NEWMEYER
DILLION O
July 13, 2026
Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
895 Dove Street
Second Floor
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 854-7000
Charles S. Krolikowski
[email protected]
VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Newport Beach City Council
100 Civic Center Dr.
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658
[email protected]
Re: City Council Hearing on Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision on Application PA 2025-01112 for Staff Approval of Driveway Uses 2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Honorable Members of the Newport Beach City Council:
Please be advised that this office represents 2350 SE Bristol, LLC ("Owner"), the owner and operator of the real property and improvements (a professional office building) located at 2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, California 92660 (APN: 439- 021-25) ("Property").
The purpose of this letter is to submit further written comments on behalf of the Owner and appeal the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission’s March 19, 2026, action denying the staff approval application (Application PA 2025-01112) ("Application") for the continued use of the previously approved driveways at the Property for necessary and safe ingress and egress. The Owner respectfully requests that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s denial and approve the Application at the upcoming hearing on July 14, 2026.
Although there have been some discussions with City staff regarding the possibility of installing an automatic gate or arm system at the Property's back or rear driveway (along Zenith Avenue), the Owner has elected to proceed with this appeal. Of course, this appeal is only being processed because City staff recommended that the Owner submit an administrative application with the City for the continued use of the above driveway, which was denied by the Planning Commission. By now appealing to the City Council, the Owner is exhausting its administrative remedies. 6156.101 /16991300.1
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeverdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
1. Introduction.
In 1986, the County of Orange ("County") approved and later signed-off on the development of the Property (which is presumed to be consistent with the approvals and conditions due to the certificate of occupancy issued) before the Property was ever annexed into the City. At the time of sign-off by the County and thereafter, there were no permanent barriers (such as concrete ballards) for the rear driveway on Zenith Avenue ("Zenith Driveway"). Rather, it appears there was a sliding gate system that could be opened and closed at any time by the then owner.
In fact, the County approval documents identify that its Construction Manager and/or Fire Chief would approve the Property's access points before the building could be occupied. In this regard, and consistent with the improvements that were actually constructed, the City acknowledges that two County permits (Permit No. BP52461 and BP55889) were processed with the County depicting the sliding gate system, which negates any argument that permanent ballards or similar system were to be used.
Further, in the County's approval documents and plans, there is no express condition, statement or indication that the Zenith Driveway was limited to emergency vehicles only. Preliminary site plan application documents do not supplant the final approvals and sign-off by the County to allow the Property to operate as it was developed and approved, which included the use and operation of the Zenith Driveway.
If the County sought to limit the Zenith Driveway to emergency vehicles only, it could have expressly conditioned the project accordingly, which it did not. The City has been advised of this issue multiple times. (See Exhibits A and B.)1 When the City asserted that the unrestricted use of the Zenith Driveway was not allowed, City staff advised the Owner to apply for a modification to the County approval based on its claim that it was necessary for the continued use of the Zenith Driveway.
In an abundance of caution, the Owner moved forward with the same. In addition to the prior County approvals, there is significant evidence that the continued use of the Zenith Driveway will promote safety and alleviate a potential dangerous condition related to the operation(s) of delivery vehicles that frequent the Property.
Indeed, since the last hearing before the Planning Commission, the Owner has received City traffic studies and reports that demonstrate how dangerous Bristol Street has become. For example, in a 2020 study by the City, in a two (2) year period, the City recorded 52 traffic accidents. (Exhibit C.) Similarly, in a more recent City report, 1 As a result, the existing uses on the Property are vested (as well as legal non conforming to the extent the City modified its regulations) and the City's post development regulations (Municipal Code and Specific Plan) have no application. (See Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1519, 1530 ("Goat Hilf").
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
the City reported approximately 25 accidents over a one (1) year period. (Exhibit D.) This data supports the need for increased safety measures along Bristol Street.
2. The Application Was Superfluous.
The Application being reviewed by the City Council on appeal by Owner arises from the City's issuance of a purported notice of violation issued to the Owner related to the use of the Zenith Driveway to safely access the Property. As set forth below, the Application is not necessary as the Property already possesses the necessary approvals (and sign-off) from the County to use and operate the Zenith Driveway for ingress and egress.
Nevertheless, in an abundance of caution, and at the request and direction of City Staff, the Owner approved the submittal of the Application as an additional "belt and suspenders" approach for the continued use of the Zenith Driveway. Even in the Application itself, the Owner again stated that City approval was not necessary to continue to utilize the Zenith Driveway due to the prior development approvals from the County approximately 40 years ago. (Exhibit E.) Simply reviewing the approval documents and conditions, there is no definitive language or statement that the Zenith Driveway was approved for emergency vehicles only. Instead, the CUP for the Zenith Driveway identified that the back gate should be opened for emergency & fire access, but did not require that the back gate could only be used for such uses.
Due to the approvals (including the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy ("COO")) and continued use of the Zenith Driveways, the Owner has and continues to enjoy a vested right to continue its use. (See Goat Hill [a City cannot eliminate a vested right to continue a use(s) previously approved and relied upon by the owner].) Further, because the City's land use regulations related to the Property, such as Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), section 20.90.040(9) and the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan (SP-7), did not apply (or even exist) to the 1986 approvals and development of the Property, any such enforcement of later-enacted regulations is improper as the property would be legal non-conforming. (NBMC, § 20.38.030, subds. (A), (B); Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533, 540.)2
3. The Application Was Deemed Complete by City's Initial Failure to Respond.
Under NBMC section 20.50.060(A), "[t]he Director shall review each application for completeness and accuracy before it is accepted as being complete." 2 City of Oakland v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 740, 747, fn. 1, citing from Korean American Legal Advocacy Foundation v. City of Los Angeles (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 376, 397, 28 Cal.Rptr.2d 530.)
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
As noted in our letter to Jenny Tran dated September 26, 2025 (Exhibit A), under NBMC section 20.50.060(A)(1), an applicant or its authorized agent must be informed in writing within thirty (30) calendar days of its application filing "either that the application is complete and has been accepted for processing or that the application is incomplete and that additional specified information shall be provided before the application is deemed complete."
While we submitted the Application for the Property to the City on June 2, 2025, the City did not send its Notice of Incomplete Filing relating to the Application until July 29, 2025, nearly two months later. The City's Notice of Incomplete Filing for the Application was thus invalid because it violated NBMC section 20.50.060(A)(1) by failing to deem the Application as being incomplete or complete within the mandatory 30-day deadline. (Exhibit A, p. 1.)
Accordingly, the Application was deemed complete on July 3, 2025, because the Owner received no written notice to the contrary within 30 days of its submission on June 2, 2025.
4. The Zenith Driveway Is Not Restricted to Emergency Vehicles Only and the County Already Determined (Via Resolution) There Are No Impacts to Other Uses in the Vicinity, Nor to Public Health, Safety or Welfare.
The County approved the development of the Property in 1986, more than 20 years before it was annexed to the City. In the August 1986 County Board of Supervisors' Resolution (Exhibit F) approving the development, the County made the following findings:
I. That the project proposed, as conditioned herein below, is consistent with the objectives, policies, and general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan adopted pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law.
* * *
III. That the activity and improvements proposed, subject to the specified conditions, are consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code, or specific plan regulations applicable to the property.
IV. That the locations, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use will not create unusual noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that will be objectionable, detrimental or incompatible with other permitted uses in the vicinity.
V. That the application will not result in conditions or circumstances contrary to the public health and safety and the general welfare.
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
(Exhibit F, pp. 1-2, emphasis added.)
Based on the County's findings, the City cannot second guess or attempt to make new findings about the impacts of the development and uses of the Property, which the County already determined were consistent with the land use regulations at the time and would not have any detrimental impacts on the neighboring properties or the general welfare.
In the Conditions for the County's Resolution, there is no reference or indication that the Zenith Driveway was in anyway limited to emergency vehicles only. Rather, the Conditions only require the then developer to provide construction details (to be approved by the Fire Chief) of how the Zenith Driveway could/would provide emergency access in the event of an emergency. (Exhibit F, p. 5, Condition 19.) Due to the fact that the County determined that Bristol would be a "high capacity" and "high speed" corridor (Exhibit F, p. 4), it makes sense that the Property would have two usable driveways for its safe operations.
Of note, Condition 19 also states that: "Prior to the issuance of any certificate of use and occupancy, emergency access shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Manager, Construction Division." After completion of the development in 1987, the Property received its COO. What this means is that the County, the Fire Department and the Manager, determined that the Zenith Driveway, as constructed (without any ballards), was approved and satisfied the above condition.
Simply put, there is no condition that the Zenith Driveway was limited to emergency vehicles only.
5. Both Driveways Are Necessary for the Property's Safe Operations.
Based on the high speed of traffic along Bristol Street, sight distance issues exiting the Property and the height of the drive aisle located below the building (about eight (8) feet high), the continued use of both the Bristol Street driveway ("Bristol Driveway") and the Zenith Driveway are necessary for the safe operations of the Property.
Pictures of the driveways (and access aisles) along Bristol Street and Zenith Avenue are depicted below:
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeYerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeYerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
The above pictures demonstrate that the location of the Property along Bristol Street (a high capacity and high-speed regional corridor), which narrows and then merges directly into the SR-73 Toll Road, it creates significant hazards for those attempting to turn into and out of the Bristol Driveway. Thus, the Zenith Driveway is necessary for anyone attempting to safely access the Property. Further, due to certain poles, signage, fencing and landscaping, the sight distance for vehicles attempting to exit the Property onto Bristol Street is limited, which is a further safety concern.
Further, when the Property was developed, southbound Bristol Street was configured differently (less lanes and merging). Based on historical maps, SR-73 in this location was not substantially completed until about 1990. Likewise, at the time of development about 40 years ago, there was more room for larger vehicles to navigate the front entrance to the Property. However, as a result of widening, street realignments, shoulder and sidewalk modifications and the on and off-ramps to SR-73, Bristol Street has undergone significant changes.
The above traffic-related issues are corroborated by the Circulation Element for Newport Beach itself, which states that "[i]n Newport Beach, natural barriers... and the John Wayne Airport superblock limit roadway connection. As a result, traffic volumes are concentrated on the roadways making regional connections (i.e.....Bristol Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Street/SR-73, ...) which increases conflict and congestion at intersections along these routes." (See Newport Beach General Plan, 7-5.) Indeed, this concentration of traffic directly increases the "conflict and congestion" on Bristol Steet at the front driveway to the Property.
The distance from the back of the sidewalk to the entry of the covered driveway (about eight (8) feet tall) is only about thirteen (13) feet, which makes it difficult (if not impossible) for delivery trucks to safely enter and/or maneuver in the limited space available. As most delivery trucks are between 20 and 30 feet in length, the back of those vehicles will extend into the sidewalk and possibly into Bristol Street.
In addition, due to the approximate eight (8) foot height of the drive aisle below the building, most delivery vehicles would not be able to enter and exit the Property via Bristol Street. Below is information (Google and Al) about the type(s) of delivery vehicle, such as UPS, FedEx, USPS and Amazon that frequent the Property.
UPS uses a variety of vehicle sizes, but most neighborhood deliveries are handled by "Package Cars" (the iconic brown walk-in vans). These vehicles are typically custom-built on chassis from manufacturers like Freightliner or Morgan Olson, and their dimensions vary by the "P-series" model number (which indicates cubic foot capacity).
Typical Exterior Dimensions for Common UPS Trucks
Model Overall Length Outside Width Outside Height
PI 200 (Large) -29 ft 9 in (357.5") -8 ft (95.5" at rails) ~10 ft 4 in (124") P1000 (Standard) -25-28 ft -8 ft (96") -10-11 ft
P500 / P600 (Smaller) -20 ft -8 ft (96") -10 ft
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeYerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
A standard UPS P1200 package car (delivery truck) typically measures approximately 30 feet (357.5 inches) long, 8 feet (95.5 inches) wide, and over 10 feet (124 inches) high. Inside cargo space is about 20 feet long (240 inches), 7.75 feet (93 inches) wide, and 7 feet (85 inches) high.
FedEx trucks vary by type, with common residential "step vans" typically ranging from 16 to 22 feet long and roughly 10-13.5 feet in height. Larger P1000/P1200 delivery trucks have 20-22 foot bodies, while heavy-duty linehaul tractors can be up to
27.5 feet long and 13.5 feet high.
Common FedEx Delivery Truck Dimensions
For local residential and business deliveries, FedEx primarily utilizes step vans and cargo vans.
• P1200 Step Van (Large Delivery Truck):
o Overall Length: 357.5 inches (~29.8 feet).
o Outside Width: 95.5 inches (at rub rails).
o Outside Height: 124 inches (~10.3 feet).
• P1000 Step Van (Standard Delivery Truck):
o Body Dimensions: 18 feet (L) x 93.5 inches (W) x 85 inches (H). o Clearance Height: Approximately 132 inches (11 feet) to the top of the vehicle.
• Ford Transit T350 (Extended Cargo Van):
o Exterior Height: 110.2 inches.
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
o Cargo Height (Internal): 81.5 inches.
The USPS Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV) is approximately 19.6 feet (235.75 inches) long, 7 feet (84.5 inches) wide, and 9.25 feet (111 inches) tall.
Designed by Oshkosh Defense, the vehicle features a 76-inch (6' 4") high cargo area, a 127-inch wheelbase, and offers significantly more cargo capacity (263 cubic feet) compared to the older LLV.
Key NGDV Dimensions & Specifications:
• Length: 235.75 inches (19 feet 64 inches)
• Width: 84.5 inches (7 feet .04 inches)
• Height: 111 inches (9 feet 2 inches)
• Wheelbase: 127 inches
• Cargo Capacity: 263 cubic feet
• Internal Cargo Height: 76 inches (6 feet 4 inches)
• Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR): 8,700 pounds
ANational Association of Postal Supervisors (NAPS) +1
Amazon delivery vehicles vary by type, with the common Rivian Electric Delivery Van (EDV)700 measuring roughly 278 inches (23 ft) long, 103.5 inches wide, and 115 inches tall. Smaller Prime vans, such as the Ram ProMaster, range from 195 to 213 inches long and 90-101 inches high. Larger third-party box trucks often use 26-foot lengths.
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Key Amazon Vehicle Exterior Dimensions:
• Rivian EDV-700 (Electric): -278" L x 103.5" W (with mirrors) x 115” H. . Rivian EDV-500 (Electric): -248" L (6.31m) x 96" W (2.45m) x 114” H (2.9m). . Ram ProMaster (High Roof): -213" L x 82" W x 102" H.
• Standard 26ft Box Truck (Relay): 26' L x -8.5' W x -10-13' H.
All of the above information and delivery truck dimensions show that these vehicles would not be able to access the Property from Bristol Street due to the eight (8) foot height of the entry below the building. To the extent a delivery vehicle over eight (8) feet tall would attempt to stop/park short of the entryway, they would extend into the City sidewalk and could cause other vehicles to queue behind it into Bristol Street, a high-speed corridor. Further, as there is little room to turn around, delivery vehicles would have to back up onto Bristol Street, where vehicles are zooming by at well over 60 mph, if not faster.
Thus, the Zenith Driveway is absolutely necessary for delivery vehicles to safely enter and exit the Property. Likewise, due to the high number of employees that work at the Property, it would further promote the safe operations of the Property and the public right of way, if they continue to utilize the Zenith Driveway for ingress and egress.
6. The Continued Use of the Zenith Driveway is Vested, May Constitute a Legal Non-Conforming Use and The City Is Estopped from Challenging the County Approvals 40 Years Later.
Any attempts to limit the approved, historic and continuous uses of the Zenith Driveway would violate the law.
First, when the uses authorized by a use permit are timely implemented (as they were here) they mature into a vested property right. {Goat Hill, supra, 6 Cal.App.4th at 1530, internal citations omitted, "[w]here a permit has been properly obtained and in Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
reliance thereon the permittee has incurred material expense, he acquires a vested property right to the protection of which he is entitled.) "Once a use permit has been properly issued the power of a municipality to revoke it is limited.” (Ibid., internal citations omitted.) This is true because once a permittee has acted in reliance of the acquired permit and incurred material expense, the permittee has obtained a vested property right. (Ibid.)
In Goat Hill, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's holding that the property owner had a vested property right in its use of the property. The Goat Hill court stated that "by simply denying renewal of its conditional use permit, the city destroyed a business which has operated legally for 35 years. The action implicates a fundamental vested right of the property owner and the trial court was correct in applying the independent judgment test." (Id., at 1531.)
Second, the development of the Property was approved in 1986, before it was annexed to the City (2008), before the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan was adopted (2010) and before the adoption of the applicable Municipal Code sections referenced in the Staff Report. As such, any uses of the Property that are arguably inconsistent with the City's regulations, would be a legal non-conforming use, i.e., grandfathered-in. "A legal nonconforming use is one that existed lawfully before a zoning restriction became effective and that is not in conformity with the ordinance when it continues thereafter." (Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 CaL4th 533, 540, fn. 1, internal citations omitted.) "“Grandfathered” uses are nonconforming uses that are not required to seek permits under local zoning ordinances enacted after they were established. (City of Oakland v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 740, 747, fn. 1, citing from Korean American Legal Advocacy Foundation v.
City of Los Angeles (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 376, 397, 28 Cal.Rptr.2d 530; see also NBMC,§ 20.38.030, subds. (A), (B).)
Third, any attempt to enforce any allegedly previously unmet conditions of approval for the Property would face a strong laches defense because the City did not challenge the County's final decision pertaining to the development/conditions within the 90-day statute of limitations to bring such a challenge. (See Gov. Code, § 66499.37.) Government Code section 66499.37 provides a 90-day limitation period measured from “imposition” of the condition "to determine the reasonableness, legality, or validity of any condition attached” as pertaining to a decision about a subdivision. (Uniwill v. City of Los Angeles (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 537, 543, see also Honchariw v.
County of Stanislaus (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 243, 255, citing from Gov. Code, § 66499.37.) Absent exceptional circumstances, the power to revoke such a permit thereafter is limited. (See Gov. Code § 66499.37, "[tjhereafter all persons are barred from any action or proceeding or any defense of invalidity or unreasonableness of the decision or of the proceedings, acts, or determinations.") Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Thus, the City is not permitted to rescind the vested rights related to the approved/historic uses of the Zenith Driveway and/or impose new regulations that would impact the same.
7. Other Nearby Properties Have Two Driveways - One Within Close Proximity to Zenith Avenue.
In addition to the Property, there is at least one other nearby property along Bristol Street with two driveways, one of which is in close proximity to Zenith Avenue.
The property located at 2424 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660 ("2424 Bristol") contains a professional office building with drive aisles located beneath the building, and is located just one block away from the Property. Photos of 2424 Bristol are set forth below:
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
As can be seen from the above photos, 2424 Bristol has one driveway along Bristol Street and a second driveway near the intersection of Zenith Avenue and Spruce Avenue. In fact, the second or rear driveway at 2424 Bristol is located less than 20 feet away from Zenith Avenue.
Of note is the fact that the driveway along Bristol Street does not directly lead into an eight (8) foot clearance in the drive aisle under the building like the Property. As such, delivery and taller vehicles can easily access 2424 Bristol from Bristol Street, will not create any potential queuing issues, and can turn around to leave the property without having to back-up into traffic. Even with such a viable access point along Bristol Street, 2424 Bristol possesses a second driveway located just a few feet away from Zenith Avenue.
This evidence confirms that the City is attempting to treat the Property differently than other similarly situated properties in the immediate area, which could be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeyerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
8. Any Decision to Limit or Revoke the Uses of the Zenith Driveway Would Constitute a Compensable Taking, A Dangerous Condition and A Substantial Impairment of Access to the Property.
The taking, elimination and/or substantial impairment of access to private property constitutes a taking (inverse condemnation) to which just compensation must be paid. (See Cal. Const, art 1, § 19; U.S. Const., 5th Amend.; Bacich v. Board of Control (1943) 23 Cal.2d 343, 352; Rose v. State (1942) 19 Cal.2d 713, 727.) California courts have recognized that property owners have a right to access the public rights of way that they abut. (Brumer v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1738, 1745; People ex rel. Dep't of Public Works v. Symons (1960) 54 Cal.2d 855, 860; Bacich v. Board of Control (1943) 23 Cal. 2d 343, 352; Rose v. State (1942) 19 Cal. 2d 713, 727.) "Compensable access impairment exists... if there is a substantial impairment of access to abutting street and from there to general system of public streets." (San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Bd. v. Price Co. (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1541.) Further, without the use of the Zenith Driveway, the use of the Bristol Driveway (especially by delivery vehicles) could result in the creation of a dangerous condition of public property to the extent there are any accidents or injuries/fatalities on the sidewalk or along Bristol Street. If not already on notice, the City is hereby put on notice of this potential dangerous condition pursuant to Government Code section 835, which is the statutory basis for a claim imposing liability on a public entity based on the condition of public property. (Brown v. Poway Unified School Dist. (1993) 4 Cal.4th 820, 829.)
9. Conclusion.
While the Owner maintains that the Application is not necessary and that City staff directed the submission of the same, for the reasons set forth herein, the Zenith Driveway was approved by the County about 40 years ago, and its continuous use and operation should be left alone. This includes the continued use of the driveway for delivery vehicles and employees.
If you have any questions or comments concerning the above, do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
cu
Charles S. Krolikowski
Encl.
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeYerdillion.com
Newport Beach City Council
July 13, 2026
cc: Client
Daniel Kopshever ([email protected])
Aaron Harp., Esq. ([email protected])
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
newmeverdillion.com
EXHIBIT A
NEWMEYER
D ILION
Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
895 Dove Street
Secord Floor
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 854-7000
September 26, 2025 Charles S. Krolikowski
[email protected]
VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Jenny Tran
Community Development Department -
Planning Division
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Dr.
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658
[email protected]
Re. Application PA 2025-01112 for Staff Approval
Property. 2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Ms. Tran:
As you know, our office represents the owner of the real property and improvements located at 2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660 ("Property"). While we have attempted to work together with the City of Newport Beach ("City") to resolve any issues regarding the continued use (ingress and egress) of the rear driveway along Zenith Avenue, we continue to maintain our position that such use(s) are already permitted pursuant to the prior land use approvals (CUP) for the Property.
In an abundance of caution, on or about June 2, 2025, the ownership submitted Application PA 2025-01112 ("Application") requesting Staff Approval for the continued use of the above driveway for delivery and employee vehicles, Not until July 29, 2025, almost two months after the Application was submitted, did the City respond to the Application, deeming it incomplete and requesting additional information. However, the City's response to the Application was untimely.
Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") section 20.50.060(A)(1), an applicant or its authorized agent must be informed in writing within thirty (30) calendar days of its application filing "either that the application is complete and has been accepted for processing or that the application is incomplete and that additional specified information shall be provided before the application is deemed complete.” Accordingly, we hereby request that the City continue to process the Application as it was received on June 2, 2025.
6156.101 /16499602.1
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
ne'.w.eyerdilteu.coin
Jenny Tran
September 26, 2025
We appreciate the City's anticipated prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours.
I
Charles S. Kroiikowski
cc: Client
6156.101/16499602.1
Las Vegas | Newport Beach | Walnut Creek
»ewr>eve<dillion com
EXHIBIT B
Charles S. Krolikowski
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Charles S. Krolikowski
Thursday, February 12, 2026 2:33 PM
Kopshever, Daniel'
RE: [EXTERNAL]:RE: PA2025-0112 2350 SE Bristol
Hi Daniel, as we have stated several times in our communications, and based on the original approval and development, the driveway was approved for all uses and was not limited to emergency access only. We only proposed seeking further approvals because the City claimed to the contrary in response to a complaint(s).
With that said, we intend to move forward with our application, as proposed, despite your statement that City staff would not recommend the use of the rear driveway for employees. We think this is safety issue, and to the extent the City denies the proposed application, we would certainly put the City on notice to the extent there are any accidents or injuries resulting from the inability to use the rear driveway for certain vehicles.
With respect to your e-mail below about a resubmittal, how do you propose we change or modify the application? Regards,
Chuck
Charles S. Krolikowski
Charles .KrolikowskKaindlf.com
p 949.854.7000 - d 949.271.7233
Newmeyer & DiUi_on LLP.
895 Dove Street, 5th Floor
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Newport Beach • Walnut Creek • Las Vegas
From: Kopshever, Daniel <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 10:32 AM
To: Charles S. Krolikowski <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]:RE: PA2025-0112 2350 SE Bristol 0 External email >
Hi Charles,
I left you a voicemail a few weeks ago and haven’t heard back for a status update. As I mentioned in my voicemail, we need to move forward with the application as it is an active code case and receiving pressure from the community. I have the project tentatively scheduled for March 19th, where we will be recommending denial of the request. Please contact me immediately if you plan to modify the request and resubmit, so that we can move the project to a later date and review.
Kind regards,
i
Daniel Kopshever
Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
Office: 949-644-3235
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
O®©
" cnrv of
b NEWFOfir BEACH
Ci c
Reody to apply lor
a pMmlt? Skip tha
trip to the counter
and use our Online
CMC Portoil
srve Time
APPLY OnLIDE
TUL A FRflNM CO PAPWIS?! APVLV ONLJW
From: Charles S. Krolikowski <[email protected]> Sent: January 14, 2026 12:05 PM
To: Kopshever, Daniel <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]:RE: PA2O25-O112 2350 SE Bristol [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.
Hi Daniel, when we last spoke (and after a discussion with Ms. Perez as well), it was communicated to me that it was going to be staff’s position not to support the use of the rear driveway for tenants/employees regardless of the size of their vehicles. This concerns my client greatly and they are still evaluating how to proceed in light of this communication.
Regards,
Chuck
Charles S. Krolikowski
Charles. Krolikowskt^odll. cam
p 949.854.7000 - d 949.271.7233
Newmeyer &_Di.llion LLP
895 Dove Street, 5th Floor
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Newport Beach • Walnut Creek • Las Vegas
From: Kopshever, Daniel <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2026 9:27 AM
To: Charles S. Krolikowski <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL]:RE: PA2025-0112 2350 SE Bristol
Hi Charles,
2 Do you have any update on this project?
Kind regards,
Daniel Kopshever
Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
Office: 949-644-3235
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
o®©
; crrv or
s' NEWPORT BEACH
Ci C
Roody to apply tor
a permit? Skip the
trip to the counter
and use our Online
CIVIC Portoil
save Time
APPLY OALIRE
TELL A FRENCH PAPtWLESSS AM»1V OHL WE!
From: Kopshever, Daniel
Sent: December 12, 2025 3:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: PA2025-0112 2350 SE Bristol
Hi Charles,
My name is Danny, I took over this project from Jenny and we spoke briefly on the phone about next steps for the project. I am going to be out of the office until January 50120 26. Please contact Joselyn Perez at jperez@ne_wp.prtbe.a.chca gQy if you have any updates on how the applicant would like to proceed or if you need any information from us while I am out.
Thanks and happy holidays!
Kind regards,
Daniel Kopshever
Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
Office: 949-644-3235
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
OS©
3 EXHIBIT C
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Dave Webb, Director
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC
SURVEY FOR SPEED LIMITS
February 27, 2020
This document has been prepared by the Traffic Engineering Division, Department of Public Works, and supersedes the May 2, 2011 Engineering and Traffic Survey for Speed Limits and all addendums.
I, Antony Brine, do hereby certify that I am the Traffic Engineer for the City of Newport Beach. This report has been prepared under my supervision and its contents are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Antony Brine, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
2/27/2020
Date
CERTIFIED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY
Telephone: (949) 644-3330 • Fax (949) 644-3308 • www.newportbeachca.gov
Roadway
ID
Number
Location Direction Speed
Limit
85th Percentile
Speed
7 Bison Avenue
Jamboree Rd to MacArthur Blvd EB 45 47
WB 45 45
MacArthur Blvd to Route 73 EB 50 49
WB 50 47
8 Bonita Canyon Drive
MacArthur Blvd to East City Limit EB 50 50
WB 50 49
9 Bristol Street North
Jamboree Rd to Campus Dr EB NA NA
WB 45 48
10 Bristol Street South
Campus Dr to Jamboree Rd EB 45 48
WB NA NA
11 Camelback Street
Bison Ave to Jamboree Rd NB 40 44
SB 40 39
12 Campus Drive
Bristol St South to MacArthur Blvd NB 45 48
SB COUNTY OF ORANGE
MacArthur Blvd to Jamboree Rd EB 45 48
WB cnFY OF IRVINE
13 Cliff Drive
Riverside Ave to Dover Dr EB 30 34
WB 30 32
14 Coast Highway
West City Limit to Superior Ave NB 50 See Appendix B
SB 50 See Appendix B
Superior Ave to Hoag Dr/Balboa Coves NB 45 See Appendix B SB 50 See Appendix B
Hoag Dr/Balboa Coves to Riverside Ave NB 40 See Appendix B SB 45 See Appendix B
Riverside Ave to Tustin Ave NB 40 See Appendix B
SB 40 See Appendix B
Tustin Ave to Dover Dr NB 45 See Appendix B
SB 40 See Appendix B
Dover Dr to Bayside Dr NB 50 See Appendix B
SB 45 See Appendix B
Bayside Dr to Jamboree Rd NB 50 See Appendix B
SB 50 See Appendix B
Jamboree Rd to Avocado Ave EB 50 54
WB 50 56
7 10. Bristol Street South Summary
City of Newport Beach
Speed Survey Summary
Street: Bristol Street South
Segment Location: Campus Drive to Jamboree Road
Direction: One Way EB
Roadway Condition
Number of Lanes (eastbound) 2-4 lanes/Bike Lane
Grade Level
Median One Way
On-Street Parking No
Traffic Condition
Traffic Control Traffic Signal
Accident History
Total Accidents (2 Year) ^52
Accident by Speeding
% Accident by Speeding 5.8
Speed Survey
Study Segment Direction Speed Limit 85th Percentile Speed Campus Dr to Jamboree Rd EB 45 48
WB NA NA
Discussion and Justifications:
The speed limit for this roadway is set in accordance to the California MUTCD Section 2B.13, CVC Sections 627, 21400(b) and 22358.5.
22 TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
si 85% of 102 Recorded Vehicles = | 87 85th Percentile Speed = 48 MPH #of Veh.
Cum.
Veh^*2/ rc
Number of Vehicles
MPH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 MPH 60 X X 60 2 102
59 59
58 58
57 X 57 1 100
56 X 56 1 99
55 X 55 1 98
54 54
53 X X 53 2 97
52 52
51 X 51 1 95
50 X 50 1 94
49 X X X 49 3 93
48 X X X X 48 4 90
47 X X X X X 47 5 86
46 X X X X 46 4 81
45 X X X XXX X 45 7 77
44 X X X XXX X 44 7 70
43 X X X XXX 43 6 63
42 X X X X X 42 5 57
41 X X X XXX X X X 41 9 52
40 X X X XXX X X XXX 40 11 43
39 X X X XXX 39 6 32
38 X X X XXX X 38 7 26
37 X X X X X 37 5 19
36 X 36 1 14
35 X X X X 35 4 13
34 X X X 34 3 9
33 X X X X 33 4 6
32 32
31 X 31 1 2
30 X 30 1 1
29 29
28 28
27 27
26 26
25 25
24 24
23 23
22 22
21 21
20 20
MPH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 MPH Location: Bristol St S Direction: EB No. of lanes in each direction: 2 Between: Campus Dr and Jamboree
Begin Time: 1:33 PM End Time: 1:58 PM Type of Surface: AC Weather: Sunny Posted Speed Limit: 45 85th Pere. Speed: 48 Observer: JR Date: 9/24/19
EXHIBIT D
NBPD Communications
Call Time Event ID Street Nature CloseCo
03/02/2026 11:11:57 2603020067 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP CITE 02/27/2026 00:59:24 2602270016 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 02/25/2026 16:35:06 2602250095 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP CITE 02/24/2026 02:45:48 2602240008 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP RPT 02/23/2026 01:13:10 2602230009 2112 BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER 1015 02/19/2026 10:37:54 2602190064 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 02/10/2026 13:51:35 2602100101 BAYVIEW PL/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 02/09/2026 21:01:49 2602090175 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/23/2026 23:19:56 2601230251 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/22/2026 17:41:21 2601220125 JAMBOREE1 RD/BRISTOL ONRAM TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU RPT 01/20/2026 17:45:54 2601200119 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU RPT 01/17/2026 21:45:33 2601170185 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/16/2026 00:22:52 2601160004 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/09/2026 06:13:57 2601090052 2121 BRISTOL ST MISD HIT’ AND RUN JUST ।OCC ASST 01/07/2026 23:14:47 2601070195 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/07/2026 18:08:48 2601070157 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 01/07/2026 17:57:38 2601070154 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST ' NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 01/04/2026 00:24:25 2601040004 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/02/2026 18:58:41 2601020189 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE RECKLESS1 DRIVER UTL 01/02/2026 10:03:16 2601020.065 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/02/2026 02:54:18 2601020027 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE VEHICLE STOP 1015 01/01/2026 22:58:31 2601010208 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV 12/23/2025 17:17:05 2512230171 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU RPT 12/22/2025 23:05:56 2512220244 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP ADV 12/20/2025 21:34:36 2512200267 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP CITE 12/18/2025 01:11:18 2512180011 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV, 12/17/2025 23:00:02 2512170224 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP* ADV 12/17/2025 22:16:36 2512170217 CYPRESS ST/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 12/15/2025 23:10:01 2512150241 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 12/13/2025 02:42:29 2512130024 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE NON INJ ACCIDENT CITY :PROP RPT 12/11/2025 17:52:20 2512110202 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP f
ADV
Report Generated: 03/03/2026 09:31:25 | UserID: MFEAR
\\superioncad\PROD\cad\rpt\Option_LandscapeStandard Page 1 of 5
Call Time Event ID Street Nature CloseCo
12/11/2025 08:19:59 2512110028 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 12/09/2025 07:47:07 2512090020 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION UNK INJUR RPT 12/02/2025 15:38:23 2512020135 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 11/23/2025 09:36:41 2511230055 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU RPT 11/18/2025 21:33:19 2511180168 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 11/15/2025 23:35:21 2511150196 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP 1015 11/03/2025 17:56:53 2511030142 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP ADV 11/01/2025 19:27:06 2511010167 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST NON INJ TRAFFIC COLLISION R ASST 10/30/2025 08:25:51 2510300034 SPRUCE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 10/27/2025 15:43:35 2510270135 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP / ADV 10/22/2025 10:07:40 2510220060 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 10/22/2025 05:59:48 2510220023 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP CITE 10/20/2025 12:09:47 2510200097 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE DRUNK DRIVER PC 10/20/2025 07:59:44 2510200042 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 10/19/2025 12:36:12 2510190095 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 10/18/2025 23:23:26 2510180268 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP 1015 10/18/2025 17:26:21 2510180161 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 10/16/2025 19:50:54 2510160218 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST MISD HII? AND RUN JUST OCC 1022 10/12/2025 18:00:25 2510120176 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV 10/08/2025 21:57:26 2510080192 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP ADV 10/08/2025 19:34:44 2510080175 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 09/27/2025 23:11:39 2509270212 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 09/24/2025 11:01:51 2509240081 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 09/23/2025 23:24:46 2509230208 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 09/23/2025 22:15:37 2509230196 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 09/21/2025 20:00:50 2509210185 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV 09/20/2025 12:33:44 2509200092 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION UNK INJUR RPT 09/16/2025 17:44:12 2509160141 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD MISD HI!? AND RUN REPORT A$ST 09/14/2025 17:36:33 2509140166 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST INJURY ACCIDENT CITY PROP I RPT 09/11/2025 23:06:15 2509110226 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE VEHICLE STOP ADV ' 09/11/2025 09:28:37 2509110061 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU re/x 09/09/2025 21:22:50 2509090183 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP* C4 09/06/2025 12:33:15 2509060102 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 08/26/2025 17:14:30 2508260182 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD MISD HI1D AND RUN REPORT REFX 08/20/2025 00:08:18 2508200001 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP * FI
Call Time Event ID Street Nature CloseCo
08/15/2025 03:10:49 2508150022 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP . ADV 08/10/2025 19:10:24 2508100209 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 07/27/2025 16:25:51 2507270173 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD RECKLESS DRIVER GOA 07/27/2025 15:02:29 2507270148 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 07/26/2025 22:18:49 2507260274 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP FI 07/25/2025 15:56:54 2507250170 BRISTOL ST/CYPRESS ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 07/23/2025 21:58:25 2507230221 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 07/23/2025 20:49:43 2507230201 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 07/22/2025 00:45:02 2507220010 SPRUCE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 07/16/2025 23:59:57 2507160275 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP ' ADV 07/12/2025 13:50:32 2507120147 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE VEHICLE STOP CITE 07/08/2025 23:03:49 2507080260 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 07/06/2025 20:45:37 2507060273 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD MISD HIT AND RUN JUST OCC ASST 07/03/2025 07:45:35 2507030037 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO CBD 07/02/2025 06:07:49 2507020042 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP CITE 06/25/2025 23:59:23 2506250246 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP C4 06/22/2025 05:47:44 2506220050 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD TRAFFIC COLLISION UNK INJUR REFX 06/15/2025 17:39:56 2506150203 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER UTL 06/14/2025 16:59:38 2506140149 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 06/10/2025 21:33:09 2506100229 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 06/09/2025 20:53:10 2506090203 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 06/05/2025 19:06:00 2506050238 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST DRUNK DRIVER GOA 06/03/2025 22:57:33 2506030253 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 06/02/2025 13:29:53 2506020098 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 05/29/2025 21:17:11 2505290233 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 05/23/2025 15:19:46 2505230172 BRISTOL ST/IRVINE AVE NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 05/20/2025 23:41:07 2505200254 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP ADV 05/18/2025 15:10:16 2505180163 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP CJTE 05/16/2025 14:37:36 2505160161 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST RECKLESS DRIVER GB 05/13/2025 03:18:20 2505130024 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV - 05/09/2025 16:26:07 2505090215 BAYVIEW PL/BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER RP FOLLOWING C4 ■ 05/09/2025 02:49:23 2505090030 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP* 1015 04/29/2025 13:07:18 2504290125 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO REFX 04/16/2025 17:06:51 2504160180 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 04/14/2025 23:10:30 2504140238 2111 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ♦ ADV
Call Time Event ID Street Nature CloseCo
04/09/2025 20:08:52 2504090246 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 04/08/2025 11:58:08 2504080080 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO 1022 04/08/2025 10:41:41 2504080060 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 04/06/2025 01:06:48 2504060014 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 04/02/2025 22:54:20 2504020258 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP RPT 04/02/2025 18:10:52 2504020205 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER GOA 04/01/2025 23:21:00 2504010257 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/29/2025 12:09:44 2503290108 2111 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 03/29/2025 00:25:02 2503290004 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER UTL 03/28/2025 08:40:52 2503280043 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL RECKLESS DRIVER / GOA 03/26/2025 22:38:08 2503260272 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/23/2025 12:11:16 2503230115 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO RPT 03/22/2025 21:18:35 2503220271 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/18/2025 10:20:05 2503180074 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/17/2025 05:54:09 2503170023 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/12/2025 21:52:33 2503120252 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/04/2025 20:21:21 2503040218 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/03/2025 23:05:31 2503030223 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 03/03/2025 12:15:59 2503030076 2580 BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER 1022 03/02/2025 00:03:05 2503020001 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST DRUNK DRIVER PC 02/26/2025 16:09:02 2502260130 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST RECKLESS1 DRIVER GB 02/24/2025 17:55:24 2502240170 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE 02/22/2025 19:33:40 2502220179 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO RPT 02/22/2025 08:31:16 2502220050 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE' STOP CITE 02/11/2025 22:20:51 2502110197 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 02/10/2025 11:17:36 2502100086 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION UNK INJUR DRX 02/04/2025 21:35:52 2502040217 BAYVIEW PL/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 02/02/2025 15:09:14 2502020144 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST RECKLESS> DRIVER GpA 01/31/2025 02:59:56 2501310017 3574 JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP C4 01/29/2025 03:19:14 2501290015 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP 1015* 01/28/2025 23:23:18 2501280227 2121 BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP AD^ 01/28/2025 11:49:11 2501280103 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STO^ ADV 01/27/2025 22:18:30 2501270181 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH INJU RPT 01/27/2025 20:04:05 2501270151 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/22/2025 15:35:41 2501220152 JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP CITE
Call Time Event ID Street Nature CloseCo
01/15/2025 01:08:16 2501150009 BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST VEHICLE STOP . ADV 01/09/2025 23:13:34 2501090211 BRISTOL ST/BAYVIEW PL VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/09/2025 17:30:23 2501090140 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD NON INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIO ASST 01/06/2025 17:43:16 2501060138 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST RECKLESS DRIVER GB 01/05/2025 21:58:49 2501050231 BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD RECKLESS DRIVER UTL 01/04/2025 21:04:11 2501040186 IRVINE AVE/BRISTOL ST VEHICLE STOP ADV 01/03/2025 11:50:23 2501030091 BRISTOL ST/SPRUCE AVE VEHICLE STOP CITE
EXHIBIT E
Community Development Department
Discretionary Application
Owner’s Affidavit
CIPi' OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
1. Check Permits Requested:
□ Approvai-in-Concept - AIC #
□ Coastal Development Permit
□ Waiver for De Minimis Development
□ Coastal Residential Development
□ Condominium Conversion
□ Comprehensive Sign Program
□ Development Agreement
□ Development Plan
□ Lot Line Adjustment
□ Lot Merger
□ Limited Term Permit -
□ Seasonal □ < 90 day O>90 days
□ Modification Permit
□ Off-Site Parking Agreement
□ Planned Community Development Plan
□ Planned Development Permit
□ Site Development Review -
□ Major □ Minor
□ Parcel Map
G Staff Approval
□ Tract Map
□ Traffic Study
□ Use Permit -DMinor OConditional
□ Amendment to existing Use Permit
□ Variance
□ Amendment -ncode OPC DGP DLCP
□ Zoning Clearance - DADU □ Use
□ Residential Project Using Senate Bill 6
□ Other:
2. Project Address(es)/Assessor’s Parcel No(s)__________________ 2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660
3 Project Description and Justification (Attach additional sheets If necessary):______________________ 2350 SE Bristol. LLC (“Property Owner") hereby applies for Staff Approval to clarify the 1986 Use Permit ("Permit") related to toe development and uses for the property located at 2350 SE Bristol Street in Newport Beach ('Subject Property"). The Property Owner seeks to continue to use the back driveway/gate located along Zenith Avenue for necessary and safe ingress/egress to the Subject Property for larger/delivery vehicles and employees.
Staff Approval should be granted as toe driveway/gate on Zenith Avenue was previously approved in 1986 and was not expressly limited In the Permit (Exhibit A).
Further, the continued use of the driveway/gate will allow tor "adequate and safe maneuvering" to enter/exit toe Subject Property onto Bnstoi Street (a multi-lane, higher-speed arterial) in a forward direction as required by toe later-adopted Newport Beach Municipal Code ("N8MC") § 20AC 070. (See Attachment 1.)
4. Property Owner's Affidavit*: (d (we) iMaryam Parman------------------- -J depose and say that (I am) (we are) the owner(s) of the property (ies) involved in this application. (I) (We) further certify, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects tru^gnd correct to the best of (my) (our) knowledge and belief.
Signature(s)?^________Title: Qwner ,---------- Ji Date: - I fl MM/DD/YEAR
Signature(s):Title: Date:
*May be signed by the lessee or by an authorized agent if written authorization from the owner of the record is filed concurrently with the application. Please note, the owner(s)’ signature for Parcel/Tract Map and Lot Line Adjustment Application must be notarized.
Under the Levine Act, Section 84308 of the Government Code, a party to a proceeding before the City involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use is required to disclose on the record of the proceeding any contribution in an amount of more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) made within the preceding 12 months by the party or the party's agent to any elected or appointed officer of the City. If you have made a qualifying contribution, please ensure to make this disclosure on the record. Please review Senate Bill 1439 - Statues 2022 for further information.
Please be further advised, application representatives who are not exempt and are considered a "lobbyist" pursuant to the City's Ordinance No. 2020-3 must file a lobbyist registration form. Click here or contact the City Clerk’s Office at 949-644- 3005 for more information.
l:\Users\CDD\SharedVdmln\PlanningJDivision\AppncatiDnsWpplication_Guidellnes\Flanning Permit Owner's Affadavit 2022. docx Rev: 06/30/23
Attachment 1
2350 SE Bristol Street, Newport Beach, CA 92660 ___
When the Subject Property development was approved in 1986 by the County of Orange ("County"), the Permit stated that the back gate was to be made available for access by emergency vehicles. (See Exhibit A.) There was no limitation on the use of the Zenith Avenue driveway/gate by other vehicles, such a delivery trucks, customers, employees, etc. In fact, for nearly 40 years, the driveway/gate was used for such purposes, without incident.
During that same 40 year period, Bristol Street (which was once a County road) has been widened into a Major Arterial (tens of thousands of vehicles per day) and the speed increased. Not to mention, the actual speed of traffic heading southbound along Bristol Street is much greater than the posted speed of 45 per hour. Thus, the safety of the Subject Property's owners, tenants, employees and vendors (including delivery vehicles) is of paramount importance. An aerial site picture with dimensions and other various photos of the Subject Property are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
As the City is aware, many vehicles traveling along southbound Bristol Street merged off of SR 73 - a freeway/tollway with higher speeds. Further, as vehicles pass the Subject Property, many of them are merging back onto SR 73 and/or turning right or left onto Jamboree, another major arterial. It is easy to see that most vehicles traveling southbound on Bristol Street are passing the Subject Property at high speeds, some well over 65 miles per hour.
The Subject Property has one driveway along on Bristol Street, which immediately enters into an 8' garage style/covered entrance. (See Exhibit B pictures.) At the driveway entrance, there are also several bushes and other structure-type materials at the northern side of the driveway, which can make it difficult for vehicles exiting the Subject Property to see oncoming vehicles traveling on southbound Bristol Street. This can create certain safety concerns related to site distance issues. Of note, most if not all of the neighboring properties near the Subject Property, have at least two driveways (entrances/exits); one along Bristol Street and another either on the side or in the back of the property.
As a result, it is much safer for most vehicles to enter the Subject Property from Bristol Street and exit onto Zenith Avenue. For larger vehicles, and due to the limitations on turning radii within the parking area/aisles, it is safer for those vehicles to enter from Zenith Avenue and exit in a forward direction onto Bristol Street. This of course is assuming such vehicles are lower than eight (8) feet; as vehicles over such height would have to enter/exit the Subject Property from Zenith Avenue. As the later-adopted NBMC requires (adopted after the 1986 Permit), vehicles should not be backing out of the Bristol Street driveway and onto a heavily traveled, high-speed, major arterial.
Finally, as the City does not permit street parking along Bristol Street (or Spruce Avenue), all vehicles (including larger vehicles) must enter/exit the Subject Property to
access the same. This further supports the continued use of the Zenith Avenue driveway/gate for safe access to and from the Subject Property.
For the reasons stated, the Property Owner respectfully requests Staff Approval to re confirm that the Zenith Avenue driveway/gate can continue to be used for the necessary and safe ingress/egress for larger/delivery vehicles and employees.
By submitting this application and request, the Property Owner does not waive any rights to claim that the Permit already allows the existing uses of the Zenith Avenue driveway/gate to continue, and expressly reserves all rights thereto.
EXHIBIT F
^///4
^.*4
I
2 5
/ 5
\___ 6
7 8
9 10
II
12 13
14 * »
o ,
«»w 16
& »2
8*o 17
/ 19
\___^0
21 22
2-1
£ 25
*
2 26
i ! 27
.1 *
JRG:db
RESOLUTION OP BOARD Op SUPERVISORS
OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA
August 20. 1986
On ®otion of supervisor Riley_______ . duly seconded end carried, following resolution was adopted: __
WHEREAS, this Board has considered appeal of Planning Comisalon conditions of approval on Use Permit UP 86 21P/Site Plan SP 86-52P in compliance with provisions of Section 7-9-150.4 of Certified Ordinances of Orangs County; WHEREAS, this Board has considered the action of the Planning Commission on~ Use Permit UP 86-21P/Site Plan Sp 86-52P;
WHEREAS, this Board has considered testimony of appellant on this project; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission also considered a site plan which included adjacent Parcel 439-021-10 and provided for an 18.000± square foot office building (Site Plan Alternative B); and
WHEREAS, subject discretionary permit will allow the establishment of a 14,5001 square foot office building on three parcels with an off-street parking modification and a height variance of three (3) feet for an architectural feature;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED tnat the appeal is denied, the action of the Planning Commission is amended to approve either the proposed office building of 14,5001 square feet on three parcels as approved by the Planning Commission or the proposed office building of 18,0001 square feet on four parcels in accord ance with Site Plan Alternative B filed by the project proponent, based upon the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
FINDINGS:
I. That the project proposed, as conditioned herein below, is consistent with the objectives, policies, and general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan adopted pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law.
I. That Final EIR 508, previously certified by findings on February 26, 1985, was considered prior to approval of the project. It was determined adequate to serve as a Program SIR for this project and satisfy all the requirements of CEQA. It is hereby certified for this project and the findings readopted.
I. That the activity and improvements proposed, subject to the specified conditions, are consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code, or specific plan regulations applicable to the property.
V. That the locations, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use will not create unusual noise, traffic or othe.* conditions or situations that will be objectionable, detrimental or incompatible with other permitted uses in the vicinity.
Resolution No. 86-1076
Prop Reso/Appeal of UP 86-21P
SP 86-52P of Trav. Corp, of
Amer. (Travcoa), App. by
Salerno, Appellant
reTeTved
- 1 51986
2. EMA
35 ?
1 jv. That the application will not result in conditions or circumstances I contrary to the public health and safety and the general welfare. \____ J i7X- That the off-street parking requirements for a fifty (50) foot parking accessway is inappropriate due to the low stacking demand created by the . one-way traffic along Bristol Street*
I. That the proposed off-street parking facilities comply with the Intent of Section 7-9-145.1 *Off-Street Parking Regulations* of the Orange County Zoning Code*
5JIII
8 Si
9 That subject project lies within the area of benefit of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor* In order to find this project consistent with the General Plan and to ensure that the traffic impacts have been adequately mitigated, it is necessary to adopt a condition requiring the developer to participate in the fee program for the corridor. 10 B
13 15
16 IX. That the property to which the permit applies is not located in a community facilities fee area aS that term is defined in Section 7-9-702. f| CONDITIONS;
2 18;}
3. 19
20 2\
22 23
24 Approval of this permit application constitutes approval of the proposed project to the extent of its compliance with the applicable zoning regulations, but does not include any action or finding as to compliance or approval of the project regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement*
The approval of this application is valid for a period of 24 months from the date of final determination. If the use approved by this action is not established within such period of time, the permit shall be terminated and shall thereafter be null and void. ?
This application is approved as a precise plan for the location of the*uses and structures shown on the approved plot plan. Any relocation, alteration or addition of any structure or use not specifically approved will nullify the approving action for this permit. If any changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, EMA for approval. If the Director of Planning, EMA determines that the proposed change complies with the provi sions and the spirit and intent of this approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plot plan, he may approve the changed plan without requiring a new public hearing.
Three-Parcel Development
25 4*
26 27
26 If the building permit application is for a three-parcel development, then a building permit will be issued for a 14,500± square foot office building.
However, the Issuance of certificates of use and occupancy for the structures approved in this permitting action shall be governed by the following: The Manager, Building Inspection Division In consultation with the Manager, Current Planning and Development Assistance Division will grant 2*
1 N a certificate of use and occupancy for only 13,000± square feet gross floor space for personnel occupancy.
Four-Parcel Development
5. xf the project proponent provides satisfactory evidence..to the Director* DIA 4 that the development includes Parcel 439-021-10, then a building permit will be Issued for an 18,00Qt..square foot office, building in accordance with Site Plan Alternative B filed by the project proponent.
$ FAA notification Requirement
7 8
6. At least thirty (30) days prior to the application, for a building permit the 8 |' project applicant shall submit a notice of proposed construction to the FAA.
The FAA will then make a determination on the projects' potential to create 9'] an aeronautical hazard. The project shall comply with restrictions and | conditions imposed by the PAA as a part of their determination. 10 I
1 N0!81*
H 1
All non-residentla1 structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior noise criteria as specified in the Noise Element and Land Use/Noise Compatibility Manual.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence prepared under the sjpervlsion of an acoustical consultant that these rhandards will be satis fied in a manner consistent with applicable zoning 'agulations shall be submitted to the Manager, Development Services Division in the form of an acoustical analysis report describing in detail the exterior noise environ ment and the acoustical design features required to achieve the Interior noise standard and which indicate that the sound attenuation measures specified have been Incorporated into the design of the project.
Prior to the Issuance of any grading permits, the project proponent shall produce evidence acceptable to the Manager, Development Services, that:
A. All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
22 25
24 FO192 21O (5/7 7) 25
26 27
B. All operations shall comply with Orange County Codified Ordinance Division 6 (Noise Control).
C. Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practicable from dwellings.
9. Prior to issuance of any certificates of use and occupancy, the developer shall produce evidence acceptable to the Manager, Development Services Division, that information stating this property is subject to the overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from John Wayne Airport 28 3.
I *1
£ has been provided to the Department of Meal estate of the State of 2 $ California for inclusion into the Pinal Subdivision Public Report. s
3 £0. Prior to sale, lease/ or rental of any structure or portion thereof, the | appllcant/owner shall provide to each prospective purchaser, lessee, or 4 | tenant a notice and statement of acknowledgement that the property is j[ subject to overflight/ sight, and sound of aircraft operating from John 5 Wayne Airport. The form and method of distribution of said notice and J statement of acknowledgement shall be as approved by the Manager, 6Development Services Division.
i
7 ill
if
Prior to recordation of the first final tract/parcel
shall prepare and record a notice that this property
impacts from the proposed San Joaquin Transportation
map, the landowner
may be subject to
Corridor in a manner
meeting the approval of the Manager/ Development Services Division. 1210
11 12
13 p o
Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and Occupancy, the owner shall produce evidence to the Manager, Development Services Division, that the Department of Real Estate has been notified that the project area is adjacent to a regional transportation corridor which is shown on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways and which will pass along the side of project. The corridor is expected to be a high capacity, high-speed, limited-access facility for motor vehicles, and will have provisions for bus lanes and other mass transit type facilities along it.
Landsca*
•13 A. Private Landscape Design Certification:
16 18
20 Prior to issuance of building permits, areas to be landscaped which will be maintained privately shall be designed in accordance with a plan certified by a licensed landscape architect taking into account an approved preliminary landscape plan (if any), EMA Standard Plans, adopted planned community, scenic corridor and specific plan require ments, Grading Code erosion control requirements. Subdivision Code, Zoning Code, and conditions of approval. Said certification shall be furnished to the Manager, Building Inspection Division. 2 o 1
B. Private Landscape installation Certification:
22 23
24 Prior to issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, applicant shall have installed said landscaping and irrigation system and shall have installation certified by a licensed landscape architect that it was installed in accordance with a certified plan. Applicant shall furnish certification in writing to the Manager, Building Inspection Division.
F O I9 2 7 IO (S/JZ|
Circulation/Traff ic
26 27
Prior to the completion of an application for any building permits, the developer shall pay fees, as prescribed in the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. If the 28 4.
1 2
3 4
5 6
15 building permit application is for a three-par cel development, the fee shall be based upon 13,D0Qt square feet of office apace. If the building permit application is for a four-par cel development, the fee shall be based upon 18,0001 square feet of office apace.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall design and construct the following improvements in accordance with plana and specifications meeting the approval of the Manager of Subdivision Division.
A. Sidewalk on South Bristol Street across the property frontage B. Sidewalk on Zenith Avenue across the property frontage. 8 J Grading
’1“ issuance of any precise grading permits, the applicant shall design the following improvements and provide necessary dedications in a Prior to the
manner meeting the approval of the Manager, Subdivision Division.
A. All provisions for surface drainage; and
15 14
B.
C.
All necessary storm drain facilities extending to a satisfactory point of disposal for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff; and Where determined necessary by the Manager, Subdivision Division associated easements shall be dedicated to the County of Orange the
& 2
* a
2 i? a
15 16
Prior to issuance of certificates of use^and occupancy, or whichever first, said improvements shall be constructed in a manner meeting the approval of the Manager, EMA/Construction Division.
comes
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 2j
25 26
s v
i 28
17. Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a geotechnical report'to the Manager, Development Services, for his approval.
This report will primarily involve assessment of potential soil related constraints and hazards such as slope instability, settlement, liquefaction, or related secondary seismic impacts where determined to be appropriate by the Manager, Development Services. The report shall also include evaluation of potentially expansive soils and recommended construction procedures and/or design criteria to minimize the effect of these soils on the proposed development. All reports shall recommend appropriate mitigation measures and be completed in the manner specified in the Orange County Grading Manual and State/County Subdivision Ordinance.
Fire
18. 19
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, plans for an automatic fire extinguishing system shall be approved by the Fire Chief. Such systems shall be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy •
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, construction details for the controlled emergency access shall be approved by the Fire Chief. These
5. • / 1
/ 2
(3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 U
12 13
14 J* 15
’2
“* 16* o
r J
go L
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 5 25
2 26*?
S 27
28 detail* shall include width, clear height, and Mana of tMtgency vehicle override. Prior to leauance of any certificate of we and occupancy, emergency access shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Manager, Const ruction Division.
Light/Glare ——
20. notwithstanding the submitted site plan, the site plan shall be revised to Incorporate the use of nonreflective materials including recessed windows, non-reflectlve glass and other non-glare materials, to reduce light and glare on Zenith Avenue elevation. No building or grading permits or certificates.of use and occupancy authorized by this permit shall be issued until revised plans are submitted to the Director, EMA, and found by the Director or his designee to be consistent with the action of the approving authority. If such revision is not submitted within sixty (60) days, or as otherwise specified by the approving authority, after the date of final determination, the permit shall thereafter be null and void* However, prior to the expiration of this period, the Director, SNA, may grant one extension of time of an additional sixty (60) days if it is requested and justified by the applicant.
Caveats
21. Applicant agrees as a condition of issuance and use of this permit to defend at her/his sole expense any action brought against the County because of issuance of this permit or, in the alternative, the relinquishment of such permit. Applicant will reimburse the County for any court costs and attorney's fees which the County may be required to pay as a result of such action. County may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of bis obligations under this condition (Government Code Section 65907 requires that any action to attach, review, set aside, void or annul the use permit must be brought within 180 days of approval).
22. Failure to abide by and faithfully comply with any and all conditions attached to the granting of this permit shall constitute grounds for revocation of said permit.
/
/
/
I
I
I
/
6. AYES: SUPERVISORS THOMAS F. RILEY? RALPH B. CLARK? ROGER R. STANTON? HARRIETT M. WIEDER, BRUCE NESTANDE
NOES: SUPERVISORS NONE
ABSENT: SUPERVISORS NONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SB.
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
I, LINDA D. ROBERTS, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Reso lution was duly and regularly adopted by the said Board at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of August , 19 86 , and passed by a unanimous vote of said Board.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 20th_ day of August? 19 86 .
n i t h n o j
V
» 16
u
18 /Clerk of the Board?'6fi< Supervisors
of Orange CountyV^california
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 8 26
S 27
£ 28