St. Andrew’s expansion not well explained

Mike Talbot

As a resident of Cliff Haven living within a few blocks of St.

Andrew’s Church, I strongly oppose the proposed expansion and any

change in the general plan and zoning to accommodate any further

development of the facilities on the church property.

Our neighborhood is already struggling with significant traffic,

parking, density and noise problems resulting from the church, the

high school and the fact that our neighborhood streets have become

arterial highways for bypassing Coast Highway as well as getting to

businesses on 17th Street and elsewhere in Costa Mesa.

In brief, set forth below are the substantive reasons I believe

require the Planning Commission to deny approval of the project.

1. The proposed expansion will have a significant, detrimental

impact ondensity, air quality, traffic, parking and safety.It will

cause noise and light pollution in our area due to the increased uses

caused by the expansion, as well as the general density effects

135,000 square feet of improvements on just 3.9 acres has by itself.

Construction alone will have a substantial negative effect, but

the long-term effects will be most detrimental. In addition, the

proposed 400-car underground parking structure is totally

unacceptable in a residential neighborhood like ours. It would be a

safety problem and would greatly exacerbate the traffic situation.

And there is no proof that it would relieve the parking situation we

experience from the church as claimed.

Our neighborhood now lives with unacceptable levels of speeding

traffic, endangering our children and ourselves. On my street, Signal

Road, like other residential streets in the neighborhood, we have

considerable “through” traffic as well as church and high school

“destination” traffic coursing through and parking in front of our

houses. We do not have sidewalks in our neighborhood, so the streets

are shared by our children and ourselves with the traffic. We enjoy

walking and jogging on our streets and should be able to let our

children freely walk in our neighborhood to visit their friends and

play. But we cannot do this due to the high danger caused by traffic,

which only gets worse as time goes on. On my street, we often have to

flag down speeding drivers -- not a safe thing to be doing in any

event, but something we are often compelled to do when cars are

running through our stop signs and speeding as if on a drag strip.

And it’s not just young drivers, but most any age. And it is a

substantial number daily at all hours.

It is evident to all of us living near the church that there is

already a significant adverse impact on the neighborhood based on

current utilization of the church facilities, which is far beyond

that contemplated by the 1982 use permit.

2. The environmental review is inadequate in several respects

provided by other opponents to the project. These deficiencies are

briefly listed below and require that the environmental review be

determined inadequate.

A. The review fails to adequately address parking and traffic

impacts. For instance, the use of a gymnasium, which the report

states will increase levels of traffic and demands for parking above

what presently exists, are said not to be significant. However, the

only traffic analysis done is with respect to the intersection at

Cliff and Dover drives.

B. The mitigation measures do not take into consideration the

impact on traffic in any area other than at the intersection of 15th

Street and Irvine Avenue.

C. Our Cliff Haven/Newport Heights road network is already

inadequate to handle the current traffic safely, and the report’s

conclusion about the adequacy of the existing road network to handle

the increase in traffic is unsupported.

D. The report contains no study or analysis to support its

conclusions regarding use of the parking structure. The unsupported

reliance on a parking structure to solve not only a current problem,

but to absorb the future expansion, is unsupported.

E. Metrics in the report used for analysis of impacts from church

facilities’ attendance do not adequately address total attendance

based on increased uses planned and capability for increased uses

based on expansion.

F. Measurements for the noise study do not include measurements

taken in the neighborhood but appear to be some distance from the

residential neighborhood. The report fails to address the impacts

with respect to noise in the Cliff Haven neighborhood itself.

G. There is an inherent conflict in the fact that the Cliff Haven

area does not have street lights and the proposed mitigation of

adding lighting to satisfy security requirements. This mitigation is

unsupportable as any such lighting increase is noticeable and has a

negative impact.

H. The report does not adequately address the cumulative impact on

the neighborhood from the increased enrollment at Newport Harbor High

School and the substantial increase in use of the church facilities.

I. The report fails to address what impact the current Newport

Heights/Cliff Haven traffic-calming study will have on the

contemplated traffic impacts from the church expansion.

J. A 34% increase in floor area, placing approximately 135,000

square feet on a 3.9-acre site (34,615 square feet per acre), which

is acknowledged to be parking-deficient now, and 62 spaces deficient

later, and relies on full utilization of a parking structure about

which no evidence has been given to assure its full utilization.To

increase the intensity of usage on the church site would exacerbate

already existing severe problems with traffic, noise, parking, safety

and air quality and detrimentally affect the overall residential

nature of the neighborhood. This is a residential neighborhood where

people walk and where children should be able to play in the streets.

Traffic is horrendous with constant speeding and running of stop

signs. The church, particularly if expanded, is no different than

putting a major commercial office or shopping center in the midst of

an residential area with inadequate roads and traffic controls.

Further, expansion of the church would cause significant

additional costs and inconveniences to the neighborhood for which the

church contributes nothing to ameliorate the problems it already

brings to our neighborhood.

I request that the Planning Commission deny the application.

* MIKE TALBOT is a Newport Beach resident.