Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152)�WPo CITY OF 0. � RT NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report November 29, 2016 Agenda Item No. 1 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232, kbrandt@newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: Gregg Ramirez, Senior Planner, gram irezQnewportbeachca.gov PHONE: 949-644-3219 TITLE: Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) 850 San Clemente Drive ■ General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 ■ Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 ■ Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 ■ Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 (County Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 17970) ■ Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 ■ Traffic Study (TPO) No. 2015-004 ■ Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002 ■ Use Permit No. UP2005-017 Revocation Drive ■ Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 Revocation ABSTRACT: The applicant is seeking approval of a 100 -unit condominium project, the Museum House, which requires several discretionary approvals. The proposed project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building. The proposed tower consists of 25 floors totaling approximately 295 feet from finished grade to the top of the roof -mounted equipment and two levels of subterranean parking. The project site is approximately two acres in size and is located between Santa Cruz Drive to the east and Santa Barbara Drive to the west. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and recommends that City Council approve the application as proposed. RECOMMENDATIONS: a) Conduct a public hearing; b) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-26, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Certifying Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016- 002 and Approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Museum House Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152) (Attachment A); Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 2 c) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-127, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to Change the Land Use Designation from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100), for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive and Adopting California Environmental Quality Act Facts and Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the Museum House Project (PA2015-152) (Attachment B); d) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-23, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 Amending the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC -19) Located at 850 and 856 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152), and pass to second reading on December 13, 2016 (Attachment C); e) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-128, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project and Revoking Use Permit No. UP2005-17 and Modification Permit No. MD 2004-059 Related to the Orange County Museum of Art Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152) (Attachment D); f) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-129, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152) (Attachment E); g) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-130, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Traffic Study No. TS2015-004 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152) (Attachment F); and h) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-24, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Multi -Family Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152), and pass on to a second reading on December 13, 2016 (Attachment G). FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: In order to quantify the project's long-term fiscal implications on City resources, staff engaged a consultant to prepare a fiscal assessment (Attachment I) in accordance with General Plan Implementation Policies 12.1 and 12.2. The analysis used the City's fiscal impact model which calculates the average cost of public services required by new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in the same way that existing development does. At the time the 2006 General Plan was adopted, the model concluded that General Plan build out would result in a positive fiscal impact on the City's General Fund of $21.7 million per year. 2 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 3 For this application, the fiscal analysis included four different land use options for the project site, including the proposed 100 -unit project; the existing museum (23,632 square feet); a larger museum (31,538 square feet); and a 90 -unit project. Both residential options resulted in positive fiscal impacts while the museum options resulted in minor annual costs to the City. The positive increase in City revenues is attributable to property taxes, fees, and revenue expenditures from residents. Due to the applicant's intention to target the high- end residential market, the proposed 100 -unit project is estimated to generate a net increase of $606,095 of annual revenue to the City. DISCUSSION: Proiect Settin The two -acre project site is located in Newport Center, and since 1978 OCMA has operated at this location. The General Plan land use designation for the property is PI (Private Institutional). The property and the adjacent site at 856 San Clemente Drive are designated as Anomaly No 49, and the combined maximum development capacity is 45,218 square feet for both properties. The PI designation is intended to provide for privately -owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, health care, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. The property is located in the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC), which allows a variety of uses including civic, cultural, business and professional office uses, and support commercial activities. To the north of the site are the Villas at Fashion Island apartments that are under construction and nearing completion. To the west is an office parking structure and the aforementioned OCMA administration building; to the east is a parking structure, and to the south, across San Clemente Drive, are the Colony Apartments and Pacific Life office building. 3 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 4 �$ T ;;,, � y: '+ � ,.►'��� `, gay �`�. �' v S' `% r Y[ rAK Subject Property �te1 r+ to N I san C!£'MEN7E OR kms; ro z ~ i GENERAL PLAN ZONING s - LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON-SITE PI (Private Institutional) IF7PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Orange County Museum of Art NORTH I MU -H3 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) PC -56 (San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area) Villas at Fashion Island Apartments Multiple Residential PC -56 (North Newport Center, Pacific Life Office Building and SOUTH (RM) and Regional Block 800 Sub -Area) and OR The Colony Apartments Commercial Office CO -R (Office Regional Commercial) EAST MU -H3 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) PC -56 (San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area) Parking Structure and Apartments PI (Private Institutional) PC -56 (North Newport Center, OCMA Administration Building WEST and MU -H3 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Block 100 Sub -Area) and Parking Structure Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 5 Prosect Description The requested amendments would allow the construction of a 25 -story residential tower that contains 100 units; project plans are included in Attachment D and are summarized below. Height: The maximum building height is 295 feet, as measured from finished grade at the building entrance to top of roof. The site would be raised to a finished grade of approximately 187 above mean sea level (AMSL) and would be generally even with the grade of the adjacent San Clemente Drive right-of-way. The proposed tower is 482 AMSL to the top of the mechanical enclosure. Floor Area: The 25 -story building includes a total floor area of 391,158 square feet, not including the subterranean garage levels. The tower's footprint would measure approximately 75 feet by 220 feet, with the size of the building's floors becoming progressively smaller at the higher levels. The building would be located in the northeastern portion of the site and angles diagonally so the lobby entrance faces the entry motor court. Unit Mix: The 100 units would consist of 54 two-bedroom, three -bath units, and 46 three-bedroom, four -bath units. Unit sizes are anticipated to range between 1,800 to 6,000 square feet. Building Materials: Building architecture includes a textured stone base, masonry frames and pilasters, and metalwork details. The exterior is predominantly stone and masonry with large-scale architectural features such as multi -story bay windows, large balconies, and terraces. All mechanical equipment and elevator overruns would be enclosed above the top floor. Setbacks: The main residential tower is set back a minimum of 36 feet from the front property line (San Clemente Drive), 34 feet from the right property line (adjacent to the office parking structure), 10 feet to the left property line (adjacent to the OCMA administration building site) and 42 feet to the rear property line (adjacent to the Villas at Fashion Island apartments). Parking level and basement setbacks occur largely below grade and are not immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. They maintain a minimum 10 -foot setback except on the right side where the access road is located along the property line adjacent to the office parking structure. Vehicle Access and Parking. Access to the site will be via San Clemente Drive. An entry gate and guard house staffed 24 hours per day would be located in a driveway off San Clemente Drive opposite Santa Maria Road. Parking is provided in a two-level underground structure in addition to the 12 spaces located around the motor court. A total of 250 marked parking spaces (200 resident spaces; 50 guest spaces) are provided. All parking would be valet with an on-site attendant 24 hours per day. Through the use of valet and vehicle stacking, an additional 38 parking spaces will be provided. All parking would be provided on site as there is no on -street parking allowed on San Clemente Drive. Refer to Attachment J for the Parking Management and Valet Plan. As 5 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 6 conditioned, the plan is a subject to final review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. Emergency, refuse, and delivery access would be via a proposed access road located adjacent to the easterly property line. This road slopes down terminating on the upper parking level and provides access to trash facilities and service elevators. Emergency vehicles would use either this access or the main motor court. Refer to Attachment K for the Fire and Delivery Truck Access Plan. This plan is also subject to final review by the City Traffic Engineer and Community Development Department. Amenities: The design also includes a variety of resident facilities and shared spaces. The ground -level exterior amenities include plazas, gardens, and a dog run. A pool and garden terrace are proposed on the second level. Interior features include meeting areas, home offices, a media room, lounge, fitness center, and other shared spaces. The basement parking levels also include resident storage areas, mechanical rooms, refuse collection, and service areas. Energy Efficiency: The developer intends on securing Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver rating. LEED is a system created and administered by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) to evaluate the sustainability of a building. LEED buildings are often fitted with the most efficient plumbing fixtures, irrigation designs, and electrical systems. Some building materials are often created using recycled materials and refuse from demolished buildings are often recycled for other uses. LEED certification often exceeds the standard Title 24 and other energy and water conservation requirements applied to new construction. Other Components. The revocation of Use Permit No. UP2015-017 (PA2015-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum, and revocation of Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC are included in the recommendations. These revocations would become effective at the time of permit issuance for the proposed project. A detailed discussion of the project components, including an analysis of applicable General Plan policies, Planned Community development standards, project architecture, and the required project findings related to the site development review, traffic study and tentative tract map are provided in the Planning Commission staff report dated October 20, 2016 (Attachment Q). Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Analysis Charter Requirements. Pursuant to Charter Section 423 (Charter) and Council Policy A- 18, an analysis must be prepared to establish whether a proposed General Plan amendment requires a vote by the electorate, if approved by City Council. Any proposed amendment is combined with 80 percent of the increases in traffic, dwelling units, and non-residential floor area allowed by previous General Plan amendments (approved within the preceding 10 years) within the same statistical area. 0 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 7 The Charter specifies the following thresholds: 100 dwelling units (density), 100 a.m. peak hour trips and 100 p.m. peak hour trips (traffic), and 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area (intensity). If any one of the thresholds is exceeded, and the City Council approves the requested General Plan amendment, the amendment would be classified as a "major amendment" and be subject to voter consideration. Approved amendments, other than those approved by the electorate, are tracked for 10 years and factored into the analysis of future amendments within the same statistical area as indicated. Proposed General Plan Amendment: The applicant is requesting a General Plan amendment in order to allow 100 units to be developed on the property, which is located in Statistical Area L1. There have been two prior amendments approved within Statistical Area L1 since the 2006 General Plan adoption. The first amendment authorized the new Civic Center and Park Site, and the second authorized the Newport Beach Country Club to construct a new, larger clubhouse. Neither of these two prior amendments added dwelling units to Statistical Area L1. With 100 units remaining in the "density" threshold for Statistical Area L1, this 100 -unit project will equal the density threshold. Based on the trip generation rates contained in the Council Policy A-18, the project does result in a traffic increase. Specifically the project will add 30 morning peak hour trips and 33 evening peak hour trips; both of these increases are within the Charter traffic thresholds. The project does not add any nonresidential floor area (intensity) to Statistical Area L1. Table 1 summarizes staff's Charter analysis, which concludes that none of the Charter thresholds would be exceeded. Therefore, should the City Council approve the request, it would not be considered a "major" General Plan amendment nor would it require subsequent voter approval. Table 1: Charter Section 423 Analysis Summary Statistical Area L1 Increase in Increase in Increase in Increase in Allowed Floor A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Allowed Area (sq. ft.) Trips Hour Trips Dwelling Units "Intensity" "Traffic" "Traffic" "Density" GP2015-001 (PA2015-152) 0 30 33 100 850 San Clemente Drive Prior Amendments (80%) 1. Civic Center GP2008-009 0 0 0 0 (PA2008-182) 2. NB Country Club 16,800 0 0 0 GP2008-005 (PA2008-152) TOTALS 16,800 30 33 100 Section 423 Thresholds 40,000 100 100 100 Vote Required? No No No No 1. The current Charter Section 423 table for Statistical Area L 1 is provided in Attachment L. 7 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 8 Development Agreement Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 15.45.020 requires a development agreement for residential projects that 1) include 50 or more units, and 2) require a General Plan amendment, Zoning Code amendment, or other legislative act; the proposed project meets this NBMC standard. Agreement Term: The applicant has requested a development agreement (Agreement) that has an initial 10 -year term with one 5 -year extension. Public Benefit Fee: The applicant has also agreed to pay the City a public benefit fee of $71,100 per unit (for a total $7,110,000), which will be paid at the time of grading permit issuance. Donation of 856 San Clemente Drive: As an additional public benefit, the Agreement includes a donation from the Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) to the City of the adjacent 0.9 -acre parcel at 856 San Clemente Drive (Section 3.2 of the Agreement). The 13,935 square -foot, single -story building at 856 San Clemente Drive is used by OCMA for administration and storage purposes. This building was previously the Newport Center Branch Library, but closed after construction of the Central Library. The Agreement includes a provision for a 5 -year lease back of the property from the City to OCMA, at $1 per year. The intention of this donation is to retain the property for community and cultural uses which are consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations. The Agreement is provided in Exhibit A of Attachment G. It should be noted that the Irvine Company placed a land use restriction on 856 San Clemente Drive when it was donated to OCMA in 1995. This restriction may prevent OCMA from transferring the property to the City. Therefore Section 3.2.1 has been added to the Agreement since the Planning Commission's review and recommendation on October 20, 2016. This new section indicates that an alternative public benefit of a similar value will be negotiated to the satisfaction of the City Council should the 856 San Clemente Drive property transfer not occur. This "reopener" provision also does not require an amendment to the Agreement. 0 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 9 Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 20, 2016. Staff and the applicant provided presentations that explained the requested approvals and described the project. The main topic discussed by the Planning Commission was the land use designation change, consistency with the General Plan policies related to building height in Newport Center, and the location of the property in the 300 -foot High Rise Height Limit Area. See Attachments M and N for exhibits depicting height standards and Newport Center building heights in the vicinity of the project site. The Planning Commission also discussed the project's traffic and trip generation rates and the Charter requirements and applicability to the project. Following the conclusion of the public comments and discussion, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed legislative amendments and project site design including circulation, landscaping, height, and setbacks were consistent with all applicable General Plan policies, compatible with the surrounding land uses, and that all applicable findings for approval for the requested applications could be made. The Planning Commission voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend that the City Council approve the project as proposed by the applicant. The Planning Commission resolution, meeting minutes, and staff report are attached for reference as Attachments O, P, and Q. Public Comments Since the October 20, 2016, Planning Commission meeting, nine public comment letters have been received in opposition to the Project and 25 public comment letters have been received supporting the Project. Additionally, City staff received phone calls regarding the project and compiled a tally of 121 citizens opposing the project and one D Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 10 citizen supporting the project. Finally, a petition was submitted on behalf of Citizens Against High Rise Urban Towers that is signed by 1,165 citizens opposing the project. Public comments submitted as of November 21, 2016, are provided as Attachment S. Staff will provide an update of any additional public comments received at the public hearing. Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) John Wayne Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles north/northeast of the project site and is the nearest public airport. The project is within the notification area of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the project is below the maximum transitional imagery surface heights, and thus the project is within the building height limits of the AELUP. The project is also outside the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level contour line established by the AELUP and would, therefore, not conflict with any land use compatibility issues related to noise. Finally, the project is not within any of the AELUP Safety Zones, which identify certain land uses as incompatible and restricts them appropriately. Since the proposed project includes a building higher than 200 feet above ground level and General Plan and zoning amendments, the ALUC must review the project for consistency with the AELUP, prior to the City Council taking any action on the proposed project. On November 17, 2016, the ALUC reviewed the proposed project and found it consistent with the AELUP. However, the ALUC did include a condition on the consistency determination. The condition requires the applicant to 1) provide written documentation from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) verifying that the City's Police Department helipad was considered in the FAA's Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for the project, and 2) provide this documentation to both the ALUC and the City Council prior to the City Council's action on this project. Staff will provide this information to the City Council in a supplemental memorandum since this documentation was not available at the time this staff report was completed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Prior to making an approval decision on the proposed project or a modified project, the City Council must first review, consider, and certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), SCH No. 2016021023. The City contracted with Placeworks, Inc., an environmental consulting firm, to prepare an Initial Study and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed project in accordance with the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The DEIR was routed to the City Council in advance of this staff report to allow additional time to review the report. A copy of the DEIR was also made available on the City's website (http://www.newportbeachca.gov/cegadocuments), at each Newport Beach Public Library, and at the Community Development Department at City Hall. 10 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 11 The DEIR was completed and circulated for a mandatory 45 -day public -review period that began on August 17, 2016, and concluded on September 30, 2016. A total of 29 comments were received from interested parties. The consultant and staff prepared detailed written responses to each of the comments received on the adequacy of the DEIR. On the basis of the analysis provided in the DEIR, City staff has concluded that the project would not have a long term significant impact on the environment and with the exception of construction noise, there are no significant short-term or construction -related impacts. The noise analysis concluded that construction -related noise impacts would be significant and unavoidable. In particular the impact is due to the proximity of the apartments to the north of the site, which will be occupied prior to the start of construction. The nine mitigation measures address vehicle and equipment maintenance and the erection of a temporary sound barrier/curtain between the construction site and apartments. The mitigation measures are identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is included as Exhibit "B" of Attachment A. Since the construction noise has been identified as significant and unavoidable, the City Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations which is included in the draft General Plan Amendment resolution (Attachment B). One notable addition in the Final EIR (Revisions to the Draft EIR) is related to the Development Agreement's public benefit which includes the donation of the adjacent parcel developed with the OCMA office and administration building (856 San Clemente Drive) from OCMA to the City. As indicated in the Final EIR, the donation only changes ownership and no physical improvements are proposed. Additionally, future uses will be required to adhere to the use and development standards for the property as described in the San Joaquin Plaza PC. Therefore, staff has determined no additional CEQA analysis is necessary or required. SUMMARY: The applicant has requested amendments to the City's General Plan and zoning regulations, as well as numerous other land use entitlements, in order to construct a 100 -unit residential development in Newport Center. A development agreement is also proposed. The Planning Commission determined that the density, bulk, and scale of the proposed residential project is compatible with the surrounding land uses and in keeping with the overall vision for the northern half of Newport Center, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the application. ALTERNATIVES: As an alternative the City Council may choose to deny the requested legislative amendments and other zoning entitlements required to allow the development of the 100 -unit project (Attachment H). 11 Museum House Residential Project November 29, 2016 Page 12 The City Council may also choose to approve the 90 -unit project alternative analyzed in the EIR or otherwise modify the project proposal. Should the City Council choose to modify the project, it may be necessary to continue the project to a future meeting in order to prepare the appropriate supporting documents. NOTICING: Notice of this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights-of- way and waterways) including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the NBMC. A courtesy notice of the hearing was also emailed to the interested parties list for this project. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Attachment F Attachment G Attachment H Attachment I Attachment J Attachment K Attachment L Attachment M Attachment N Attachment O Attachment P Attachment Q Attachment R Attachment S - Draft Resolution Certifying the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program - Draft Resolution Approving the General Plan Amendment and adopting CEQA Facts and Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations - Draft Ordinance Approving the Planned Community Development Plan Amendment - Draft Resolution Approving the Site Development Review (Includes Project Plans) - Draft Resolution Approving the Tentative Tract Map - Draft Resolution Approving Traffic Study - Draft Ordinance Approving the Development Agreement - Draft Resolution for Denial - Fiscal Analysis - Parking Management and Valet Plan - Fire and Delivery Truck Access Plan - Current Statistical Area L1 Section 423 Table - Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation - Newport Center Building Height Exhibits - Planning Commission Resolution - Planning Commission Minutes, October 20, 2016 - Planning Commission Staff Report, October 20, 2016 - Applicant Letter - Public Comment Letters 12 Attachment A Draft Resolution Certifying the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program 13 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. ER2016-002 AND APPROVING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement — To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific 14 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 (AB52), the City is required to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested in writing to be informed of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe. Two tribes have requested notification in writing. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 12, 2016. California Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 requires 30 days prior to City Council action to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult. A response letter was received from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation on February 24, 2016 requesting that a monitor from their tribe oversee ground disturbing construction 15 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of _ work. During consultation with staff, City Council Policy K-5 was discussed which requires a qualified archaeologist be present during ground breaking, as well as General Plan Historical Resources Policy HR 2.3 (Cultural Organizations) which says to notify cultural organizations, including Native American organizations, of proposed developments that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources and to allow representatives of such groups to monitor grading and/or excavation of development sites. As a result, Mr. Salas, the representative for the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation, agreed that the implementation of those two policies would be sufficient and the consultation was closed; WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq., the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K-3, it was determined that the project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an EIR; WHEREAS, on February 5, 2016, the City, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR and mailed that NOP to responsible and trustee public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed project, including any persons who had previously requested notice in writing; WHEREAS, on February 22, 2016, the City held a public scoping meeting to present the project and to solicit input from interested individuals, organizations, and responsible and trustee public agencies regarding environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR; WHEREAS, a Draft EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) (DEIR) was prepared in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3; WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45 -day comment period beginning on August 17, 2016 and ending on September 30, 2016. The Draft EIR, comments, and responses to the comments were considered by the City Council in its review of the proposed project; WHEREAS, the Final EIR, consisting of the NOP, Initial Study, Draft EIR, Responses to Comments, Revisions to the Draft EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached as Exhibits A and B, and incorporated herein by reference, were considered by the Planning Commission and City Council in its review of the proposed project; WHEREAS, the Final EIR identifies significant impacts to the environment which are unavoidable in the areas of noise and vibration and more specifically short-term construction related noise impacts; WHEREAS, on the basis of the entire environmental review record, the project, with mitigation measures, will have a less than significant impact upon the environment 16 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of and there are no known substantial adverse effects on the environment that would be caused by the project with the exception of short-term construction related noise impacts. Additionally, there are no long-term environmental goals that would be compromised by the project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in connection with the project. The mitigation measures identified and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit B), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are feasible and will reduce the potential environmental impacts, with the exception of short-term construction related noise, to a less than significant level; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby certifies EIR No. ER2016-002 (SCH No. 2016021023), which is attached here to as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. EIR No. ER2016-002 consists of the NOP, Initial Study, Draft EIR, appendices, Responses to Comments, and revisions to the Draft EIR. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves the Mitigation Monitoring Report Program attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 29th day of November, 2016. 17 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of Diane B. Dixon Mayor ATTEST: Leilani 1. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTO KEY'S OFFICE Aaron C- arp City Attorney Exhibit A: Environmental Impact Report No. 2016-002 Exhibit B: Mitigation Monitoring Report Program 18 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 6 of _ Exhibit "A" Environmental Impact Report EIR SCH No. 2016021023 • Notice of Preparation • Initial Study • Environmental Analysis • Alternatives Analysis • Appendices • Responses to Comments • Revisions to Draft EIR (Available separate due to bulk) http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?paqe=1347 19 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 7 of Exhibit "B" Mitigation Monitoring Report Program 20 October 2016 i Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program State Clearinghouse No. 2016021023 MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT for City of Newport Beach Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Contact: Gregg Ramirez, Senior Planner 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 949.644.3219 gramirez@newportbeachca.gov Prepared by: PlaceWorks Contact: JoAnn Hadfield, Principal, Environmental Services 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707 714.966.9220 info@placeworks.com www.placeworks.com 21 22 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Table of Contents Section Page 1. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM.........................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION.......................................................................................................................................2 1.3 PROJECT SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................... 3 List of Tables Table Page Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements................................................................................................ 5 October 2016 Page i 23 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank. Page ii PlaceWorks 24 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been developed to provide a vehicle by which to monitor mitigation measures and conditions of approval outlined in the Museum House Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2016021023. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in conformance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and City of Newport Beach Monitoring Requirements. Section 21081.6 states: (a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply: (1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. (2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 provides clarification of mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements and guidance to local lead agencies on implementing strategies. The reporting or monitoring program must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The City of Newport Beach is the lead agency for the Museum House project and is therefore responsible for implementing the MMRP. The MMRP has been drafted to meet the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 as a fully enforceable monitoring program. The MMRP consists of the mitigation program and the measures to implement and monitor the mitigation program. The MMRP defines the following for the mitigation measure outlined in Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring Requirements. October 2096 Page 9 NE MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ■ Definition of Mitigation. The mitigation measure contains the criteria for mitigation, either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of the steps to be taken in mitigation. ■ Responsible Party or Designated Representative. Unless otherwise indicated, the project applicant is the responsible party for implementing the mitigation, and the City of Newport Beach or a designated representative is responsible for monitoring the performance and implementation of the mitigation measures. To guarantee that the mitigation measure will not be inadvertently overlooked, a supervising public official acting as the Designated Representative is the official who grants the permit or authorization called for in the performance. Where more than one official is identified, permits or authorization from all officials shall be required. ■ Time Frame. In each case, a time frame is provided for performance of the mitigation measure or review of evidence that mitigation has taken place. The performance points selected are designed to ensure that impact -related components of project implementation do not proceed without establishing that the mitigation is implemented or ensured. All activities are subject to the approval of all required permits from local, state, and federal agencies with permitting authority over the specific activity. The numbering system in Table 1 corresponds with the numbering system used in the DEIR. The last column of the MMRP table will be used by the parties responsible for documenting when implementation of the mitigation measure has been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of mitigation compliance will be completed by the City of Newport Beach. The completed MMRP and supplemental documents will be kept on file at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division. 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION The City of Newport Beach is in the western part of Orange County in Southern California. The City is bordered by Huntington Beach to the northwest, Costa Mesa to the north, Irvine to the northeast, and unincorporated areas (Crystal Cove State Park) of Orange County to the southeast. Regional access to the City is provided by various freeways, including Interstate 405 which runs north to south across the southern California region and intersects State Route 73 (San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor) and State Route 55. State Route 55 also runs north to south and terminates in the City of Costa Mesa. State Route 73 runs along the northwestern boundary of the City limits and connects with Interstate 5 further south in Laguna Niguel. Highway 1, also known as East/West Coast Highway, runs near the southeastern boundary of Newport Beach. The project site is located in Newport Center, which includes residential, hospitality, and high- and low-rise office buildings surrounding the Fashion Island regional mall. The site itself is approximately two acres (86,942 square feet) and is located at 850 San Clemente Drive in Newport Center (Assessor's Parcel Number 442-261-05). The project site is generally bounded by Santa Cruz Drive to the east, Santa Barbara Drive to the west, San Joaquin Hills Road to the north, and San Clemente Drive to the south. Paoe 2 PlacelVorks 26 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1.3 PROJECT SUMMARY A 25 -story condominium tower is proposed for the approximately two -acre site and would consist of 100 for -sale residential units and a two-level subterranean garage. The tower footprint would measure approximately 75 feet by 220 feet, with floors becoming progressively smaller at higher levels. The building would be located in the northeastern portion of the site and angled so that the lobby entrance faces San Clemente Drive. From finished grade of the main building entry point at approximately 187 feet above mean sea level (amsl) to the roof of the highest portion of the tower, which includes the mechanical equipment and elevator overrun, the tower is expected to be 482 feet amsl. Therefore, the tower itself, from finished grade of the main building entry point to the top of the tower would be 295 feet. Each residential floor would be approximately 11 feet in height. The 100 residential units would consist of 54 two-bedroom units with 3 baths, and 46 three-bedroom units with 4 baths, ranging in size from approximately 1,800 to 6,000 square feet. The number of units per floor would range from three on the upper levels to five on the lower floors. All units would include private balconies. Architectural Features The Museum House tower would be designed as a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver -certified building. The tower would be built with a textured stone base, masonry frames and pilasters, delicate metalwork details, and a predominantly stone and masonry exterior with large window openings. Larger -scale elements, such as multistory bay windows with French balconies and inset terraces, help define the massing in a residential manner, and multistory window groupings and large terraces at the uppermost floors create a finished cap to the building. All mechanical equipment and elevator overruns would be enclosed at the top floor. Common Area Amenities The proposed common area amenities would be located on Levels 1 and 2, and include both indoor and outdoor spaces. Common areas on the ground floor (level 1) could include a main lobby, bar and lounge, dining room and foyer, screening room, library, conservatory, and outdoor open space. The outdoor amenities may include a garden, lawn area, and a fountain plaza in the northern and northwestern portions of the project site, and dog run lawn along the southeastern site boundary. Level 2 is envisioned to have additional indoor common areas, which may include, but are not limited to, a lounge, fitness center and spa, billiards room, kid's playroom, party/event room, business center, and resident services. Outdoor spaces could include two amenity decks on each side of the building with a pool and garden terrace, an infinity edge pool, outdoor kitchen and barbecue area, and indoor space. An outdoor roof terrace is planned on the 25th floor. October 2016 Page 3 27 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Site Circulation and Parking Parking The proposed project would include 200 resident and 50 guest parking spaces, the majority of which would be in a two-level subterranean garage. Residential parking would be provided entirely in the underground garage. Guest parking would be available at the surface level (12 spaces) and underground garage (38 spaces). Valet parking for guests and residents would be used on a full-time basis. Vehicular Circulation Primary vehicular access to the site would be at the T -intersection of San Clemente Drive and Santa Maria Road, with secondary service access from a new San Clemente Drive curb cut near the project's southeastern boundary. Two main entry lanes would gain access to the property through a guard station and gate, which would be set back about 60 feet from the property line. One exit lane, separated by a landscaped median, would be adjacent to the entry lanes. The proposed entry lanes would lead into a motor court that could be used for drop-off/pick-up, short-term parking, and pedestrian access to the building lobby. The motor court would also provide access to the project's underground parking areas via ramps along the western edge of the site. The eastern side of the site, east of the proposed residential tower, would be improved with a fire lane and loading zone for delivery vehicles ending as a partially underground dead-end. Pedestrian Circulation Primary pedestrian access to the site would be from San Clemente Drive to the motor court and the lobby entrance on the western building fagade. A five -foot -wide walkway along the service lane east of the building would provide secondary pedestrian access. Page 4 Place U%rks 28 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Monitor Responsibility for Responsibility for (Signature Required) Mitigation Measure Implementaiion Timing Monitor ng (Date of Compliance) 5.2 AIR QUALITY 2-1 During construction, the construction contractor(s) shall require Project Applicant; During building plan City of Newport Beach the use of interior paint with 0 grams per liter (g/L) of volatile Construction Contractor check and construction Community Development organic compounds (VOC) (i,e., zero VOC paint). Paints that Construction Contractor Department — Building emit less than the low-VOC limits of South Coast Air Quality Division Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1113 are known as .super -compliant paints.° A list of super -compliant VOC coating manufacturers is available at SCAQMD's website (http:/1www.agmd.gov/prdas/brochuresipaintguide.html). Use of super -compliant interior paints shall be noted on building plans. 2-2 The construction contractor(s) shall limit the daily amount of Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach debris haul trips during the project's building demolition and Construction Contractor construction Community Development asphalt demolition phases to a maximum of 17 truckloads per Department— Building day (34 truck trips per day) or a total overall daily haul truck Division miles traveled of 680 miles. These requirements shall be noted on all construction management plans and truck trips and mileage shall be documented. 5.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 3-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant Project Applicant; Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department Certified Archaeologist; grading permits Community Development that an Orange County -certified professional archaeologist has Construction Contractor Department — Planning been retained to monitor any potential impacts to archaeological Division resources throughout the duration of any ground -disturbing activities at the project site. The qualified archeologist shall be present at the pregrade meeting to discuss the monitoring, collection, and safety procedures of cultural resources, if any are found. If subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground - disturbing activities, the construction contractor shall ensure that all work stops within 25 feet of the find until the qualified archeologist can assess the significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment or disposition of the resources in consultation with the City of Newport Beach and a representative of the affected Native American tribe (Gabrieleno or Juaneno). The archeological monitor shall have the authority to halt any project -related activities that may adversely impact Oclober 2016 29 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitorina Reauirements Mitigation Measure Responsibility for implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring Monitor (Signature Required) ate of Compliance) potentially significant archaeological resources. Suspension of ground disturbances in the vicinity of the discoveries shall not be lifted unfit an archeological monitor has evaluated the discoveries to assess whether they are classified as significant cultural resources, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and, if determined to be significant, to develop an appropriate treatment or disposition plan. As required by General Plan Policy HR 2.4, any scientifically valuable materials will be donated to a responsible public or private institution with a suitable repository, located within Newport Beach or Orange County, whenever possible. 3-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant Project Applicant; Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department Certified Paleontologist grading permits Community Development that an Orange County—certified professional paleontologist has Department — Planning been retained to monitor any potential impacts to Division paleontological resources throughout the duration of any ground -disturbing activities at the project site. The paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Mitigation Plan, which shall include the following minimum elements: • All earthmoving activities eight feet or more below the current surface shall be monitored full-time by a qualified paleontological monitor. • If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor has the authority to temporarily divert work within 25 feet of the find to allow recovery of the fossils and evaluation of the fossil locality. • Fossil localities shall require documentation, including stratigraphic columns and samples for micropaleontological analyses and for dating. • Fossils shall be prepared to the point of identification and evaluated for significance. • Significant fossils shall be cataloged and identified prior to being donated to an appropriate repository. The final report shall interpret any paleontological PlarelG orks 30 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitorina Reauirements Mitigation Measure Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring Monitor (Signature Required) Date of Compliance) resources discovered in the regional context and provide grading permits Community Development the catalog and all specialists' reports as appendices. Department— Building An executed curation agreement shall be part of the plan, and Division the project proponent shall bear all expenses of the mitigation program, including curation of materials meeting significance criteria. 3-3 During construction activities, the project applicant shall allow Project Applicant During grading and City of Newport Beach representatives of cultural organizations, including Native construction Community Development American tribes (i.e., Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians), to Department—Planning access the project site on a volunteer basis to monitor grading Division and excavation activities. 5.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4-1 Given that the project would require excavation extending to the Project Applicant Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach property line, shoring is required to support subterranean grading permits Community Development excavation. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City of Department— Building Newport Beach Building Division shall confirm that the grading Division plans include the shoring requirements detailed in the project's geotechnical study. Cantilever, tied -back or internally braced shoring systems can be used for the subterranean excavation. Cantilever shoring systems are typically limited to a maximum retained height of 15 feet. Tied -back shoring walls will require a temporary or permanent easement from the adjacent property owners and the City of Newport Beach. The shoring system shall be designed to resist a uniform pressure equal to 25 pounds per square foot (psf). An allowable passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of depth below the bottom of the excavation shall be used for design of the shoring system. The residential tower would be located approximately 26 feet from the property line. Therefore, it may be possible to excavate to the subgrade elevation without the use of shoring. Temporary slope in the marine terrace deposit may be excavated at slopes where the proportion of the height of the rise is less than or equal to the length of the slope (1 H:1 V). Alternatively, sloped excavations may be used to reduce the height of the shored October 2016 31 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements P/nrel rbrks 32 Monitor Responsibility for Responsibility for (Signature Required) Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing Monitoring ate of Compliance) excavation. In the case, the earth pressures above may be increased and will be handled on a case by case basis when the height of the sloped excavation is known. All shoring and excavation shall comply with current Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations and observed by the designated competent person on site. 42 The bedding zone is defined as the area containing the material Project Applicant Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach specified that is supporting, surrounding, and extending to one grading permits Community Development foot above the top of any proposed utility pipes. During grading Department— Building and construction plan reviews, the City of Newport Beach Division Building Divisions shall confirm that the project's proposed bedding satisfies the requirements of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC) Section 306-1.2.1. There shall be a flinch minimum of bedding below the pipe and 1 -inch minimum clearance below a projecting bell. There shall be a minimum side clearance of 6 inches on each side of the pipe. Bedding material shall be sand, gravel, crushed aggregate, or native free -draining material having a sand equivalent of not less than 30, or other material approved by the engineer. Materials used for the bedding zone shall be placed and compacted with light mechanical means to reduce the potential of damaging the pipe; jetting shall not be allowed. 43 Backfill shall be considered as starting 12 inches above the Project Applicant; Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach pipe. On-site excavated materials are suitable as backfill. Construction Contractor grading permits and Community Development During construction activities, any boulders or cobbles larger during construction Department — Building than three inches in any dimension shall be removed before Division backfilling. All backfill shall be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 6 to 8 inches in thickness and be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The upper 12 inches below pavement shall be compacted at least to 95 percent relative compaction. Mechanical compaction will be required to accomplish compaction above the bedding along the entire pipeline alignments. In backfill areas, where mechanical compaction of soil backfill is impractical due to space constraints, sand -cement slurry may be substituted for compacted backfill. The slurry shall contain P/nrel rbrks 32 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements Mitigation Measure Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring Monitor (Signature Required) Date of Compliance) one sack of cement per cubic yard and have a maximum slump residents or businesses within 500 feet of the project site construction Department — Building regarding the planned construction activities. The notification of 5 inches. When set, such a mix typically has the consistency Division shall include a brief description of the project, the activities that of hard compacted soil and allows for future excavation. occur. The notification shall also include the telephone number A lean non -shrink concrete plug with a minimum width length of of the construction contractors authorized representative to respond in the event of a vibration or noise complaint. 3 feet shall be placed in the utility trenches at the location where 9-2 Prior to the beginning of construction activities, a sign shall be I Project Applicant; Prior to construction Citv of Newport Beach off-site utilities enter the project boundaries to minimize the potential for off-site water flow onsite. 4-4 All foundation excavations shall be observed and/or tested by Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach the project applicant's geotechnical consultant before placement Geotechnical construction Community Development of concrete to verify that the foundations would be supported in Consultant Department— Building competent soils. If soft or loose soils are encountered at the Division subgrade level, the soils shall be removed or brought to a near - optimum moisture content (±2 percent), recompacted, and tested to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction prior to placement of fill or footing or floor slab construction. Only granular soils shall be used for compacted fill. Mat foundations may also derive lateral load resistance from passive resistance along the vertical sides of the foundations. Therefore, an ultimate passive fluid pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) shall be used. It is recommended that an ultimate sliding friction coefficient of 0.45 to be used for design. Passive and sliding resistance may be used in combination Without reduction. The required factor of safety is 1.5 for static loads and 1.1 for wind or seismic loads. 5.9 NOISE 9-1 At lead 30 days prior to commencement of demolition or any Project Applicant; At least 30 days prior to City of Newport Beach other construction activities, notification shall be given to all Construction Contractor demolition or Community Development residents or businesses within 500 feet of the project site construction Department — Building regarding the planned construction activities. The notification Division shall include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the duration and hours when construction would occur. The notification shall also include the telephone number of the construction contractors authorized representative to respond in the event of a vibration or noise complaint. 9-2 Prior to the beginning of construction activities, a sign shall be I Project Applicant; Prior to construction Citv of Newport Beach October 33 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitorinq Requirements PlacelG orks 34 Monitor Responsibility for Responsibility for (Signature Required) Mitigation Measure Im lementation Timing Monitoring Date of Compliance) posted at the entrance to the job site, clearly visible to the Construction Contractor Community Development public, that contains a contact name and telephone number of Department— Building the construction contractor's authorized representative to Division respond in the event of a vibration or noise complaint. If the authorized representative receives a complaint, he/she shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City of Newport Beach's Community Development Director. 9-3 Route all construction -related trips (including worker Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach commuting, material deliveries, and debris/soil hauling) so as to Construction Contractor construction Community Development minimize pass-bys or residential areas around the project site. Department — Building Division 9-0 All heavy construction equipment used on the proposed project Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach shall be maintained in good operating condition, with all internal Construction Contractor construction Community Development combustion, engine -driven equipment fitted With intake and Department — Building exhaust muffles, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no Division less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer. 9-5 Electrically powered equipment instead of pneumatic or internal Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach combustion powered equipment shall be used to the extent Construction Contractor construction Community Development possible. Department — Building Division 9-6 All stationary noise -generating equipment shall be located as far Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach away as possible from neighboring property lines; with particular Construction Contractor construction Community Development attention paid to the residential complex (currently under Department — Building construction) to the north of the project site. Division 9-7 Limit all internal combustion engine idling both on the site and at Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach nearby queuing areas to no more than five (5) minutes for any Construction Contractor construction Community Development given vehicle or machine. Signs shall be posted at the job site Department — Building and along queueing lanes to reinforce the prohibition of Division unnecessary engine idling. 9-8 The use of noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, Project Applicant; During grading and City of Newport Beach alarms, and bells will be for safety warning purposes only. Use Construction Contractor construction Community Development smart back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm Department — Building level based on the background noise level, or switch off back-up Division alarms and replace With human spotters. PlacelG orks 34 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 1 Mitigation Monitorina Reauirements Mitigation Measure Responsibility for Im lementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring Monitor (Signature Required) Date of Compliance) 9-9 A temporary noise bamerlcurtain shall be erected between the Project Applicant; During building plan City of Newport Beach construction zone and adjacent residential receptors to the Construction Contractor check and grading and Community Development north of the project site boundary. The temporary sound barrier construction Department— Building shall have a minimum height of 16 feet and be free of gaps and Division holes and must achieve a Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 35 or greater. The barrier can be (a) a''% -inch -thick plywood wall OR (b) a hanging blanket/curtain with a surface density of at least 2 pounds per square foot. For either configuration, the construction side of the barrier shall have an exterior lining of sound absorption material with a Noise Reduction Coefficient (NRC) rating of at least 0.7. 5.13 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 13-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall Project Applicant; Prior to issuance of City of Newport Beach prepare a construction traffic management plan to be submitted Construction Contractor building permits Traffic Engineer and approved by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineer. At a minimum, the construction traffic management plan shall include the following: • Provide detail on planned lane closures, including scheduling and duration; • Detail applicable lane closure restrictions during peak hours and holiday periods and noticing to surrounding property owners and tenants; • Provide measures to prevent blocking of surrounding property access points (due to construction vehicle queuing, etc.); • Document specific off-site parking locations for construction workers; • Project phasing; • Parking arrangements for off-site parking location and on-site during construction; • Anticipated haul routes; and • All materials transported on and offsite shall be securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust or dirt. October 2016 35 MUSEUM HOUSE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tbu page intentionally left blank PlacelWorkr Attachment 6 Draft Resolution Approving the General Plan Amendment and adopting CEQA Facts and Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations 37 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2015-001 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM PRIVATE INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL (RM - 100), FOR A 100 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE AND ADOPTING CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FACTS AND FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE MUSEUM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building and to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). m Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of _ • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement — To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; 39 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of WHEREAS, on November 17, 2016, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) found the City of Newport Beach Museum House Residential Project to be consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, with the condition that written documentation from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be provided to ALUC and the City Council verifying that the City's Police Department helipad was considered in the FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for the project; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29th, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code are legislative acts and neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments; WHEREAS, the requested GPA from PI to RM does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the site's size, location, and surrounding uses. Numerous PI designated properties are located throughout the City that could accommodate cultural institutions. Additionally, cultural institutions are allowed by right in 11 commercial and mixed-use zoning districts; WHEREAS, the requested GPA and resulting land use change is consistent with other applicable land use policies of the General Plan. Consistent with General Plan Goal LU6.14 for Newport Center, the project site is located in an area of Newport Center where multi -family uses are encouraged to produce opportunities to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation. The project site is also located in the northerly section of Newport Center making the proposed height consistent with Land Use Policy LU6.14.4, which encourages development with the greatest building mass and height to be located in the northeasterly section of Newport Center along San Joaquin Hills Road. The size, density, and character of the proposed dwelling units complement the existing land uses in the project area and include design elements consistent with Land Use Element Policy 5.1.9 (Character and Quality of Multi -Family Residential) that require multi -family dwellings to be designed to convey a high quality architectural character; ,n Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of WHEREAS, Council Policy A-18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate is required pursuant to City Charter Section 423. If a General Plan Amendment (separately or cumulatively with other CPA's within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM), adds 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required if the City Council approves the GPA; WHEREAS, this is the third GPA that affects Statistical Area L1 since the General Plan update in 2006. The amendment results in 100 additional dwelling units and there is no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. The 100 additional units result in a net increase of 30 a.m. and 33 p.m. peak hour trips based on the Trip Generation Study prepared by DKS Associates for the existing museum use and the High Rise Condominium use trip rates included in City Council Policy A-18. Including 80 percent of prior General Plan amendments, the proposed GPA increases the City Charter Section 423 thresholds to a total of 16,800 square feet of nonresidential floor area, 30 a.m. peak hour trips, 33 p.m. peak hour trips, and 100 residential dwelling units for Statistical Area L1. As none of the applicable thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded for Statistical Area L1, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve GPA No. GP2015-001; WHEREAS, the future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed amendments to the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) Zoning District of the NBMC; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65352.3 (SB18) of the California Government Code, a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that eight tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 12, 2016, Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code requires 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult. The City was contacted by one tribal contact. Rebecca Robles of the United Coalition to Protect Pahne responded on March 17, 2016, noting receipt of the City's letter and concurrence with Mitigation Measure 3-1 Museum House Project EIR. 41 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of _ NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications to the project made by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 as attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by reference. General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 amends Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property located at 850 San Clemente Drive and reduces the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and changes the land use designation for the property located at 850 San Clemente Drive from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. Section 3: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council has reviewed and hereby adopts the CEQA Findings and Facts in Support of Findings as shown in, Exhibit "B," entitled "CEQA Findings of Fact for the Museum House Project, Final Environmental Impact Report" which is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 4: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has reviewed and hereby makes the Statement of Overriding Considerations to adverse environmental impacts, attached also as Exhibit "C" entitled "Statement of Overriding Considerations," which is hereby incorporated by reference. The City Council finds and declares that through its efforts to achieve the goals of the General Plan related to Newport Center the project promotes the mixed-use environment envisioned by the General Plan. Section 5: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each 42 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 6 of section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 7: The Museum House Project Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the Project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the Project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final EIR and adopted "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-� is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 8: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adapting the resolution. ADOPTED this 291h day of November, 2016. Diane B. Dixon Mayor ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTO NEY'S OFFICE Aaron C. Harp City Attorney Exhibit A: Table LU2 Anomaly Locations Amendment and General Plan Land Use Map Amendment 43 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 7 of _ Exhibit B: Facts and Findings Regarding the Environmental Effects of the Approval of the Museum House Project Exhibit C: Statement of Overriding Considerations Resolution No. 2016 - Page 8 of Exhibit "A" Table LU2 Anomaly Locations Amendment Anomaly 49 GPA General Plan Land Use Map Amendment 45 TableAnomaly Locations Anomaly !Number Statistical Area Land Use Designation Development Limit (so Development Limit (father) Additional Information 49 L1 Pl 21,576 General Plan Land Use Map Amendment 45 Land Use Change: Anomaly 49 Development Limit from 45,208 s.f to 21,576 s.f. 62.: A ► Land Use Change: Private Institutions (PI) T'\ Anomaly 49 to Multiple Unit Residential (RM) 100 dwelling units 71 AR ap 74 401111111111 41 CENT SPX CO LU 0 400 800 Feet GP2015-001 (PA2015-152) General Plan Amendment U X 850 / 856 San Clemente Drive Document Name: PA2015-152—GP2015-001—Reso—Exliibit I Resolution No. 2016 - Page 10 of Exhibit "B" Facts and Findings Regarding the Environmental Effects of the Approval of the Museum House Project 47 Exhibit B CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT City of Newport Beach STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2016021023 I. INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a number of written findings be made by the lead agency in connection with certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approval of the project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code. The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can or should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR (b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subdivision (a) (2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a) (3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. (f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required bythis section. Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." CEQA Guidelines section 15364 adds another factor: "legal" considerations. (See Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 CAM 553, 565 (Goleta II).) The concept of "feasibility' also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. (California Native Plant Soc. v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Ca1.App.4th 957, 1001 ["an alternative `may be found infeasible on the ground it is inconsistent with the project objectives as long as the finding is supported by substantial evidence in the record'"].) An alternative may also be rejected because it "would not `entirely fulfill' [a] project objective." Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 296, 314-315.) "[F]easibility' under CEQA encompasses `desirability to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715.) With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency fust adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its "unavoidable adverse environmental effects." (CEQA Guidelines, % 15093, 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b).) The California Supreme Court has stated, "[t]he wisdom of approving ... any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced." (Goleta II, supra, 52 CAM at p. 576.) When adopting Statements of Overriding Considerations, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further provides: (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects maybe considered "acceptable." (b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -2- 19 Having received, independently reviewed, and considered the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Museum House Project, SCH No. 2016021023 (collectively, the EIR), as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings of Facts (Findings) are hereby adopted by the City of Newport Beach (City) in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for the discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City for adoption and implementation of the Museum House Project. This action includes the certification of the following: ■ Museum House Project Environmental Impact Report, SCH No. 2016021023 A. DOCUMENT FORMAT These Findings have been organized into the following sections: 1) Section 1 provides an introduction. 2) Section 2 provides a summary of the project, overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the project, and a statement of the project's objectives. 3) Section 3 provides a summary of previous environmental reviews related to the project area that took place prior to the environmental review done specifically for the project, and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the project. 4) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding the environmental impacts that were determined to be— as a result of the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation (NOP), and consideration of comments received during the NOP comment period— either not relevant to the project or clearly not at levels that were deemed significant for consideration given the nature and location of the proposed project. 5) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the DEIR that the City has determined are either not significant or can feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level through the imposition of project design features and/or mitigation measures. In order to ensure compliance and implementation, all of these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (N%IRP) for the project and adopted as conditions of the project by the Lead Agency. Where potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through adherence to project design features and/or mitigation measures, these findings specify how those impacts were reduced to an acceptable level. Section 5 also includes findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the DEIR that will or may result from the project and which the City has determined cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level. 6) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the proposed project. B. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum: ■ The NOP and all other public notices issued by the Cityin conjunction with the proposed project ■ The DEIR for the proposed project Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -3- 50 ■ The FEIR for the proposed project ■ All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the DEIR ■ All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the DEIR ■ All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project ■ The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ■ The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Response to Comments ■ All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the DEIR and FEIR ■ The Resolutions adopted by the City of Newport Beach in connection with the proposed project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment period and responses thereto ■ Matters of common knowledge to the City of Newport Beach, including but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations ■ Any documents expressly cited in these Findings ■ Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e) The documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. The custodian for these documents is the City of Newport Beach. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 California Code Regulations Section 15091(e). C. CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related to the project are at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660. The City's Community Development Department is the custodian of the administrative record for the project. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Community Development Department. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 California Code Regulations Section 15091(e). II. PROJECT SUMMARY A. PROJECT LOCATION The City of Newport Beach is in the western part of Orange County in Southern California. The City is bordered by Huntington Beach to the northwest, Costa Mesa to the north, Irvine to the northeast, and unincorporated areas (Crystal Cove State Parr of Orange Countyto the southeast. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -4- 51 Regional access to the City is provided by various freeways, including Interstate 405 which runs north to south across the southern California region and intersects State Route 73 (San Joaquin Hills Transportation Comdor) and State Route 55. State Route 55 also runs north to south and terminates in the City of Costa Mesa. State Route 73 runs along the northwestern boundary of the City limits and connects with Interstate 5 further south in Laguna Niguel. Highway 1, also known as East/West Coast Highway, runs near the southeastern boundary of Newport Beach. The project site is located in Newport Center, which includes residential, hospitality, and high- and low rise office buildings surrounding the Fashion Island regional mall. The site itself is approximately two acres (86,942 square feet) and is located at 850 San Clemente Drive in Newport Center (Assessor's Parcel Number 442-261-05). The project site is generally bounded by Santa Cruz Drive to the east, Santa Barbara Drive to the west, San Joaquin Hills Road to the north, and San Clemente Drive to the south. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A 25 -story condominium tower is proposed for the approximately two -acre site and would consist of 100 for - sale residential units and a two-level subterranean garage. The tower footprint would measure approximately 75 feet by 220 feet, with floors becoming progressively smaller at higher levels. The building would be located in the northeastern portion of the site and angled so that the lobby entrance faces San Clemente Drive. From finished grade of the main building entry point at approximately 187 feet above mean sea level (amsl) to the roof of the highest portion of the tower, which includes the mechanical equipment and elevator overrun, the tower is expected to be 482 feet amsl. Therefore, the tower itself, from finished grade of the main building entry point to the top of the tower would be 295 feet. Each residential floor would be approximately 11 feet in height. The 100 residential units would consist of 54 two-bedroom units with 3 baths, and 46 three-bedroom units with 4 baths, ranging in size from approximately 1,800 to 6,000 square feet. The number of units per floor would range from three on the upper levels to five on the lower floors. All units would include private balconies. Architectural Features The Museum House tower would be designed as a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver -certified building. The tower would be built with a textured stone base, masonry frames and pilasters, delicate metalwork details, and a predominantly stone and masonry exterior with large window openings. Larger -scale elements, such as multistory bay windows with French balconies and inset terraces, help define the massing in a residential manner, and multistory window groupings and large terraces at the uppermost floors create a finished cap to the building. All mechanical equipment and elevator overruns would be enclosed at the top floor. Common Area Amenities The proposed common area amenities would be located on Levels 1 and 2, and include both indoor and outdoor spaces. Common areas on the ground floor (level 1) could include a main lobby, bar and lounge, dining room and foyer, screening room, library, conservatory, and outdoor open space. The outdoor amenities may include a garden, lawn area, and a fountain plaza in the northern and northwestern portions of the project site, and dog run lawn along the southeastern site boundary. Level 2 is envisioned to have additional indoor common areas, which may include, but are not limited to, a lounge, fitness center and spa, billiards room, kid's playroom, party/event room, business center, and resident services. Outdoor spaces could include two amenity decks on each side of the building with a pool and garden terrace, an infinity edge pool, outdoor kitchen and barbecue area, and indoor space. An outdoor roof terrace is planned on the 25th floor. Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -5- 52 Site Circulation and Parking Parlflng The proposed project would include 200 resident and 50 guest parking spaces, the majority of which would be in a two-level subterranean garage. Residential parking would be provided entirely in the underground garage. Guest parking would be available at the surface level (12 spaces) and underground garage (38 spaces). Valet parking for guests and residents would be used on a full-time basis. The use of valet parking would increase the number of parking spaces by 38 or more. Vehicular Circulation Primary vehicular access to the site would be at the T -intersection of San Clemente Drive and Santa Maria Road, with secondary service access from a new San Clemente Drive curb cut near the project's southeastern boundary. Two main entry lanes would gain access to the property through a guard station and gate, which would be set back about 60 feet from the property line. One exit lane, separated by a landscaped median, would be adjacent to the entry lanes. The proposed entry lanes would lead into a motor court that could be used for drop-off/pick up, short-term parking, and pedestrian access to the building lobby. The motor court would also provide access to the project's underground parking areas via ramps along the western edge of the site. The eastern side of the site, east of the proposed residential tower, would be improved with a fire lane and loading zone for delivery vehicles ending as a partially underground dead-end. Pedestrian Circulation Primary pedestrian access to the site would be from San Clemente Drive to the motor court and the lobby entrance on the western building fa§ade. A five -foot -wide walkway along the service lane east of the building would provide secondary pedestrian access. C. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS Implementation of the project within the City of Newport Beach will require several actions bythe City, including: ■ City of Newport Beach General Plan Amendment No. 2015-001. To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. ■ San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. 2015-001. To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PG) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. ■ Site Development Review No. SD2016-001. To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMQ Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). ■ Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001. To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. ■ Development Agreement No. DA2016-001.. To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -6- 53 ■ Traffic Study No. TS2015-004. To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. D. STATEMENT OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES The statement of objectives sought by the project and set forth in the EIR is provided as follows: 1. To develop a fully amenitized residential community with state-of-the-art facilities within walking distance of employment opportunities, public facilities, and recreational and commercial amenities, thereby reducing vehicle trips and furthering local, regional, and State mobility objectives. 2. To provide additional housing that meets the City's growing population and housing needs. 3. To maximize the project's view opportunities of the visual resources of the City of Newport Beach, including the Pacific Ocean and Newport Harbor. 4. To implement Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.4 by developing a residential project that would reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeastern section along San Joaquin Hills Road. 5. To create a landmark structure with architectural features and materials that is compatible and complementary with the project's location. 6. To contribute significant property tax revenue to the City of Newport Beach. 7. To generate temporary employment in the construction industry. g. To improve the job -housing balance in Newport Beach by providing new housing within a major employment center. 9. To maximize onsite open space and provide a variety of onsite outdoor open space amenities. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS In conformance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Newport Beach CEQA Guidelines, the City conducted an extensive environmental review of the proposed project. ■ The City of Newport Beach determined that an EIR would be required for the proposed project and issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on February 5, 2016. The NOP was sent to all responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the Office of Planning Research and posted at the Orange County Clerk -Recorders office and on the City's website on February 5, 2016. The 30 -day public review period extended from February 5, 2016, to March 7, 2016. ■ A scoping meeting was held during the NOP review period to solicit additional suggestions on the scope of the DEIR Attendees were provided an opportunity to identify verbally or in writing the issues they felt should be addressed in the DEIR The scoping meeting was held on Monday, February 22, 2016, at the City of Newport Beach Civic Center Community Room at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. The notice of the public scoping meeting was included in the NOP. The scope of the DEIR was determined based on the City's Initial Study, comments received in response to the NOP, and comments received at the scoping meeting conducted by the City on February 22, 2016. Section 2.3 of the DEIR describes the issues identified for analysis in the DEIR Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -7- 54 • The City of Newport Beach prepared a DEIR, which was made available for a 45 -day public review period beginning August 17, 2016, and ending September 30, 2016. The complete DEIR consists of the analysis of the Museum House Project and all referenced appendices. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIR was sent to all interested persons, agencies and organizations. The Notice of Completion (NOC) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk -Recorder's office on August 17, 2016. Copies of the DEIR were made available for public review at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department and four Newport Beach Public Library facilities (Central Library, Mariners Branch, Balboa Branch, and Corona Del Mar Branch). The DEIR was also made available for download via the City's website: wwwnevportbeachca.gov/mdex.aspx.page=1347. A study session was held by the Planning Commission on April 7, 2016 in the Newport Beach City Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Notices of time, place, and purpose of the aforesaid meetings were provided in accordance with CEQA and the City's municipal code. The purpose of the study session was to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. Public comments regarding the proposed project were also taken. The study session was for informational purposes only and no action was taken by the Planning Commission. The agenda for the study session was posted at City Hall and on the City's website. A second study session was held by the Planning Commission on September 1, 2016 in the Newport Beach City Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Notices of time, place, and purpose of the aforesaid meetings were provided in accordance with CEQA and the City's Municipal Code. The purpose of the study session was to provide an update on the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the DEIR_ Public comments regarding the proposed project were also taken. The study session was for informational purposes only and no action was taken by the Planning Commission. The agenda for the study session was posted at City Hall and on the City's website. Preparation of the FEIR includes comments on the DEIR, responses to those comments, clarifications/ revisions to the DEIR, and revised figures. The FEIR was released on October 10, 2016 and posted on the City's website. A Planning Commission Public Hearing was held on October 20, 2016 in the Newport Beach City Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the aforementioned meeting was provided in accordance with CEQA and the City's Municipal Code. The DEIR, FEIR, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this hearing. • Notice of the Planning Commission Public Hearing was a one-eighth page advertisement in the Daily Pilot newspaper on October 8, 2016. • Additionally, notices were mailed to nearby property owners and interested parties consistent with the environmental review process required under the California Environmental Quality Act. The item was on the agenda for the noticed Planning Commission Public Hearing, which was posted at City Hall and on the City's website. • In compliance with Section 15088(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines), the City has met its obligation to provide written Responses to Comments to public agencies at least 10 days prior to certifying the FEIR • The City Council Public Hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Newport Beach City Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforementioned meeting was provided in accordance with CEQA and the Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -8- 55 City's Municipal Code. The FEIR, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the City Council at this hearing. Notice of the City Council Public Hearing was a one-eighth page advertisement in the Daily Pilot newspaper on November 19, 2016. Additionally, notices were mailed to nearby property owners and interested parties consistent with the environmental review process required under the California Environmental Quality Act. The item was on the agenda for the noticed City Council Public Hearing, which was posted at City Hall and on the City's website. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WERE DETERMINED NOT TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IN THE INITIAL STUDY As a result of the project scoping process including the NOP circulated by the City on February 22, 2016, in connection with preparation of the DEIR, the preparation of the Initial Study, and the public scoping meeting, the City determined, based upon the threshold criteria for significance, that the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on the following potential environmental issues, and therefore, determined that these potential environmental issues would not be addressed in the DEIR Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the DEIR, and the comments received by the public on the DEIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City which indicated that the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: (a) Aesthetics: The project would not damage scenic resources (e.g., trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings) within a state scenic highway. (b) Agriculture and Forestry Resources: The project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No portion of the project area includes forest resources, and the site is not zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production. (c) Air Quality: Development of the project would not create objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people. (d) Biological Resources: The project site is in an urban environment and would not adversely impact candidate, sensitive, or special status species; riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities; federally protected wetlands; native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; or wildlife corridors or nursery sites. The project also would not conflict with any local ordinances protecting biological resources, adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. (e) Cultural Resources: The project would not impact historical resources and would not disturb any human remains. (f) Geology and Soils: The project would not expose people or structure to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Map or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. Impacts related to landslides would be less than significant and the proposed project would not use septic systems or alternative waste water disposal systems. (g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions. The project also would not handle or operate hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The site is not Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -9- 56 located on a list of hazardous materials per Government Code Section 65962.5 and is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip that may cause safety hazards for people residing or working in the project area. The project also would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response/ evacuation plan or expose people or structures to potential wildland fire hazards. (h) Hydrology and Water Quality: The project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard zone and is not close or low enough to sea level to be exposed to potential inundation by seiche or tsunami. The project area is mostly flat and would not be prone to mudslides, and there are no nearby dams or levees that could expose people or structures to flood hazards as a result of dam or levee failure. (r, Land Use and Planning: The project would not physically divide an established community or conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. 0) Mineral Resources: The project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locallyimportant mineral resource recoverysite. (k) Noise and Vibration: The project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from a public airport or private airstrip. (I) Population and Housing: The project would not displace any housing or residents. (m) Public Services: Other public service facilities, such as libraries, would not be adversely impacted by development of the project. (n) Recreation: The project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that could adversely affect the environment. (o) Transportation and Traffic: The project would not change air traffic patterns, increase hazards due to design features or incompatible uses, result in inadequate emergency access, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs related to public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. (p) Utilities and Service Systems: Nearby landfills have sufficient capacity to serve the project and would continue complying with federal, state, and local regulations related to solid waste. The project would be required to comply with applicable wastewater treatment regulations per the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board as well. All other topical areas of evaluation included in the Environmental Checklist were determined to require further assessment in the DEIR B. IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IN THE DEIR This section identifies impacts of the proposed project determined to be less than significant without implementation of project -specific mitigation measures. This determination, however, does assume compliance with existing regulations as detailed in each respective topical section of Chapter 5 in the DEIR (a) Aesthetics: The project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and would not adversely impact viewsheds along coastal view roads in the Newport Center area. The project would also not cast shadows on the adjacent Villas at Fashion Island residential community beyond the shade standard established for the North Newport Center Planned Community. The project would generate new sources of light and glare; however, compliance with lighting standards and regulations would minimize impacts to less than significant levels. Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -10- 57 (b) Air Quality: The project is consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan and long-term criteria air pollutant emissions associated with the project would not exceed SCAQMD's regional operational significance threshold. (c) Geology and Soils: The project would not expose people and structures to strong seismic groundshaking and would not result in substantial soil erosion. (d) Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Development of the project would not exceed SCAQMD's significance criteria for GHG emissions and the project would not conflict with the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) or the California Air Resources Board's Scoping Plan. (e) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The project would not create an obstruction to air navigation or cause safety hazards to people working or residing on the project site due to its proximity to the John Wayne Airport. (fJ Hydrology and Water Quality: The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Additionally, the project would not adversely alter the existing drainage patterns onsite to cause substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or offsite. Runoff from the project site would also be adequately accommodated in the City's water drainage system (g) Land Use and Planning: The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including the City of Newport Beach General Plan, San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan, SC.AG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, and the Airport Environ Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. (h) Noise: The project would not expose sensitive uses to strong levels of groundbome vibration or operational traffic and stationary noises. (1) Population and Housing: The proposed project would not substantially induce population or housing beyond SC.AG's forecast population and housing growth anticipated for the City of Newport Beach by 2040. 0) Public Services: The project would not create significant impacts related to fire protection and emergency services, police protection, school services, or libraryservices. (k) Recreation: Development of the proposed project would not create significant impacts on existing park or recreational facilities. (I) Transportation and Traffic: The project would not impact levels of service for the existing roadway system and would not conflict with applicable plans governing the performance of the City's circulation system, including the Newport Beach traffic phasing ordinance and Orange County Congestion Management Plan. The project would also not impact state highway intersections in the study area. The project would not increase hazards due to design features, result in inadequate emergency access, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. (m) Utilities and Service Systems: Project -generated wastewater would be adequately collected and treated by the City and Orange County Sanitation District, respectively. Water demands of the project would be adequately served by existing and proposed water supply and delivery systems and stormwater flow would be adequately served by existing and proposed drainage systems. Demand for electricity and natural gas would also be adequately served by Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company. Museum House Project C EQA Findings of Fact -11- V. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following potentially significant environmental impacts were analyzed in the DEIR, and the effects of the project were considered. Because of environmental analysis of the project and the identification of relevant General Plan policies; compliance with existing laws, codes, and statutes; and the identification of feasible mitigation measures, some potentially significant impacts have been determined bythe City to be reduced to a level of less than significant, and the City has found—in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) (1)—that "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment." This is referred to herein as "Finding 1." Where the City has determined— pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(2) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(2)—that "Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency," the City's f*M&in,is referred to herein as "Finding 2." Where, as a result of the environmental analysis of the project, the City has determined that either (1) even with the identification of project design features, compliance with existing laws, codes and statutes, and/or the identification of feasible mitigation measures, potentially significant impacts cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant, or (2) no feasible mitigation measures or alternatives are available to mitigate the potentially significant impact, the City has found in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3) that "Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report." This is referred to herein as "Finding 3." A. IMPACTS MITIGATED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT The following summary describes impacts of the proposed project that, without mitigation, would result in significant adverse impacts. Upon implementation of the mitigation measures provided in the DEIR, the impacts would be considered less than significant. 1. Air Quality Impact 5.2-2: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed project would generate short-term emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District's regional construction threshold for volatile organic compounds. Construction activities for the proposed project would temporarily increase particulate matter (PMIo), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NN, sulfur oxides (SOS, and carbon monoxide (CO) regional emissions within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). Activities would include demolition of the existing Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building, site preparation, grading, utility trenching, construction of the 25 -story condominium tower, and offsite sewer improvement. Maximum daily construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD's regional construction significance thresholds for NO, CO, SO2, PMIo, and PM2.5. However, the maximum daily emissions of VOC generated from the combined building construction, asphalt paving, and architectural coating activities would exceed SCAQMD's regional construction significance threshold for VOC. Consequently, impacts to regional air quality from project -related construction activities would be significant unless mitigated. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-1 would reduce short-term VOC emissions associated with construction activities to less than significant levels. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -12- 59 Mitigation Measures 2-1 During construction, the construction contractor(s) shall require the use of interior paint with 0 grams per liter (g/L) of volatile organic compounds (VOC) (i.e., zero VOC paint). Paints that emit less than the low-VOC limits of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1113 are known as "super -compliant paints." A list of super -compliant VOC coating manufacturers is available at SCAQMD's website (http://wwwagmd.gov/prdas/brochures/paintgwde.htA. Use of super -compliant interior paints shall be noted on building plans. Finding Finding 1— The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. Impact 5.2-4: Construction of the proposed project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The maximum daily NO, CO, and PM2.5 construction emissions generated from onsite construction -related activities would be less than their respective SCAQMD localized significant thresholds (LSTs). However, PMIo emissions generated during the overlapping building demolition, asphalt demolition, building demo debris haul, and asphalt demo debris haul phase would exceed the SCAQMD LSTs. Therefore, project -related construction activities would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations unless mitigated. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-2 would limit the total overall daily haul truck miles traveled to 680 miles to reduce PMIo emissions generated by haul trucks. Therefore, with incorporation of mitigation, localized construction impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures 2-2 The construction contractors) shall limit the daily amount of debris haul trips during the project's building demolition and asphalt demolition phases to a maximum of 17 truckloads per day (34 truck trips per da� or a total overall daily haul truck miles traveled of 680 miles. These requirements shall be noted on all construction management plans and truck trips and mileage shall be documented. Finding Finding 1— The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. 2. Cultural Resources Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -13- .01 Impact 5.3-1: Development of the project could impact archaeological resources. No archaeological resources have been recorded within the project site. The nearest archaeological site (P-30- 000136) was 300 feet southwest of the site and was excavated in 1964, and there are a number of archaeological sites within a half mile of the project site. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would require excavation of at least 20 to 25 feet for the underground garage, which would be below previously graded depths for construction of the existing OCMA building. Newport Beach is associated with various early Native American peoples who inhabited the larger region. Therefore, it is possible that previously undiscovered archaeological resources may be found The Newport Beach City Council has adopted formal guidelines— Archaeological Guidelines (K-5)— that would ensure any impacts to archaeological resources would be minimized. Mitigation Measure 3-1 implements General Plan Policy HR 2.2 requiring a qualified archaeologist to monitor all grading and/or excavation where there is a potential to affect such resources, and would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures 3-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department that an Orange County–certified professional archaeologist has been retained to monitor any potential impacts to archaeological resources throughout the duration of any ground -disturbing activities at the project site. The qualified archeologist shall be present at the pregrade meeting to discuss the monitoring, collection, and safety procedures of cultural resources, if anyare found. If subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction contractor shall ensure that all work stops within 25 feet of the find until the qualified archeologist can assess the significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment or disposition of the resources in consultation with the City of Newport Beach and a representative of the affected Native American tribe (Gabrieleno or Juaneno). The archeological monitor shall have the authority to halt any project -related activities that may adversely impact potentially significant archaeological resources. Suspension of ground disturbances in the vicinity of the discoveries shall not be lifted until an archeological monitor has evaluated the discoveries to assess whether they are classified as significant cultural resources, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and, if determined to be significant, to develop an appropriate treatment or disposition plan. As required by General Plan Policy HR 2.4, any scientifically valuable materials will be donated to a responsible public or private institution with a suitable repository, located within Newport Beach or Orange County, whenever possible. Finding Finding 1– The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. Impact 5.3-2: The proposed project could destroy paleontological resources or a unique geologic feature. The project site is entirely built out with the OCMA building and hardscape improvements; therefore, there are no unique geologic features onsite. However, given the location of other paleontological resources Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -14- 61 discovered within the vicinity of the project site, all subsurface excavation anticipated for tower supports and underground parking has a sensitivity to encounter paleontological resources. The City has adopted formal guidelines— Paleontological Guidelines (K-4)— that contains specific procedures and standards for examining and reporting on possible paleontological sites. Nevertheless, the applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to prepare and implement a paleontological mitigation plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The plan shall require a qualified paleontological monitor for all grading activities eight feet or more below the current surface and require temporaryhalt of work within 25 feet of any found fossils. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-2 would ensure impacts to potential paleontological resources are reduced to less than significant levels, and would implement General Plan Policy HR 2.2, which requires a qualified paleontologist to monitor all grading and/or excavation where there is a potential to affect such resources. Mitigation Measures 3-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department that an Orange County -certified professional paleontologist has been retained to monitor any potential impacts to paleontological resources throughout the duration of any ground -disturbing activities at the project site. The paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Mitigation Plan, which shall include the following minimum elements: ■ All earthmoving activities eight feet or more below the current surface shall be monitored full-time by qualified paleontological monitor. ■ If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor has the authority to temporarily divert work within 25 feet of the find to allow recovery of the fossils and evaluation of the fossil locality. ■ Fossil localities shall require documentation, including stratigraphic columns and samples for micropaleontological analyses and for dating. ■ Fossils shall be prepared to the point of identification and evaluated for significance. ■ Significant fossils shall be cataloged and identified prior to being donated to an appropriate repository. ■ The final report shall interpret any paleontological resources discovered in the regional context and provide the catalog and all specialists' reports as appendices. An executed curation agreement shall be part of the plan, and the project proponent shall bear all expenses of the mitigation program, including curation of materials meeting significance criteria. Finding Finding 1- The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -15- 62 Impact 5.3-3: The proposed project could impact tribal cultural resources. There are no known tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, in the project area. The City sent letters to 15 Native American contacts provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) notifying them of the project and opportunity for tribal consultation. Only 2 of the 15 tribes responded— the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation, and United Coalition to Protect Panhe. The City consulted with Andrew Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, who requested Native American tribal monitoring onsite during all construction activities. Consultation between the City and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians ended with the conclusion that mitigation measures would be provided to ensure appropriate tribes would be notified if any resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities and that tribal cultural monitoring by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians would be allowed onsite during construction activities on a voluntary basis, consistent with the City's General Plan Policy HR 2.3. The United Coalition to Protect Panhe noted receipt of City's letter and did not request further consultation. Although no tribal cultural resources were identified to be within the project site, Mitigation Measures 3-1 and 3-3 are provided to ensure appropriate tribes would be notified if any were to be found and allow Native American tribal monitoring on a voluntary basis consistent with General Plan Policy HR 2.3. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure 3-1 would also apply to this impact. 3-3 During construction activities, the project applicant shall allow representatives of cultural organizations, including Native American tribes (i.e., Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians), to access the project site on a volunteer basis to monitor grading and excavation activities. Finding Finding 1– The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. 3. Geology and Soils Impact 5.4-3: Project development would not exacerbate existing hazards related to landslide, liquefaction, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. The project site is predominantly flat and is not identified as being in an area of the City that is subject to landslides. The project site's marine terrace deposits are not subject to liquefaction or lateral spreading because they are considered medium dense to dense, and the site is not in a state -designated Liquefaction Hazard Zone or identified by the City as being subject to liquefaction. The project site is also not over a groundwater basin, and significant groundwater pumping would not occur, thus, ground subsidence is not considered a significant hazard. Additionally, the site is not susceptible to collapsible or compressible soils. Additionally, as stated above, the soils at the site are marine terrace deposits (dense to medium dense) that overlie bedrock of the Monterey Formation (stiff to hard claystone). Thus, the site is not susceptible to collapse because of low density soils and/or organic materials. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -16- 63 However, excavation activities related to the subterranean parking garage and utility trenches may cause instability in the site's geologic units. Thus, recommendations in the geotechnical study for excavation and backfill are reproduced as Mitigation Measures 4-1 through 4-3 to ensure impacts remain less than significant. Mitigation Measures 4-1 During grading plan review, the City of Newport Beach Building Division shall confirm that the grading plans complywith the recommendations in the project's geotechnical report. Given that the project would require excavation extending to the property line, shoring is required to support subterranean excavation. Cantilever, tied -back or internally braced shoring systems can be used for the subterranean excavation. Cantilever shoring systems are typically limited to a maximum retained height of 15 feet. Tied -back shoring walls will require a temporary or permanent easement from the adjacent property owners and the City of Newport Beach. The shoring system shall be designed to resist a uniform pressure equal to 25 pounds per square foot (psf). An allowable passive earth pressure of 200 psf per foot of depth below the bottom of the excavation shall be used for design of the shoring system The residential tower would be located approximately 26 feet from the property line. Therefore, it may be possible to excavate to the subgrade elevation without the use of shoring. Temporary slope in the marine terrace deposit may be excavated at slopes where the proportion of the height of the rise is less than or equal to the length of the slope (1 -1V). Alternatively, sloped excavations may be used to reduce the height of the shored excavation. In the case, the earth pressures above maybe increased and will be handled on a case by case basis when the height of the sloped excavation is known. All shoring and excavation shall comply with current Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations and observed bythe designated competent person on site. 4-2 The bedding zone is defined as the area containing the material specified that is supporting, surrounding, and extending to one foot above the top of any proposed utility pipes. During grading and construction plan reviews, the City of Newport Beach Building Divisions shall confirm that the project's proposed bedding satisfies the requirements of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWq Section 306- 1.2.1. There shall be a 4 - inch minimum of bedding below the pipe and 1 -inch minimum clearance below projecting bell. There shall be a minimum side clearance of 6 inches on each side of the pipe. Bedding material shall be sand, gravel, crushed aggregate, or native free -draining material having a sand equivalent of not less than 30, or other material approved by the engineer. Materials used for the bedding zone shall be placed and compacted with light mechanical means to reduce the potential of damaging the pipe; jetting shall not be allowed. 4-3 Backfill shall be considered as starting 12 inches above the pipe. On-site excavated materials are suitable as backfill. During construction activities, any boulders or cobbles larger than three inches in any dimension shall be removed before backfilling. All backfill shall be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 6 to 8 inches in thickness and be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The upper 12 inches below pavement shall be compacted at least to 95 percent relative compaction. Mechanical compaction will be required to accomplish compaction above the bedding along the entire pipeline alignments. In backfill areas, where mechanical compaction of soil backfill is impractical due to space constraints, sand -cement slurry may be substituted for compacted backfill. The slurry shall contain one sack of cement per cubic yard and have a maximum slump of 5 inches. When set, such a mix typically has the consistency of hard compacted soil and allows for future excavation. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -17- A lean non -shrink concrete plug with a minimum width length of 3 feet shall be placed in the utility trenches at the location where off-site utilities enter the project boundaries to minimize the potential for off-site water flow onsite. Finding Finding 1— The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. Impact 5.4-4: Development of the project would not increase existing hazards arising from expansive soils. Although the Monterey Formation claystone under the site is expansive, the tower would be supported on mat foundations and a core extending several feet into bedrock A mat foundation is an above -ground foundation typically two to three feet thick (but can be as thick as 10 feet) to provide load-bearing capacity in expansive or collapsible soils. The weight of mat foundation and high-rise structure would provide sufficient pressure on the expansive soil to prevent soil expansion. To ensure the mat foundations are properly installed, recommendations from the geotechnical report are reproduced as Mitigation Measure 4-4 below. Upon compliance with the CBC and applicable mitigation measures, project development would not exacerbate existing hazards from expansive soils, and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures 4-4 All foundation excavations shall be observed and/or tested by the project applicant's geotechnical consultant before placement of concrete to verify that the foundations would be supported in competent soils. If soft or loose soils are encountered at the subgrade level, the soils shall be removed or brought to a near -optimum moisture content (±2 percent), recompacted, and tested to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction prior to placement of fill or footing or floor slab construction. Only granular soils shall be used for compacted fill. Mat foundations may also derive lateral load resistance from passive resistance along the vertical sides of the foundations. Therefore, an ultimate passive fluid pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pco shall be used. It is recommended that an ultimate sliding friction coefficient of 0.45 to be used for design. Passive and sliding resistance may be used in combination without reduction. The required factor of safety is 1.5 for static loads and 1.1 for wind or seismic loads. Finding Finding 1— The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. 4. Transportation and Traffic Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -18- 65 Impact 5.13-7: Project -related construction worker, delivery, and construction vehicle trips would not adversely affect the operations of intersections and roadways in the study area. [Threshold T-11 Per the City of Newport Beach, construction is allowed Monday through Friday from 7:00 AM to 6:30 PM and Saturdays from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. It is anticipated that the project would be built in a single phase spanning approximately 28 months, from January 2018 to May 2020. The proposed project would be completed in one phase; however, there are various construction activities throughout the construction process. There would be up to 200 construction workers on site. Construction workers would park onsite unless a designated offsite parking area is approved by the City. Construction workers would not park on local streets. Assuming a worst case scenario where all workers drive solo, it is possible that up to 200 inbound trips would occur in the AM peak hour and 200 trips in the PM peak hour. The highest number of haul trips would occur during the soil haul period, which includes site preparation, fine grading and rough grading. There would be a total of 4,600 truck load trips during this period, which equates to 153 truckload trips per day over a 30 -day soil haul period. This translates to 459 passenger -car equivalent trips per day, assuming all heavy vehicles are four axles. Construction hauling would be limited to weekday hours between 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM. The estimated construction -related haul truck traffic is greater than the estimated proposed project daily trips (3 10 dailytrips) by 149 daily trips. Typically, the peak hour is 10 percent of the dailytraffic volumes, therefore potentially there would be 15 (fifteen) additional trips along the haul routes during the AM peak hour. Construction would cease before the traffic PM peak hour. Study intersections would operate at acceptable LOS under all scenarios. Therefore, given the small increase in traffic related to project construction, the increase in v/c at any study intersection would be nominal. The roadways and intersections would be able to handle the additional construction traffic volumes without making any study intersection operate at unacceptable LOS. Construction trucks would be staged at an offsite location acceptable to the City and would be dispatched to the site five to ten trucks at a time to prevent truck queuing at inappropriate locations. It is expected that heavyvehicles would access the site via SR -73 (north of Bison Avenue) and head south via Jamboree Road or MacArthur Boulevard. Once within the vicinity of the project site, heavy vehicles can use non -designated truck routes to access the project site. Per the City of Newport Beach, the project is required to prepare a construction traffic management plan that outlines items such as construction hours, truck routes, traffic and parking effects, and safety procedures for pedestrians and cyclists. All proposed truck routes would be approved by the City before beginning construction. It is reasonable to assume that the majority of the workers would arrive before 7:00 AM, prior to the allowed construction period, and workers would stagger their arrivals to the project area (not all arrive at the same time) outside of the peak AM period. Importantly, no construction workers trips or construction haul trips would occur at the same time because workers would arrive before 7:00 AM and hauling cannot start until 7:00 AM. The construction workers would park at an offsite lot in the Newport Center area and be shuttled to the site, if necessary. The offsite parking locations would be negotiated with nearby owners at a later date and can include the Villas at Fashion Island parking garage, the adjacent PIMCO parking garage, and Pacific Life Insurance Company (700 Newport Center) surface parking lot. The specific parking locations would be identified in the project's construction management plan. After completion of the proposed parking garage, workers would park onsite. Given the preceding factors, construction worker traffic would not significantly impact nearby roadways. Additionally, the project applicant would be required to submit a congestion -management plan prior to the commencement of any construction activities. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -19- Mitigation Measures 13-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall prepare a construction traffic management plan to be submitted and approved by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineer. At a minimum, the construction traffic management plan shall include the following: ■ Provide detail on planned lane closures, including scheduling and duration; ■ Detail applicable lane closure restrictions during peak hours and holiday periods and noticing to surrounding property owners and tenants; ■ Provide measures to prevent blocking of surrounding property access points (due to construction vehicle queuing, etc); ■ Document specific off-site parking locations for construction workers; ■ Project phasing; ■ Parking arrangements for off-site parking location and on-site during construction; ■ Anticipated haul routes; and ■ All materials transported on and offsite shall be securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust or dirt. Finding Finding 1— The City hereby makes Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR These changes are identified in the form of the mitigation measures above. The City of Newport Beach hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures is feasible, and the measures are therefore adopted. B. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS The following summary describes the significant, unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project. 1. Noise Impact 5.9-1: Construction activities would result in potentially significant temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the project site. Construction activities would occur for approximately 28 months. Activities would include demolition of the existing OCMA building, site preparation, grading, utility trenching, construction of the 25 -story condominium tower, and offsite sewer improvements. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction: (1) mobile -source noise from transport of workers, material deliveries, and debris and soil haul and (2) stationary -source noise from use of construction equipment. Existing uses surrounding the project site would be exposed to construction noise. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -20- 67 Construction Vehicles On -Road Transport of Workers and Vendor/Haul Trucks The transport of workers and equipment to the construction site would incrementally increase noise levels along site access roadways. Approximately 200 construction workers are expected to work throughout the 28 - month construction period. The worst-case flow of construction -related trips would occur during the soil haul period, which includes site preparation, rough grading, and fine grading. There would be a total of 4,600 truck load trips during this period, which equates to 153 truckload trips per day over a 30 -day soil haul period. This number of construction -related vehicle trips would be an increase of much less than 10 percent in total daily vehicle flows along Santa Barbara Drive and Santa Cruz Drive (which have average daily trip [ADT] flow rates of approximately 10,000 and 8,000, respectively). This would result in a noise level increase of much less than 0.5 dB (in the traffic -focused CNEL noise level metric) and would, therefore, have a less than significant impact on noise receptors along the truck routes. Other phases of construction are anticipated to have less than 25 daily trips (for the aggregate of workers plus vendors plus haul -offs), and these phases would have even less of an incremental difference in noise levels along construction trip routes than the worst-case mass excavation soil haul phase. While individual construction vehicle pass-bys may create momentary noise levels of up to approximately 85 dBA (Lmax) at 50 feet from the vehicle, these occurrences— although potentially audible for a few seconds— would generally be infrequent. Due to the infrequency of events, their relatively short-lived durations, their commonality with existing truck pass-bys, and the vehicle code exemption, construction vehicle movement noise would be less than significant. Truck Queuing For this size project, it is possible that multiple deliveries (such as for fresh cement) and/or haul -offs (during demolition and site preparation) could occur simultaneously (or in quick succession). Thus, construction - related trucks may end up being queued near the entrance(s) to the site and could potentially be idling while waiting to enter the construction zone. However, per the City of Newport Beach, the project is required to prepare a construction traffic management plan that outlines items such as construction hours and truck routes. Construction trucks would be staged at an offsite location acceptable to the City and would be dispatched to the site five to ten trucks at a time to prevent truck queuing at inappropriate locations. Additionally, noise from idling construction trucks would be overshadowed by normal traffic flow noise on nearby streets, particularly from daytime traffic flows on San Clemente Drive. Therefore, idling trucks would not substantially add to the overall community noise environment. Further, according to the California Air Resources Board, construction trucks are prohibited from non-essential idling longer than five minutes. Based on the relatively low aggregate noise emissions and the short-term nature of such a source, queued construction trucks would create localized noise impacts that would be less than significant. Construction Equipment Noise generated during construction is based on the type of equipment used, the location of the equipment relative to sensitive receptors, and the timing and duration of the noise -generating activities. Each stage of construction involves the use of different kinds of construction equipment and, therefore, has its own distinct noise characteristics. Noise levels from construction activities are dominated by the loudest piece of construction equipment. Noise levels from project -related construction activities were calculated from the simultaneous use of all applicable construction equipment at spatially averaged distances (i.e., from the center of the general construction area) to the property line of the closest residences. Many of the properties near the project site consist of office and commercial uses, but there are several residential and hotel developments near the site as well—the Colony Apartments (approximately 260 feet southwest of the project site), Big Canyon residential communityto the northeast (950 feet), and Island Hotel Newport Beach to the southeast (1,100 feet). Additionally, the Villas at Fashion Island are under construction Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -21- in the lot directly adjacent to the north side of the project site. According to the site plan for the Villas at Fashion Island apartment complex, the nearest building would be a distance of 230 feet from the center of construction for the proposed project. The center of the project site was used as the best representation of spatially averaged activities throughout the construction zones (i.e., average construction noise levels). Although construction may occur across the entire site, the center of the project best represents the potential average construction -related noise levels to the various sensitive receptors during the overall construction portion of the project. Moreover, the existing building demolition and the erection of the proposed project are primarily located towards the center of the two -acre site, providing some setback from the surrounding land uses. Each stage of construction has a different equipment mix, depending on the work to be accomplished. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would not require blasting or pile driving. In the construction of residential and mixed-use projects, demolition and grading typically generate the highest noise levels because they require the largest equipment. Noise attenuation due to distance, the number and type of equipment, and the load and power requirements to accomplish tasks at each construction phase, construction activities would result in different noise levels at a given sensitive receptor. As a result, construction noise quite often exhibits a high degree of variability from moment to moment, day to day, and even month to month. Heavy equipment, such as a dozer or a loader, can have maximum, short -duration noise levels in excess of 80 dBA at 50 feet. Since noise from construction equipment is intermittent and diminishes at a rate of 6 dB per doubling distance, the average noise levels at noise -sensitive receptors would be much lower, because mobile construction equipment would move around the site with different loads and power requirements. Both average and maximum noise levels are discussed below. Average Construction Noise Levels Short-term noise during the approximately 28 -month construction period can be associated with site preparation, grading, and building construction of the proposed land uses. Using information provided by the City of Newport Beach and methodologies and inputs employed in the air quality assessment, the expected construction equipment mix was estimated and categorized by construction activity. The associated, aggregate sound levels— grouped by construction activity— are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Project -Related Construction Noise Levels, Energy -Average Le Sound Levels Construction Activity Phase (duration) Sound Level at Various Distances from Construction Activities, dBA Lq Villas at Fashion Colony Apartments Big Canyon homes Island Hotel Island Apts. 230 ft. 260 ft. 950 ft. 1,100 ft. Demolition 2 months 72 71 60 59 Site Pre 1 month 67 66 54 53 Excavation 4 months 67 66 54 53 Utility Trenching +Fine Gradin 1 month 68 67 55 54 Building Construction 22 months 67 66 54 53 Building Const + Paving (overlaps with above 70 69 58 57 Finishing / Landscaping 3 months 67 66 54 1 53 Note: Calculations performed with the FHWA's RCNM software are included in Appendix J of the DEIR. As shown, combined, spatially averaged noise levels for each construction phase would range between 66 and 72 dBA Leq at the Villas at Fashion Island and Colony Apartments, and 60 dBA Leq or lower at receptors at least 950 feet away. Assuming a typical interior noise reduction of 25 dB from exterior noise levels, the average noise levels due to project -related construction activities at the interior areas at the affected uses (i.e., closest units at the Villas of Fashion Island) would generally range from 28 to 47 dBA Leq. There may be instances where these noise -sensitive receptors would be exposed to higher levels of noise from construction equipment operation. However, these moments would be sporadic and limited during the demolition, grading, and site preparation phases of construction; primarily when large construction equipment passes by. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -22- mw Maximum Construction Noise Levels Maximum noise levels for each stage were calculated as if the loudest piece of construction equipment was operating by the site's property line next to the nearest sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site. This use of a distance from the closest equipment item to the closest noise -sensitive receptor is consistent with the assessment of maximum noise levels (due to the shortest propagation distance). Table 2 shows that the maximum unmitigated noise levels from each construction stage at the nearest affected receptors would range from 55 to 79 dBA Lmax. Table 2 Proiect-Related Construction Noise Levels. Maximum (Lmax) Sound Levels Sound Level at Various Distances from Construction Activities, dBA L_ Construction Villas at Fashion Colony Apartments Big Canyon homes Island Hotel Activitv Phase (duration) I Island (100 ft.) I (150 ft.) 1 (770 ft.) 1 (910 ft.) Demolition 2 months 79 76 62 61 Site Pre 1 month 74 71 56 55 Excavation 4 months 74 71 56 55 Utility Trenching +Fine Gradin 1 month 75 72 57 56 Building Construction 22 months 74 71 56 55 Building Const + Paving (overlaps with above 77 1 74 160 159 Finishing I Landscaping 3 months 74 1 71 56 55 Note: Calculations performed with the FHWA's RCNM software are included in Appendix J of the DEIR. These levels represent the maximum levels that could occur during construction when the loudest piece of equipment is operating at maximum power at the location nearest to each receptor. Note also that longest phase, building construction, would involve noise sources on each floor of the multistory project as the development increased in elevation. These elevated noise sources (such as cutting, welding, sawing, and drilling activities) would, for various durations, be below, at, and finally above the elevation of the then - completed units at the Villas of Fashion Island. Therefore, intervening equipment or structures (between the project site and the Villas site) would not provide any barrier attenuation benefits for these elevated sources during the majority of the building construction phase. The maximum exterior noise levels during the loudest activity (demolition) would range from 79 dBA Lmax at the Villas at Fashion Island apartments to 61 dBA Lmax at the Island Hotel. Assuming a typical interior noise reduction of 25 dBA due to closed windows, the maximum noise levels during demolition would range from 55 dBA Lmax at the Villas at Fashion Island to 36 dBA Lmax at the Island Hotel. To illustrate, 55 dBA is comparable to noise levels at a large business office and below the noise levels generated by normal speech at 3 feet. Maximum noise levels during the building construction phase are projected to be approximately 5 dB less than for the demolition phase. As noted above, with the high degree of variability in construction noise, exposure to such sound level incursions would be brief, and the maximum noise levels at the residential property line would lessen as the noisiest piece of construction equipment moved farther away, reduced the necessary power setting, and/or changed the interaction with the work piece. Construction Equipment Noise Summary Adjacent sensitive receptors to the project site would be exposed to elevated noise levels during the construction period. The calculations presented in Tables 1 and 2 show that noise from demolition activities would be highest. Noise from the main construction of the residential building would have the longest duration and would last for the remaining 22 months. The noise levels related to project construction at the Colony Apartments facing San Clemente Drive and the future Villas at Fashion Island residences facing the project site would be perceptible and/or potentially annoying at times, especially when equipment is operating at maximum power and nearest to the boundary of Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -23- 70 the site. The highest noise levels within the affected interior areas would be in the range of 42 to 47 dBA Leq and in the range of 50 to 55 dBA Lmax, which would be audible and comparable to noise levels at a business office or for normal speech, potentially causing sporadic disturbances for these residences. And the highest noise levels within the affected exterior areas would be approximately 72 dBA Leq and 79 dBA Lmax. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code limits noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property to the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM on weekdays, and 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturdays. This same portion of the code exempts noise levels caused by construction equipment in having to meet the basic noise level limits of § 10.26.025 (Exterior Noise Standards). However, because of the magnitude of the noise levels within the then -completed nearest units at the Villas of Fashion Island complex and because of the extended length of the overall construction period, these impacts would be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 9-1 through 9-9 would reduce construction noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible. However, given the expected noise levels during the two-month demolition phase (predicted to be as high as 47 dBA Leq and 55 dBA Lmax within living spaces at the closest, then -completed units at the Villas of Fashion Island property , coupled with the length of the site preparation/grading (4 months) and building construction phase (22 months) and its expected noise levels as high as 42 dBA Leq and 50 dBA Lmax within living spaces at the closest, then -completed units at the Villas of Fashion Island complex, significant construction noise impacts would remain. Mitigation Measures 9-1 At least 30 days prior to commencement of demolition or any other construction activities, notification shall be given to all residents or businesses within 500 feet of the project site regarding the planned construction activities. The notification shall include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the duration and hours when construction would occur. The notification shall also include the telephone number of the construction contractor's authorized representative to respond in the event of a vibration or noise complaint. 9-2 Prior to the beginning of construction activities, a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the job site, clearly visible to the public, that contains a contact name and telephone number of the construction contractor's authorized representative to respond in the event of a vibration or noise complaint. If the authorized representative receives a complaint, he/she shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City of Newport Beach's Community Development Director. 9-3 Route all construction related trips (including worker commuting, material deliveries, and debris/soil hauling) so as to minimize pass-bys or residential areas around the project site. 9-4 All heavy construction equipment used on the proposed project shall be maintained in good operating condition, with all internal combustion, engine -driven equipment fitted with intake and exhaust muffles, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer. 9-5 Electrically powered equipment instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment shall be used to the extent possible. 9-6 All stationary noise -generating equipment shall be located as far away as possible from neighboring property lines; with particular attention paid to the residential complex (currently under construction) to the north of the project site. Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -24- 71 9-7 Limit all internal combustion engine idling both on the site and at nearby queuing areas to no more than five (5) minutes for any given vehicle or machine. Signs shall be posted at the job site and along queueing lanes to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. 9-8 The use of noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells will be for safety warning purposes only. Use smart backup alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm level based on the background noise level, or switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters. 9-9 A temporary noise bamer/curtain shall be erected between the construction zone and adjacent residential receptors to the north of the project site boundary. The temporary sound barrier shall have a minimum height of 16 feet and be free of gaps and holes and must achieve a Sound Transmission Class (STQ of 35 or greater. The barrier can be (a) a 3/a -inch -thick plywood wall OR (b) a hanging blanket/curtain with a surface density of at least 2 pounds per square foot. For either configuration, the construction side of the barrier shall have an exterior lining of sound absorption material with a Noise Reduction Coefficient (NRQ rating of at least 0.7. All the above conditions shall be included on the permit applicant drawings with verification by the Building Division Plan Check staff. Additionally, all the above conditions shall be verified in the field by the Building Division field inspection staff at the project site. Finding Finding 3 — The City hereby makes Finding 3 having found that there are no other mitigation measures that are feasible, taking into consideration specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less -than -significant level, and, further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR (CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)). As described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment. VI. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES A. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS The following is a discussion of the alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in the DEIR Alternative Project Location CEQA requires that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project. The key question and first step in the analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (Guidelines 5 15126[5IBIlD. Key factors in evaluating the feasibility of potential offsite locations for EIR project alternatives include: ■ if it is in the same jurisdiction Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -25- 72 ■ whether development as proposed would require a General Plan Amendment, and; ■ whether the project applicant could reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent) Since the project applicant does not own or control other property within the City, the evaluation of potential alternate sites focused on sites that could accommodate a development similar to the proposed project on properties that have been identified by the City as suitable for residential development. It was assumed that the project would be developed based on the same plans detailed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the DEIR Table H32 of the Newport Beach 2014-2021 Housing Element includes an inventory of land suitable for residential development within Newport Beach. Based on the development limit and allowable density in the available areas, the proposed 100 -unit condominium tower could be sited in Banning Ranch, John Wayne Airport Area, or Newport Center. However, the Banning Ranch area is proposed as a planned community by Newport Banning Ranch, LLC and would accommodate 1,375 dwelling units, a 75 -room resort inn and ancillary resort uses, 75,000 square feet of commercial uses, approximately 51.4 acres of parklands, and approximately 252.3 acres of permanent open space. Table H32 of the Housing Element states that there is a maximum development limit of 1,375 units; therefore, if the Banning Ranch project is approved as proposed, the Museum House project would not be able to relocate to this location. Per the City's Housing Element, the John Wayne Airport Area can accommodate a realistic capacity of 2,061 units. There are several existing residential project applications in the Airport Area— Koll Newport Residential (260 units) and Uptown Newport Mixed Use Development (1,244 units, approved) 1. In total, these cumulative projects would buildout 1,504 units of the 2,061 realistically allowed units, leaving 557 allowed units for future projects. Therefore, the proposed 100 -unit condominium tower could potentially be built in the Airport Area. As with the current project location, without mitigation, the development of the proposed residential tower within the Airport Area could be expected to result in significant construction -related noise, air quality and vibration impacts. Similarly, proposed excavation could result in significant cultural, paleontological, and geotechnical impacts. Development at this alternative location, therefore, would not be anticipated to eliminate or reduce any significant impacts. Moreover, additional constraints and impacts would be presented by the proximity to the John Wayne Airport GWA). Most of the southwest portion of the Airport Area is located in the JWA Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) 65 dBA CNEL contour, which is unsuitable for residential and other noise -sensitive uses. The project would also require notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) because the proposed tower would be over 200 feet and within the obstruction imaginary surfaces area. An aeronautical analysis of the structure would be required to determine whether the tower causes a hazard to navigable airspace per Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77. The project would also require approval by the ALUC. Therefore, there are restrictions to development of the proposed tower depending on where it is sited within the Airport Area. Table H32 of the City's housing element identifies 608 additional units as the future development capacity for Newport Center, based on the existing General Plan. The following residential cumulative projects are currently proposed in Newport Center— Villas at Fashion Island (524 units under construction) and the Meridian (Santa Barbara) Condominiums (79 units completed); only 5 units remain that are unbuilt. It should be also noted that a General Plan Amendment is proposed for 150 Newport Center (49 units) in Newport Center. In total, these cumulative projects would exceed the residential development capacity stated in the housing element. This supports the conclusion that there is a lack of alternative site locations in Newport Center that have the appropriate land use entitlements to support the proposed project. I The Newport Place Residential project (3 84 units) was also a cumulative project proposed in the Airport Area but was denied by the Newport Beach City Council on July 26, 2016. Museum House Project CE QA Findings of Fact -26- 73 Based on this review, there are no feasible alternative project sites within the City that would accommodate the proposed project and reduce or eliminate significant environmental impacts. Therefore, this alternative was considered but rejected for further consideration. Reduced Height Alternative The Reduced Height Alternative was designed and considered in response to scoping process comments and for its potential to reduce or eliminate significant impacts associated with the project as proposed. As with the proposed project, this alternative is assumed to include 100 units, so it is anticipated operational impacts (including traffic, public services, operational air quality and noise impacts, and utility needs) would be similar to the project as proposed. The Reduced Height Alternative would decrease the proposed tower height from 295 feet to 65 feet (from podium to roof of last occupied space) to be consistent with the underlying zoning of the project site— San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP; PG 19). The building would be six stories of residential floors over two levels of parking (one level of ground parking and one underground level of parking). This height would be in keeping with the adjacent Villas at Fashion Place project and essentially extend the character of that development. Buildout of 100 units would generate an estimated 224 residents as with the proposed project. Grading for this alternative would require approximately 28,400 cubic yards of soil export compared to 45,000 cubic yards of soil export for the proposed project. Given the substantial decrease in height, the building footprint would be much larger and encompass 78,426 square feet, covering approximately 90 percent of the project site compared to 30 percent under the proposed project. The larger building footprint would also decrease the amount of open space amenities and circulation area on the ground level compared to the proposed project. Site access would be provided at a single entryway along San Clemente Drive for residents/visitors and delivery; thus, the fire access lane proposed along the eastern project boundary under the proposed project would not be developed under this alternative. Conclusion The Reduced Height Alternative would result in impacts marginally lesser or greater, or similar, to the less than significant impacts of the proposed project, depending on the resource area. For example, impacts to recreation and hydrology would be marginally greater than the proposed project, but still less than significant. The larger building footprint would also not allow the beneficial development of a modular wetland system within the ground level buffered landscaping area that the proposed project would provide. Further, the common indoor and outdoor amenities provided under the proposed project would be greatly reduced since the expanded building footprint would cover approximately 90 percent of the lot. Also, the proposed project's less than significant greenhouse gas and air quality impacts would be slightly less due to the likely reduction in construction schedule. Importantly, however, this alternative would not avoid or lessen the proposed project's significant and unavoidable construction noise impact. The Reduced Height Alternative would require construction of a 65 - foot residential building in closer proximity to nearby sensitive receptors than the proposed project. Moreover, although the overall height of the building would be reduced, the construction equipment necessary for development of the Reduced Height Alternative, including with respect to demolition, grading, and building construction, would be consistent with the proposed project. Thus, construction noise impacts would be similar and remain significant and unavoidable. Also, the Reduced Height Alternative would result in a new significant and unavoidable aesthetic (shade/shadow) impact that was not generated by the proposed project. Compared to the proposed 295 -foot tower, a 65 -foot residential building would cast shadows on more dwelling units for longer hours and would exceed the North Newport Center Planned Community (PG 56) shade standard, causing a new significant and unavoidable shading impact. A majority of the project objectives of the Museum House project would also either not be achieved or achieved to a lesser degree. For example, compared to the 295 -foot tower, development of a 65 -foot Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -27- Z residential building onsite would not provide a fully amenitized residential community with state-of-the-art facilities to the same degree (No. 1); maximize the project's view opportunities of the Pacific Ocean and Newport Harbor (No. 3); contribute significant property tax revenue to the same degree (No. 6); generate temporary construction employment to the same degree (No. 7); or maximize onsite open space and provide a variety of onsite outdoor open space amenities (No. 9). Given the aforementioned reasons, particularly the creation of a significant and unavoidable shading impact and the failure of the Reduced Height Alternative to avoid the significant and unavoidable construction noise impact of the proposed project, this alternative was considered but rejected for further consideration. B. ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS The following alternatives were determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives with the potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. ■ No Project/No Development Alternative ■ Existing General Plan Alternative ■ Reduced Density Alternative An EIR must identify an "environmentally superior" alternative, and where the No Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is required to identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated. Each alternative's environmental impacts are compared to the proposed project and determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior. Section 7.4 of the DEIR identifies the environmentally superior alternative. No Project/ No Development Alternative Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, no development would occur onsite and the existing OCMA building would remain in its existing condition. Buildout of the No Project/No Development Alternative would not introduce any new residential or nonresidential development nor any associated residents or employees. The OCMA building would remain in operation at its current location. Finding: The City Council rejects the No Project/No Development Alternative on the basis of policy and economic factors as explained herein. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, § 15364; see also City of Del Mar P. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; California Native Plant Soc. P. City of Santa Crud (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001; Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. P. City of Oakland (1993) 23 CaLApp.4th 704, 715.) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the FEIR. The No Project/No Development Alternative would reduce the proposed project's significant and unavoidable construction noise impact. Also, because the alternative would not include any construction or new development, it would also reduce the project's less than significant impacts to the majority of environmental topical areas, including aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Population and housing and hydrology and water quality impacts would be greater for this alternative. Most of the project objectives are related to providing a high quality residential development within the City. Objective No. 4 also provides a goal of implementing General Plan Policy LU 6.14.4 by developing a residential project that would reinforce the original design concept of Newport Center. The No Project/No Development Alternative, because it does not include any residential development, would not achieve any of the objectives— develop a fully amenitized residential community with state-of-the-art facilities near major Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -28- 75 activity centers (No. 1); provide housing to meet the City's needs (No. 2); maximize view opportunities of the City, Pacific Ocean, and Newport Harbor (No. 3); develop a residential project in Newport Center per General Plan PolicyLU 6.14.4 (No. 4); create a landmark structure (No. 5); contribute significant propertytax revenue (No. 6); generate temporary construction employment (No. 7); improve jobs -housing balance in the City (No. 8); or maximize onsite open space amenities (No. 9). Existing General Plan Alternative The Existing General Plan Alternative would either 1) develop the site with an alternate, allowable use under the current Private Institutions (PI) land use designation, or 2) expand/rebuild the existing OCMA building within the development limits outlined in the City's General Plan. According to the City's General Plan, the PI designation is intended to provide for privately owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, healthcare, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. The City's land use plan labels the site as Anomaly 49 with a development limit of 45,208 square feet. An adjacent PI -designated parcel is part of Anomaly 49 but not part of the project site. This adjacent parcel is built out with another OCMA-owned building of approximately 13,670 square feet. It is not within the project boundary and will not be demolished as part of the proposed project. Therefore, buildout of the project site under the existing General Plan would allow 31,538 square feet of Private Institutions use, and approximately 32 jobs would be generated. The second option under the Existing General Plan Alternative is to expand or rebuild the existing OCMA building to the maximum buildout potential. As stated above, the site's development limit is 31,538 square feet. Thus, the existing museum building (23,632 square feet) could be expanded by 7,906 square feet to the maximum allowed square footage, or the site can be redeveloped with a new museum building at a maximum size of 31,538 square feet. Buildout of this option would similarly generate approximately 32 jobs. Given the existence of the current OCMA building onsite, the logical project design feature under this alternative is an expansion of the building to its full buildout potential— approximately 7,906 additional square feet. Therefore, the analysis assumes buildout of this alternative to be an expanded museum Finding: The City Council rejects the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative on the basis of policy and economic factors as explained herein. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, § 15364; see also City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 CaLApp.3d 410, 417; California Native Plant Soc. v. City of Santa Crud (2009) 177 CaLApp.4th 957, 1001; Sequoyah Hills Homeoivnerr Assn. P. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715.) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the FEIR. The Existing General Plan Alternative would reduce impacts to the following environmental areas: aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and planning, noise, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Impacts to geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials would be similar and impacts to population and housing and hydrology and water quality would be greater. Overall, impacts would be reduced in comparison to the proposed project. Development of the Existing General Plan Alternative would not achieve most of the project objectives. This alternative would not develop a fully amenitized residential community in the Newport Center area (No. 1); provide additional housing to meet the City's growing population and housing needs (No. 2); develop a residential project per Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.4 (No. 4); contribute significant property tax revenue to the City (No. 6); or improve the jobs -housing balance in Newport Beach (No. 8). This alternative also would not maximize the project's view opportunities of the Pacific Ocean and Newport Harbor (No. 3) or generate temporary employment in the construction industry (No. 7) to the same degree as the proposed project. However, an expanded museum would still be able to create a landmark structure with Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -29- 76 architectural features and materials that complement the project's location (No. 5) and maximize onsite open space by providing outdoor open space amenities (No. 9). Reduced Density Alternative The Reduced Density Alternative would allow development of a 90 -unit residential tower (10 fewer units) at a reduced height of 23 stories (271 feet, 6 inches). Table 3 provides a development summary comparison of the proposed project to this alternative. The building footprint and provided setbacks would remain the same. Buildout of this alternative would introduce approximately 201 residents and 20 jobs. Table 3 Proposed Project vs. Reduced Density Alternative Development Summary Proposed Project Reduced Density Alternative Dwelling Units 100 units 90 units Height 295 feet 25 stories 271 feet and 6 inches 23 stories Building Area Tower 391,158 SF 359,167 SF Parking Garage 115,828 SF 115,828 SF Parking 250 spaces 200 residential/50guest) 225 spaces 180 residential/45guest) Open Space Common Open Space 52,523 SF 52,523 SF Common Indoor Space 20,855 SF 20,855 SF Private Open Space 21,444 SF 19,302 SF Finding: The City Council rejects the Reduced Density Alternative on the basis of policy and economic factors as explained herein. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, § 15364; see also City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; California Native Plant Soc. v. City of Santa Cru.Z (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001; Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (199 3) 23 Ca1.AppAth 704, 715.) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the FEIR. The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce impacts to the following environmental areas: aesthetics, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Impacts to air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, and recreation would be similar. This alternative is able to achieve all the objectives of the proposed project. Although slightly reduced in density and height, the 90 -unit condominium tower and associated amenities would provide a fully amenitized residential community with state-of-the-art facilities within wallflng distance of employment opportunities, public facilities, and recreational and commercial amenities (No. 1); provide additional housing to meet the City's growing needs (No. 2); maximize the project's view opportunities (No. 3); develop a residential project that reinforces the design concept for Newport Center per General Plan Policy LU 6.14.4 (No. 4); create a landmark structure with compatible and complementary architectural features and materials (No. 5); contribute significant property tax revenue (No. 6); generate temporary construction related employment (No. 7); improve the job -housing balance in the City by providing housing within a major employment center (No. 8); and maximize onsite open space by providing outdoor open space amenities (No. 9). Museum House Project CEQA Findings of Fact -30- 77 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 11 of Exhibit "C" Statement of Overriding Considerations 78 Museum House Project Statement of Overriding Considerations Exhibit C STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Introduction The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency under CEQA responsible for preparation, review, and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Museum House Project. As the Lead Agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and which of those impacts are significant, and can be mitigated through imposition of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant. CEQA then requires the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve the proposed project. In making this determination, the City is guided by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 which provides as follows: CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental rids when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects maybe considered "acceptable." When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported bysubstantial evidence in the record. If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. In addition, Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) requires that where a public agency finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of the project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. The City also has examined alternatives to the project, none of which both meet the project objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed project for the reasons discussed in the Findings of Facts (Findings). The City of Newport Beach City Council, the Lead Agency for this project, having reviewed the Final EIR for the Museum House Project, and reviewed all written materials within the City's public record and heard all oral testimony presented at public hearings, adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations, which has balanced the benefits of the proposed project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in reaching its decision to approve the project. 79 Museum House Project Statement of Overriding Considerations Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts Although most potential project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated, as described in the Findings, there remains one project impact for which complete mitigation is not feasible. The Museum House Project EIR identified the following significant unavoidable adverse impact of the proposed project: Noise Impact 5.9-1: Construction activities would result in significant temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 9-1 through 9-9 would reduce construction noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible. However, given the expected noise levels during the two-month demolition phase (predicted to be as high as 47 dBA Leq and 55 dBA Lmax within living spaces at the closest residential units of the Villas of Fashion Island apartments), coupled with the length of the site preparation/ grading (4 months) and building construction phase (22 months) and expected noise levels (as high as 42 dBA Leq and 50 dBA Lmax within living spaces at the closest residential units at the Villas of Fashion Island apartments), construction noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Statement Overriding Considerations The City, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project, has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impact identified above may be considered acceptable due to the following specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project, in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guideline Section 15093. It should be noted that, when considering the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the project, the City also weighed the fact that the project's significant and unavoidable impact is considered of a temporary nature, and will cease upon completion of construction of the project. 1. Implement offsite wastewater infrastructure improvement Under existing conditions, an existing 8 -inch vitrified concrete pipe (VCS') sewer line at the intersection of Santa Barbara Drive and jamboree Road has a peak flow of 0.436 cubic feet per second (cfs)— approximately 49.3 percent full. The threshold to determine the adequacy of sewer line capacity is whether peak wastewater flows fill the bottom half (50 percent) of the pipe. Therefore, the City would likely need to upsize the existing sewer line in the near future. Development of the proposed project would trigger a need to improve the 8 -inch sewer line to accommodate additional flow generated by the proposed development. Approximately 81 lineal feet would be replaced with a 12 -inch VCP line and would connect into the Orange County Sanitation District trunk sewer line (existing OCSD manhole # BAY0010-0665). If the proposed improvement is installed, the 12 -inch VCP line would increase peak flow to 0.596 cfs and would only be 33 percent full in post -development conditions. This would allow the sewer line to accommodate existing peak flow and the proposed project's peak flow. 2. Improve the jobs -housing balance in the City of Newport Beach Jobs -housing goals and ratios are advisory only, and no ideal jobs -housing ratio is adopted in state, regional, or city policies. While the APA recognizes that an ideal jobs -housing ratio will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, its recommended target for an appropriate jobs -housing ratio is 1.5, with a recommended range of 1.3 to 1.7. -I Museum House Project Statement of Overriding Considerations The condominium tower would bring 100 housing units into Newport Beach, which is a jobs-rich city. Based on the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG), the City's jobs-housing ratio is projected to be 1.90 by 2040. Incorporating the 100 units into SCAG's projections would slightly decrease the City's jobs- housing ratio to 1.89, moving the City closer to the recommended jobs-housing range. 3. Introduce a landmark structure with distinct architectural features that complement the visual quality of Newport Center and Fashion Island The proposed tower would be designed as a LEED Silver building. LEED is a system created and administered by the United States Green Building Council (USGBQ to evaluate the sustainability of a building. LEED buildings are often fitted with the most efficient plumbing fixtures, irrigation designs, and electrical systems. Some building materials are often created using recycled materials and refuse from demolished buildings are often recycled for other uses. LEED certification often exceeds the standard Title 24 and other energy and water conservation requirements applied to construction. Additionally, the tower would be constructed with a textured stone base, masonry frames and pilasters, delicate metalwork details, and a predominantly stone and masonry exterior with large window openings. Larger-scale elements, such as multistory bay windows with French balconies and inset terraces, multistory window groupings, and large terraces on the upper floors would be implemented to create a distinct landmark tower in Newport Center. The Museum House building would be a unique icon in Newport Center and help to further enhance the visual quality of Newport Center and Fashion Island well known in the southern California region. 4. Generate more revenue for the City of Newport Beach than the existing Orange County Museum of Art through property taxes, fees, and revenue expenditures from the project residents The City prepared a fiscal impact analysis on the proposed project in accordance with Newport Beach General Plan Implementation Policies 12.1 and 12.2. The fiscal impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in the same way as existing development. Buildout of the Newport Beach General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the City's general fund of $21.7 million per year. The No Project/No Development Alternative and Existing General Plan/Expanded Museum Alternative analyzed in the EIR would result in a slight negative net fiscal impact to the City while the proposed Museum House project is expected to have a positive impact of approximately $600,000 per year. The positive fiscal impacts result from property taxes, fees, and revenue expenditures from future project residents. Generally due to the high market level targeted by the proposed project, the project would exceed the fiscal benefit from the existing museum use of the site under the existing General Plan. The project would also be consistent with General Plan Policy LU 2.4, which encourages the City to "accommodate uses that maintain or enhance Newport Beach's fiscal health and account for market demands, while maintaining and improving the quality of life for current and future residents." 5. Encourage a mixed-use environment that expands opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, schools, commercial centers, services, and recreation per General Plan Goal LU 6.14 and Policy CE 5.1.2. General Plan Goal LU 6.14 encourages "A successful mixed-use district that integrates economic and commercial centers serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the subregion, with expanded opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation, and is supported by a pedestrian friendly environment." And General Plan Policy CE 5.1.2 promotes "Enk[in] residential areas, schools, parks, and commercial centers so that residents can travel within the community without driving." RA Museum House Project Statement of Overriding Considerations The proposed project would further this goal and policy from the City's general plan by providing additional opportunities for residents to live close to existing jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation in Newport Center. The property's location, approximately one-quarter mile from Fashion Island, particularly lends itself towards this land use goal. Residential development at this location would provide a pedestrian -friendly environment by placing these uses within waUdng distance of employment, shopping, and entertainment. Conclusion The City of Newport Beach has balanced the project's benefits against the project's significant unavoidable construction noise impact, and finds that the project's benefits outweigh the project's significant unavoidable impact. This impact, therefore, is considered acceptable in light of the project's benefits. The City finds that each of the benefits described above is an overriding consideration, independent of the other benefits, that warrants approval of the project notwithstanding the project's significant unavoidable impact. EM Attachment C Draft Ordinance Approving the Planned Community Development Plan Amendment M ORDINANCE NO. 2016 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. PC2015-001 AMENDING THE SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC -19) LOCATED AT 850 AND 856 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement — To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 2 of _ discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the Draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, on November 17, 2016, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) found the City of Newport Beach Museum House Residential Project to be consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, with the condition that written documentation from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be provided to ALUC and the City Council verifying that the City's Police Department helipad was considered in the FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for the project; Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 3 of _ WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code are legislative acts and neither the NBMC nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments; WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District meets the intent and purpose for a PC as specified in NBMC Section 20.56.010 (Planned Community District Procedures, Purpose). The property is located in the Newport Center area which includes a mixture of shopping, hotels, commercial support uses, professional offices, and residential developments. The development plan and standards are consistent with the surrounding development including the standards and allowed uses of the adjoining North Newport Center Planned Community; WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District would apply appropriate site and project specific setbacks, density, and height limits to the project site given the site's urban location and all required parking is provided onsite. The site is fully developed and does not support any natural resources and all potential environmental impacts associated with the project are appropriately addressed through standard building permit procedures and the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR; WHEREAS, the proposed PC -19 (North Newport Center Planned Community) amendment and zoning designation are consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment (GP2015-001) that changes the land use category from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units; WHEREAS, the future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed San Joaquin Plaza (PC) Zoning District of the NBMC; WHEREAS, NBMC Section 20.30.060(C)(3) (Height Limits and Exceptions, Required Findings) requires findings to be made to adopt or amend a Planned Community District with an increase in the height of the structure above the previous base height limit: Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 4 of _ Finding: A. The project applicant is providing additional project amenities beyond those that are otherwise required. Examples of project amenities include, but are not limited to: i. Additional landscaped open space; ii. Increased setback and open areas, iii. Enhancement and protection of public views. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The building design provides a high level of design with open space, landscape, residential amenities, and building setbacks that are similar or greater than those required on adjoining properties. The main building provides lot coverage of approximately 30 percent. The remaining portion of the site includes the service/emergency access drive, the motor court and a variety of open and useable plazas, landscaped/hardscape areas, planters, and a dog run. 2. The site design provides 32,261 square feet of outdoor common open space, much of it landscaped area (not including the motor court) where a total of 7,500 square feet are required (75 square feet/dwelling unit) under the RM development standards of the NBMC. 3. The main residential tower is set back a minimum of 36 feet from the front property line (San Clemente Drive), 34 feet from the right property line (adjacent to the office parking structure), 10 feet to the left property line (adjacent to the OCMA administration building site) and 42 feet to the rear property line (adjacent to the Villas at Fashion Island apartments). Parking level basement setbacks occur largely below grade and are not immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. The basement levels maintain a minimum 10 -foot setback except on the easterly side where the access road caisson wall in located along the property line adjacent to the office parking structure. 4. The property abuts properties located in the North Newport Center Planned Community to the north and east. The North Newport Center PC includes setbacks from streets, which are typically 15 feet. No interior setbacks standards are included and the placement of buildings and structures is reviewed during the Plan Review process for new structures. 5. The adjoining property developed with the OCMA administration building is in the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community, which does not include required setbacks. Building location and design is reviewed during the site development review process. The existing OCMA administration building is set back M Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 5 of _ approximately 30 feet from its easterly property line, that abuts the subject property. 6. The project does not affect existing public views from designated viewpoints or view corridors as shown in the view simulations and discussed in Chapter 5-01 (Aesthetics) of the Final EIR and does not detract from the character of the area. The overall project height is generally consistent with the height limit and existing building heights in the northerly section of Newport Center. 7. The subject property is located in the 300 -foot High Rise Height Area as depicted on Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation of the NBMC. Although this height limit is applicable to nonresidential buildings, the type and design of a structure, and not only the use, are important in determining if its bulk and scale are appropriate for a particular location. In this case the residential high rise building is well-designed and is consistent with the 300 -foot high rise height limit and meets the intent of Land Use Element Policy LU 6.14.4 (Development Scale), which suggests, but does not limit, that the greatest building mass and height should be concentrated in the northeastern section of Newport Center along San Joaquin Hills Road. Finding: B. The architectural design of the project provides visual interest through the use of light and shadow, recessed planes, vertical elements, and varied roof planes; Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The building's exterior is comprised predominantly of stone and masonry with metal work details and glass windows. Massing offsets, variations of roofline, varied textures, recesses, articulation, and design accents on the elevations are integrated to enhance the building's architectural style. 2. The building facade is designed to be compatible with surrounding retail, office and residential development in Newport Center. The architectural design provides a significant amount of articulation to fit with the context of surrounding buildings in the Newport Center area. Large scale features such as variation in floor size, multistory bay windows, balconies and terraces help to reduce the scale of the structure and to provide visual interest and variety. Mechanical equipment and elevator overrides are screened from view. Finding: C. The increased height will not result in undesirable or abrupt scale changes or relationships being created between the proposed structure(s) and existing adjacent developments or public spaces. Where appropriate, the proposed :: Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 6 of structure(s) provides a gradual transition to taller or shorter structures on abutting properties, and Fact in Support of Finding: Although the building is taller than the structures in the immediate vicinity it is not out of character with the structures in the northerly section of Newport Center which includes a mix of building types and heights. There are six existing buildings in the northern section of Newport Center that are greater than 200 feet in height. Finding: D. The structure will have no more floor area than could have been achieved without the approval of the height increase. Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed floor area for the project would conform to the dwelling unit and gross floor area limit established through the amended PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan). NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications to the project made by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. 2015-001 as depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to change the San Joaquin Plaza PC land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential and revise the development standards to accommodate the proposed residential development. Section 3: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this ordinance. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not 0• Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 7 of affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: The Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) and approved "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-_ is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 6: Except as expressly modified in this ordinance, all other Sections, Subsections, terms, clauses and phrases set forth in the NBMC shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect Section 7: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published pursuant to City Charter Section 414. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 29th day of November 2016, and adopted on the 13th day of December, 2016, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS DIANE B. DIXON, MAYOR Ordinance No. 2016 Page 8 of _ ATTEST: LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATT Y'S OFFICE AARON C. HARP, CITY ATTORNEY Exhibit A: PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Pian) 91 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 9 of Exhibit "A" PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan) 92 San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures 93 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Table of Contents I. Introduction A. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan B. San Joaquin Plaza Statistical Analysis C. Planned Community Area Location Map Chapter 1(PC Subarea 1) I. Relationship to Other Regulations A. Relationship to the Municipal Code II. Land Use and Development Regulations A. Permitted Uses B. Development Limits C. Transfer of Development III. Site Development Standards A. Permitted Height of Structures B. Standards for Allowable Heights C. Rooftop Appurtenances D. Site Walls, Retaining Walls, Garage Walls and Mechanical Screens E. Site Setbacks F. Floor Area Ratio G. Lot Coverage H. Parking I. Landscaping J. Lighting K. Signs L. Residential Open Space Requirements M. LEED Certification N. Construction and Utility Requirements IV. Definitions V Site Development Review San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Chapter 2 (PC Subarea 2) I. San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community District Regulations A. General Notes B. Permitted Uses C. Building Location D. Building Height E. Parking F. Landscaping G. Loading Areas H. Refuse Collection Areas I. Telephone and Electrical Service J. Signs San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 2 95 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures [this page intentionally blank] San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 3 M G j s+� San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 3 M Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan Amendment No. 8 I. Introduction A. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan The San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community ("PC") District (PC -19) for the City of Newport Beach is a part of the Newport Center Development in conformance with the Newport Beach General Plan. The General Plan identifies the goal of creating a successful mixed-use district that integrates economic and commercial centers serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the sub -region, with expanded opportunities for residential development within Newport Center. As shown on Figure 1, the San Joaquin Plaza PC District is located in the north end of Newport Center where the concentration of building height and mass is greatest. It is generally bounded by Santa Cruz Drive on the east, San Clemente Drive on the south, and Santa Barbara Drive to the west. Surrounding uses include an existing parking structure to the east office buildings to the west, residential apartments to the north and office and residential apartments to the south. The Fashion Island regional mall is approximately % mile to the south. The purpose of the San Joaquin Plaza PC District is to ensure consistency with General Plan policies related to development scale in Newport Center and expectations for high quality development. This San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan is divided into two chapters. Chapter 1 provides land use and development standards for PC Subarea 1 (850 San Clemente Drive) only. Chapter 1 supersedes the Existing PC Development Plan with respect to PC Subarea 1. The land use and development standards in the Existing PC Development Plan shall not apply to PC Subarea 1. Chapter 2 of this San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan provides land use and development standards for PC Subarea 2 (856 San Clemente Drive) only. Chapter 2 consists of the entire Existing PC Development Plan except Section I (Statistical Analysis), which shall be superseded by Section I (B) (Son Joaquin Plaza Statistical Analysis) below. Section II (General Notes) and Section III (Civic, Cultural, Business and Professional Offices) of the Existing PC Development Plan, which set forth land use and development standards, shall apply to PC Subarea 2 only, and not PC Subarea 1. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 4 97 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures B. San Joaquin Plaza Statistical Analysis The San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community area consists of two distinct subareas: PC Subarea 1(850 San Clemente Drive) a. Site Area: 1.99 acres b. Existing Use: Orange County Museum of Art Exhibition Space (23,632 Square Feet) PC Subarea 2 (856 San Clemente Drive) a. Site Area: 0.93 acre Existing Use: Orange County Museum of Art Galleries Administrative Offices & Storage (13,670 Square Feet) San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 • :j Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures C. San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Area Location Map Figure -1— San Joaquin Plaza SAN CEMENTft ' OR. MPC Subarea 1 (850 San Clemente Drive) ElPC Subarea 2 (856 San Clemente Drive) FNot Included in Planned Community San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 6 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Chapter 1(PC Subarea 11 I. Relationship to Other Regulations A. Relationship to the Municipal Code Whenever the development regulations of this plan conflict with the regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained herein shall prevail. The Municipal Code shall regulate this development whenever regulations are not provided within these district regulations. All words and phrases used in this San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in Section V — Definitions. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 7 100 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures II. Land Use and Development Regulations — PC Sub Area 1 A. Permitted Uses 1. General Specific uses are permitted consistent with the definitions provided in Section V of this Development Plan. Uses determined to be accessory or ancillary to permitted uses, or residential support uses to permitted uses are also permitted. The Community Development Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein, provided they are consistent with the Multi - Residential (RM) Land Use designation. 2. San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1 a. Residential i. 100 residential units b. Uses that are accessory or ancillary to the permitted residential uses, including residential support uses, are also permitted. These include, but are not limited to, the following: i. Club Rooms ii. Lobby iii. Fitness and Spa iv. Business Services and Building Services v. Rooftop lounge vi. Wine Storage vii. Catering kitchen 1. Resident serving food and beverage services viii. Laundry ix. Conference Rooms x. Similar resident serving uses c. Structured Parking, Garage and Facilities B. Development Limits The development limits in this Development Plan are consistent with those established by the General Plan. Development limits may be modified through the approval of a Transfer of Development Rights. 1. San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1(850 San Clemente Drive) Up to 100 residential units are permitted within San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1. Residential uses are measured on a per unit basis and not by gross floor area. Ancillary uses, such as club rooms, San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 8 101 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures fitness, lobbies, business services, amenities and building services shall not require parking as they support the primary operations of the residential community and its residents. C. Transfer of Development Rights The transfer of development rights among sub -areas of this Planned Community and to/from other areas in the Newport Center/Fashion Island District identified in the General Plan is allowed in accordance with Policy LU 6.14.3 of the General Plan and this Planned Community Development Plan. The transfer of development rights shall be approved, as specified in the General Plan San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 9 102 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures III. Site Development Standards A. Permitted Height of Structures 1. San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1 B. Standards for Allowable Heights The maximum height of all structures shall be 295 feet as measured from finished grade to the roof of the highest appurtenance. Finish grade is defined in Graphic 1, as elevation of main building entry point in relation to mean sea level. C. Rooftop Appurtenances Rooftop appurtenances are permitted. Rooftop appurtenances shall demonstrate compliance with conditions related to the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport, consistent with Section III(A)(1)(b). Rooftop appurtenances must be screened from view; the height of rooftop appurtenances shall not exceed the height of the screening. Supports for window washing equipment are permitted, and are not required to be screened from view. No setbacks are required for any rooftop appurtenances San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 10 103 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Roof of fthest Occupied Space J Building Entry poo nt _ _ _ _ _ Finished Grade i Note: In no instance shalt any part of Che budding, including rooftop appurtenances v architectural fe.xures penetrate the FAA (Part 77 t mag=n2ry obstructon surface !or Jahn Wayne iurrort Graphic 1— Example of Building Height and Rooftop Appurtenances San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 11 104 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures D. Site Walls, Retaining Walls, Garage Walls and Mechanical Screens a. Site Walls i. Site walls will not exceed 8'-0" from finish grade. b. Retaining Walls i. Interior: The height of a retaining wall that faces interior to the project is not to exceed 30'-0" from finish grade. ii. Exterior: Retaining walls that face exterior to adjacent properties and San Clemente Drive at property lines, are limited in height to 8'-0" from finish grade not including handrail conditions that may be required above these walls. These handrail requirements may be formed by the retaining wall. c. Garage Walls that are exposed will be treated as architectural building fagade. d. Mechanical Screens will be allowed to be of sufficient height to provided coverage of equipment. Required grills, louvers, vents and other functional requirements of building equipment will to the extent possible be incorporated into the building architecture. E. Site Setbacks a. San Clemente Drive 15'-0" b. East Property Line (Adjacent to Parking Garage) 5'-0" c. North Property Line (Adjacent to San Joaquin Apartments) 5'-0" d. West Property Line 5'-0" F. Floor Area Ratio a. Allowable Floor Area for Site is 4.5:1 FAR b. Lot Area 86,924 Square Feet c. Allowable Area 391,000 Square Feet G. Lot Coverage Lot coverage is the percentage of buildable site area. a. Lot Area 86,924 Square Feet b. Allowable Lot Coverage is 90% 78,430 Square Feet H. Parking Residential parking is based on unit count with each unit receiving 2 parking spaces. Residential guest parking is also based on unit count with .5 spaces per unit. Accessory, ancillary, and support uses for residential developments shall not be included in the calculation of required parking. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 12 105 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Valet parking is allowed subject to the approval of a valet plan by the City Traffic Engineer and Community Development Director. I. Landscaping Refer to City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. J. Lighting Refer to City of Newport Beach Zoning Code K. Signs 1. General Sign Standards A comprehensive sign program may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified herein. Comprehensive sign programs shall be submitted for review and consideration in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. 2. Restricted Sign Types Signs visible from public right-of-ways are subject to the following restrictions: a. No rotating, flashing, blinking, or signing with animation shall be permitted on a permanent basis. b. No signs shall be permitted which imitate or resemble official traffic signs or signals. C. No wind signs or audible signs are permitted. Animated signs visible from public streets are not allowed unless otherwise permitted by the Municipal Code. 3. Sign Standards San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1 Primary building address numbers shall be visible from the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas. Secondary address signs may be located where appropriate for on-site orientation and safety. All address signs shall have a consistent color, design, and material for any given building. A single letter style is recommended. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 13 106 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Table 2 — Sign Standards for San Joaquin Plaza Subarea 1 Sign Maximum Maximum Type yp Description Location Number Maximum Sign Size Letter / Logo Height Signs mounted on Determined by landscape walls San Joaquin project name; A (includes ground Plaza at San 4 letter/logo height 36 inches mounted signs in Clemente not to exceed 36 front of landscaping project entry inches and landscape walls) Determined by On building name of project; elevation, letter/logo height Primary 24 B Building Sign awning or 2 primary and 4 not to exceed: inches parking secondary primary 24 Secondary structure inches, Secondary 16 inches 16 inches 4 (additional address signs 24 inches or On building may be located as required C Building Address elevation where 24 inches high by Fire appropriate for on-site Department orientation) As required by Fire Entry to As appropriate Department D Advisory Signs for safety and 6 feet high or Building service orientation Code for safety purposes San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 14 107 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures 4. TemporarySigns Temporary signs are permitted. See Definitions. L Residential Open Space Requirements The following open space standards shall apply to residential development projects: 1. Common Outdoor Open Space The project shall provide common outdoor open space either at grade, podium, common level within the building, or roof level. Common outdoor open space areas shall have a minimum horizontal dimension of 30 feet and may contain active and/or passive areas and a combination of hardscape and landscape features, but a minimum of 10 percent of the common outdoor open space must be landscaped. All common outdoor open space must be accessible to all residents. Projects shall provide a minimum of 5 percent common outdoor open space based on the residential lot area. 2. Common Indoor Open Space The project shall provide at least one community room of at least 500 square feet for use by all residents of the project. The area should be located adjacent to, and accessible from, common access point. This area may contain active or passive recreational facilities or meeting space, and must be accessible through a common corridor. 3. Private Open Space At least 50 percent of all dwelling units shall provide private open space, on a balcony, patio, or roof terrace. Private open space shall be a minimum area of 30 square feet and an average horizontal dimension of 6 feet. Balconies should be proportionately distributed throughout the project in relationship to floor levels and sizes of units. M. LEED Certification The Building will be designed to meet the criteria of LEED Certification as based on LEED's prototype points and scorecard rating system. N. Construction and Utility Requirements 1. Archaeological/Paleontological Grading of the site is subject to the provisions of the City Council Policies K-4 & K-5 regarding archaeological and paleontological resources. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 15 -�. Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures 2. Building Codes Construction shall comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Code and the various other mechanical, electrical and plumbing codes related thereto as adopted by the NBMC. 3. Grading Grading and excavation of the development area shall be conducted and undertaken in a manner both consistent with grading manual standards and ordinances of the City of Newport Beach and in accordance with a grading and excavation plan approved by the City of Newport Beach Building Division. 4. Telephone, Gas and Electrical Service All "on-site" gas lines, electrical lines and telephone lines shall be placed underground. Unless prohibited by the utility company, transformer or terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties. 5. Sewage Service All new and upgrade on and off-site sewer lines shall be designed in accordance with the Utilities Manager's approval. 6. Storm Water Management The project shall adhere to the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) approved in conjunction with the issuance of building permits. Drainage and water quality assurance measures will be implemented as per the City Public Works and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) requirements. Development of the property will be undertaken in accordance with the flood protection policies of the City. 7. Water service Water service to the site will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and is subject to applicable regulations, permits and fees as prescribed by the City. The project shall provide the infrastructure for Fire Protection Water Service and Domestic water. Each dwelling unit shall be served by its own individual water meter in accordance with the Public Works Department unless a waiver is approved by the Public Works Department. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 16 109 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures IV. Definitions All words and phrases used in this North San Joaquin Plaza PC shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in this section. Advisory Sign: Any sign that contains directional or safety information; does not contain advertisements. Audible Signs: Any sign that uses equipment to communicate a message with sound or music. Building Elevation: The exterior wall surface formed by one (1) side of the building. Building Height: Building height is measured from the roof of the highest occupied space to the exterior finished grade. If the building is on a sloping surface, the height measurement is taken from the building entrance. Exceptions include but are not limited to below grade parking structure entrances, motor courts, and retaining walls. Floor Area, Gross: The gross floor area for all other permitted uses is the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet. Excluded are covered porches, space below building entry or basement, parking, walkways and loading docks, service tunnels, and mechanical shafts. Mechanical spaces, which are inaccessible to tenants, are not counted as square footage. Monument Sign: Any sign that is supported by its own structure and is not part of or attached to any building. Parking Structure: Structures containing more than one story principally dedicated to parking. Parking structures may contain accessory, ancillary and resident support uses. Podium Level: A superposed terrace conforming to a building's plan, a continuous pedestal; a level of vertical segregation linking separate areas. Project Identification Sign: A free-standing (single or double faced) monument sign containing the project name. Residential: An area or areas within a structure on a parcel that contains separate or independent living facilities for one or more persons, with area or equipment for sleeping, sanitation or food preparation. Individual residential units may be located on multiple floors and need not be located in contiguous spaces. Rooftop Appurtenance: Rooftop appurtenances include, but are not limited to, mechanical equipment, stairwell and elevator shaft housing, antennae, window washing equipment, and wireless communication facilities. See Graphic 1 on page 34. Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used or intended to be used out-of-doors to communicate information to the public. Sign Area: The area enclosed by a rectangle drawn around the working, numbers or images composing the sign. Sign Face: The physical plane and/or surface upon which the working or images are applied. Sign Letter: The individual symbols of the alphabet used in forming the words of a message. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 17 110 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Support Uses: Uses within residential developments and parking structures designed, oriented, and intended to primarily serve building occupants. This includes uses such as dry cleaners, coffee vendors, and sundry shops. Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. Wind Sign: A series of similar banners or objects of plastic or other light material more than 2 inches in diameter which are fastened together at intervals by wire, rope, cord, string or by any other means, designed to move and attract attention upon being subjected to pressure by wind or breeze. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 18 111 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures V. Site Development Review The purpose of the Site Development Review (SDR) process is to ensure that any new development proposal within Subarea 1 is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the provisions of the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan. Prior to the issuance of building permits for development within Subarea 1, a SDR application shall be required in accordance with Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The Subarea 1 SDR shall be part of this Planned Community Development Plan and shall be reviewed concurrently with the Planned Community Development Plan. The submitted site pans and elevations shall be part of this application. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 19 112 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Chapter 2 (PC Subarea 21 I. San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community District Regulations Chapter 2 of this San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan provides land use and development standards for PC Subarea 2 (856 San Clemente Drive) only. Chapter 2 consists of the entire Existing PC Development Plan except Section I (Statistical Analysis), which shall be superseded by Section I (B) (San Joaquin Plaza Statistical Analysis) above. Section II (General Notes) and Section III (Civic, Cultural, Business and Professional Offices) of the Existing PC Development Plan, which set forth land use and development standards, shall apply to PC Subarea 2 only, and not PC Subarea 1. A. GENERAL NOTES 1. Water within the Planned Community area will be furnished by the City of Newport Beach. 2. Sewage disposal facilities within the Planned Community will be provided by Orange County Sanitation District No. S. 3. The subject property is within the City of Newport Beach. The Developer will provide the necessary flood protection facilities under the jurisdiction of the City of Newport Beach. 4. Grading and erosion control provisions shall be carried out on all areas of the Planned Community in a manner meeting the approval of the Community Development Director. S. Except as otherwise stated in this Ordinance, the requirements of the Newport Beach Zoning Code shall apply. 6. The contents of this supplemental text notwithstanding, no construction shall be proposed within the boundaries of this Planned Community District except that which shall comply with all provisions of Newport Beach's Uniform Building Code and the various mechanical codes related thereto. 7. Parking lot lighting shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. Parking lot lighting shall be designed in a manner so as to minimize impacts on adjacent residential areas. 8. All mechanical appurtenances on building roof tops and utility vaults shall be screened from street level view in a manner meeting the approval of the Community Development Director. 9. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the site shall be examined to determine the existence and extent of archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance with adopted City polices. 10. In the event that any non -office facility was to be eliminated from the project, the eliminated facility would be replaced with the equivalent amount of office space. 11. That a pedestrian and bicycle trail system be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 20 113 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures San Joaquin Plaza — Planned Community District Regulations 512/4/07 II. CIVIC, CULTURAL, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES A. INTENT The intent of this district is to permit the location of a combination of civic, cultural, business and professional office uses, and support commercial activities engaged in the sale of products to the general public. B. PERMITTED USES The following shall be permitted: 1. Retail sales and service of a convenience nature. 2. Administrative and professional offices. 3. Restaurants, bars and theater/nightclubs. Subject to Use Permit. 4. Institutional, financial and governmental facilities. 5. Civic, cultural, commercial recreational and recreational facilities. 6. Parking lots, structures and facilities. C. BUILDING LOCATION 1. All buildings shall be located in substantial conformance with the approved site plan. D. BUILDING HEIGHT 1. All buildings and appurtenant structures shall be limited to a maximum height of sixty- five (65) feet. E. PARKING 1. Adequate off-street parking shall be provided to accommodate all parking needs for the site. The intent is to eliminate the need for any on -street parking. 2. Required off-street parking shall be provided on the site of the use served, or on a common parking area in accordance with the off-street parking requirements of City of Newport Beach Planning and Zoning Ordinance. 3. Parking for the museum shall be based on 3.5 spaces/1,000 square feet of gross floor area. F. LANDSCAPING 1. Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, licensed landscaping contractor, or architect shall be reviewed by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 21 114 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures 2. All landscaping referred to in this section shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. a. Screening -Areas used for parking shall be screened from view or have the view interrupted by landscaping, and/or fencing from access streets, and adjacent properties. b. Plant materials used for screening purposes shall consist of lineal or grouped masses of shrubs and/or trees. G. LOADING AREAS Street side loading shall be allowed providing the loading dock is screened from view from adjacent streets. H. REFUSE COLLECTION AREAS 1. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from access streets, and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen. 2. No refuse collection area shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. I. TELEPHONE AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE All "on site" electrical lines (excluding transmission lines) and telephone lines shall be placed underground. Unless prohibited by the utility company, transformer or terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties. J. SIGNS 1. Building Address Sign a. Building address numerals shall be a maximum of two (2) feet in height and shall be consistent with the building identification signing. b. Building address number shall face the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas. 2. Project/Building Identification Sign a. Project and/or building identification signs are permitted at major entry access drives from adjacent frontage streets, and adjacent to project intersection corners provided that they comply with the City of Newport Beach sight distance requirement 110-L. b. The identification signage is permitted in the form of a free-standing (single or double faced) monument sign. The sign copy shall be restricted to the project or building name and street address. Individual letter heights shall not exceed eighteen (18) inches. The monument sign shall be limited to S feet in height and 12 feet in width as depicted on the attached sign drawings. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 22 115 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Project/Tenant Identification Signs a. Project/tenant identification signs are permitted at major entry access drives from adjacent frontage streets, provided that they comply with the City of Newport Beach sight distance requirement 110-L. b. The project/tenant identification signage is permitted in the form of a free standing (single or double faced) monument sign and may contain the project identification and a maximum of two tenant names. The tenant selection will be determined by the property owner or their designated management company. The tenant name shall not exceed 5 % inches in height and the monument sign shall be limited to 6 feet in height and 12 feet in width as depicted on the attached sign drawings. 4. Tenant Identification Signs a. Tenant identification signs are permitted and are divided into two (2) categories: b. PrimaryTenant -Secondary Tenant identification signs are to be wall -mounted graphics, consisting of individually fabricated letters. Box or "can" signs are not permitted. The maximum number of primary tenant signs permitted on any one building elevation is two (2). c. Each secondary tenant shall be limited to one (1) identification sign. d. The maximum letter height of a primary tenant sign shall not exceed twenty-four (24) inches. The maximum letter height of a secondary tenant sign shall not exceed sixteen (16) inches. e. Sign copy shall be restricted to identification of the person, firm, company or corporation operating the use conducted on the site. 5. General Sign Standards a. Signs (to include all those visible from the exterior of any building) may be lighted but no sign or any other contrivance shall be devised or constructed so as to rotate, gyrate, blink or move in any animated fashion. 6. Temporary Signs a. The following guidelines are intended to produce a consistent sign design for temporary signs within Newport Center. All temporary signs require the approvals of the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. b. Temporary signs are to identify the future site, project or facility under development on individual project sites. c. Information on this sign is limited to: i. For Sale, For Lease, Future Home of, Building/Project Name, etc. - Type or Name of Development - Type and Area of Space Available - Major Tenant or Developer - Financial Institution - General Contractor - Architect - Leasing Agent - Occupancy Date - Phone Number - The Irvine Company or Project Name and Logo ii. Location: One temporary sign is permitted on site for each frontage street. These signs may be single or double-faced and parallel or perpendicular to the roadway. iii. Longevity: Signs can exist from the time of lease or sale of the parcel until construction and/or leasing of the facility is complete. San Joaquin Plaza (PC 19 Amendment) Planned Community Development Plan 8 August 2016 23 116 Attachment D Draft Resolution Approving the Site Development Review (Includes Project Plans) 117 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. SD2016-001 FOR THE 100 - UNIT MUSEUM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AND REVOKING USE PERMIT NO. UP2005-017 AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. MD2004-059 RELATED TO THE ORANGE COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 118 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of • Development Agreement —To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both 119 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 2016-_ approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM - 100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-_ to change the San Joaquin Plaza PC land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi - Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade; WHEREAS, a site development review is required for the construction of five or more residential units processed in conjunction with a tentative tract map. The site development review analyzes the project as a whole for compatibility with the site and surrounding land uses. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.52.080(F) (Site Development Reviews), the following findings and facts in support of a site development review are set forth: Finding: A. Allowed within the subject Zoning district, Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed Site Development Review for a 100 -unit condominium project is consistent with the amended San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan that allows 100 residential units. Finding: B. In compliance with all of the applicable criteria in (NBMC Subsection 20.52.080(C)(2)(c)]: a. Compliance with this Section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any applicable specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the use or structure; b. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent 120 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of _ development, and whether the relationship is based on standards of good design; C. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the site and adjacent developments and public areas, d. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces; e. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use of water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and f. The protection of significant views from public rights) -of -way and compliance with [NBMC] Section 20.30. 100 (Public View Protections); and Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project is consistent with the amended Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) General Plan land use designation and amended PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan) Zoning District. 2. The project has been designed as 100 units with interior amenities and shared spaces within a 25 -story building that provides effective open space, light, and air for each unit. The project is integrated as a unified development through the use of similar architectural style and design elements, on-site parking, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian access to the site. 3. The building, including the relatively small footprint, is designed to be compatible with surrounding residential, office and commercial development in Newport Center and Fashion Island. The building architecture provides a stone and masonry exterior with large window openings, a textured stone base, masonry frames and detailed metalwork. Massing offsets, multi -story bay windows, balconies, varied textures, recesses, articulation, and design accents on all building elevations are integrated to enhance the overall architectural style of the building. 4. The height, bulk, and scale of the residential building are comparable to height limits on surrounding properties and existing building heights throughout the northern half of Newport Center. The building is designed to provide variation and modulation for visual interest, especially at the higher floors. The front fagades include both vertical and horizontal offsets and utilize a variation of building materials to provide enhanced visual relief. The project's orientation toward Newport Center Drive and San Clemente Drive creates a cohesive and visual connection to the interior of Newport Center. 5. Mechanical equipment for the residential units have been located within enclosures at the roof level to reduce noise impacts and the enclosures will provide effective screening below the roof parapet level to minimize aesthetic impacts. 121 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of _ 6. The project has been designed to avoid long-term conflicts among uses, such as noise, vibration, lighting, odors, and similar impacts. The podium wall provides a buffer between a portion of the top floor parking garage units and the adjacent commercial development to the east and west and the residential development to the north. 7. Walkways and egress are sufficient throughout the site as reviewed by the Building Division and the City Traffic Engineer. 8. Pursuant to the Zoning Code, the project provides the required 200 residential parking spaces, and 50 guest parking spaces, which are provided entirely on site. Additionally, the use of valet and the parking management increases the number of parking spaces. 9. Access to the site, on-site circulation, and parking areas are designed to provide standard -sized parking spaces, adequate drive aisles, and the minimum vehicle turning radius to provide safe access for residents and guests, emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. 10. The project's primary access would be at a new curb cut across from the intersection of San Clemente Drive and Santa Maria Road, and would include two main entry lanes and a guard station that would be setback from San Clemente Drive by approximately 60 feet. An exit lane would be adjacent to the entry lanes, though separated by a landscaped median and the guard station. The entry lanes would lead into a motor court that will be used for drop-off/pick- up of residents and guests, short-term parking, and pedestrian access to the building lobby. 11. Operationally, the project will provide 24-hour valet service to residents and guests. The use of valet will optimize the area available for parking and ensure all residents and guests can park on-site. The final valet/parking management plan is subject to the review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 12. The project does not change any street parking configurations as no parking is allowed on San Clemente Drive. The site design provides three curb cuts, one each for ingress and egress and one for emergency and delivery vehicle access. The project provides adequate sight distance at each driveway, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. 13. Landscaping is provided throughout the site in areas that are not utilized by the existing units or areas for parking circulation. The project's perimeter and street landscaping will complement the street tree pattern, enhance the pedestrian experience, and soften the view of the building facade. The majority of setback 122 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 6 of areas are landscaped. A variation of ornamental groundcover, vines, shrubs, and trees are utilized to help soften and buffer the massing of the building and podium at ground level. 14. New street trees will be provided along San Clemente Drive. 15. The existing pedestrian sidewalk and bicycle lanes along the San Clemente Drive frontage are maintained and will connect future residents to Fashion Island and Newport Center's other commercial and entertainment opportunities. To further facilitate vehicle independence and pedestrian use of nearby resources, the project includes storage for resident bicycles (two bicycles per unit) to take advantage of existing bicycle infrastructure within the City. 16. The project is subject to the City's Water -Efficient Landscape requirements (NBMC Chapter 14.17) and compliance will be confirmed at plan check prior to issuing building permits. 17. The proposed residential development provides a series of common outdoor living areas that includes pools, a dog run, open plazas, and landscaped seating. Half of the units provide private outdoor living space in the form of balconies or decks. 18. The site is visible from several coastal view roads including Avocado Avenue, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Center Drive as identified by the General Plan. These roads have been designated as Coastal View Roads because portions of them offer views of the coast. In this case, although the project may be seen from portions of these designated coastal view roads; it will not block or obstruct views of the coast. As shown in in the view simulations and discussed in the analysis of the Aesthetics chapter of the Final EIR, the project does not affect existing public views does not detract from the character of the area. The overall project height is consistent with the height limit on properties in the northern area of Newport Center and existing building heights on nearby blocks. Finding: C. The proposed development is not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The residential project has been designed to ensure that potential conflicts with surrounding land uses are minimized to the extent possible to maintain a healthy 123 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 7 of _ environment for both businesses and residents by providing an architecturally pleasing project with articulation and building modulations to enhance the urban environment consistent with development in Newport Center. 2. The proposed building has been designed to accommodate and provide safe access for emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. Emergency, refuse and delivery trucks will utilize the service entry drive that leads to parking level 1 at the easterly side of the property. The final size, design, location, and screening of the refuse enclosures will comply with the requirements of NBMC Section 20.30.120 (Solid Waste & Recyclable Materials Storage), ensuring compatibility with the on- site and adjacent uses. 3. The project, which would introduce approximately 224 new residents, would not impact the ability of public service providers, including police, fire protection, and emergency services, to meet standard levels or jeopardize the ability to meet existing response times. 4. The project redevelops an existing lot and introduces new residents into an area of Newport Beach with the intent of providing opportunities for residents to live in a pedestrian -friendly environment close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation. 5. While the project would generate new sources of light, the project site is located in the highly developed, urban Newport Center area that consists of substantial sources of light. Also, all exterior project lighting is required to comply with NBMC Section 20.30.070, which requires all outdoor lighting fixtures to be designed, aimed, located, and maintained to shield adjacent properties from light spillage. 6. The City has sufficient water supply to serve the project, which was accounted for in the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) water demand projections. Also, the project includes the installation of water -efficient fixtures in each unit to reduce water use and landscape irrigation systems designed with weather sensors, timers, and low -flow irrigation devices. 7. The project is within the notification area of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the project is below the maximum transitional imagery surface heights, and thus the project is within the building height limits of the AELUP. The project site also falls outside the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level contour line established by the AELUP and would, therefore, not conflict with any land use compatibility issues related to noise. Finally, the project site does not fall within any of the AELUP Safety Zones, in which certain land uses have been identified as incompatible and restricted. 124 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 8 of 8. The project does not involve the use or manufacture of any hazardous substances that could impact nearby development. Moreover, project construction would comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing application and disposal of any hazardous materials discovered during construction. 9. Roof -top mechanical equipment for each unit is fully enclosed within an equipment screen and is not visible from the public right-of-way. 10. The new construction complies with all Building, Public Works, Fire Codes, City ordinances, and all conditions of approval. WHEREAS, revocation of Use Permit No. 2005-017 is requested by the applicant. Use Permit No. 2005-017 allowed beer and wine sales at the museum. Revocation of Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 which allowed additional flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC is also requested by the applicant. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.68.050(B)(4)(a) (Review Authority's Action), the following finding and fact in support of the revocation are set forth: Finding: D. The permit or approval was issued in error or circumstances under which the permit or approval was granted have been modified to an extent that one or more of the findings that justified the original approval can no longer be made and the public health, safety, and welfare require the revocation or modifications. Fact in Support of Finding: The property is subject to changed circumstances (General Plan amendment to RM) under which the site will no longer be improved with the infrastructure and occupied by the museum contemplated by UP2015-017 and MD2004-059. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications to the project made by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation. Section 2: The City Council hereby approves Site Development Review No. SD2016-001, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 125 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 9 of Section 3: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach, at the request of the Applicant, hereby revokes Use Permit No. 2005-017 and Modification Permit No. MD2004-059, which upon issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, shall become null and void. Section 4: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 6: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. The Museum House Project Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) and adopted "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-_ is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 7: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon the effective date of City Council Ordinance No. 2016-_ adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 291h day of November, 2016. Diane B. Dixon Mayor 126 Resolution No. 2616 - Page 10 of ATTEST: Leilani I. Brawn City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Aaron C. arp City Attorney Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval Exhibit B: Project Plans 127 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 11 of _ EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Project -specific conditions are in italics) 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval. (Except as modified by applicable conditions of approval.) 2. The site development review authorizes the approval of a 100 -unit condominium development as specified in the adopted Planned Community Development Plan. 3. The project shall adhere to the development standards established in the amended PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan) for the project site. 4. The applicant shall comply with all project design features, mitigation measures, and standard conditions contained within the approved mitigation monitoring reporting program (MMRP) of EIR SCH No. 2016021023 for the project. 5. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent. 6. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this approval. 7. A copy of the Resolution, including these conditions of approval shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building permits. 8. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the project file. The plans shall be identical to those approved by all City departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall include architectural sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches. The plans shall accurately depict the elements approved by this Site Development Review and shall highlight the approved elements such that they are readily discernible from other elements of the plans. 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division. 128 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 12 of 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, Fair Share Traffic Fees shall be paid for the new dwelling units (currently $1,748.00 per new additional dwelling unit) in accordance with NBMC Chapter 15.38. The applicant shall be credited for the reduction in commercial square footage and the remaining balance shall be charged or credited to the applicant. 11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, San Joaquin Transportation Corridor Fees shall be paid for the new dwelling units (currently $2,398.00 per new additional dwelling unit). The applicant shall be credited for the reduction in commercial square footage and the remaining balance shall be charged or credited to the applicant. 12. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Division demonstrating compliance with the requirements of NBMC Chapter 14.17 (Water -Efficient Landscaping Ordinance). 13. All landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. Replacement street trees shall be a minimum 36 -inch box and shall be replaced at the applicant's cost. 14. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a valet parking and management plan subject to the review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer and the Planning Division. 15. The parking structure will be valet operated by parking attendants. 16. The guard house shall be manned 24 hours a day and turnaround shall be provided on-site, when necessary, with direction from parking attendants. The turn around may be provided within the motor court, behind the main entrance gates. 17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall prepare photometric study in conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. 129 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 13 of 18. All trash shall be stored within the building or within dumpsters stored in the trash enclosure (three walls and a self -latching gate) or otherwise screened from view of neighboring properties, except when placed for pick-up by refuse collection agencies. The final design of the trash enclosure shall be subject to the review and approval of Community development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. 19. The exterior of the property shall be maintained free of litter and graffiti at all times. The homeowner's association shall provide for daily removal of trash, litter, debris, and graffiti from the premises and on all abutting sidewalks within 20 feet of the premises. 20. The homeowner's association shall ensure that the trash dumpsters and/or receptacles are maintained to control odors. This may include the provision of either fully self-contained dumpsters or periodic steam cleaning of the dumpsters, if deemed necessary by the Planning Division. Cleaning and maintenance of trash dumpsters shall be done in compliance with the provisions of NBMC Title 14, including all future amendments (including Water Quality related requirements). 21. All proposed signs shall be in conformance with an approved Comprehensive Sign Program for the project site and provisions of NBMC Chapter 20.42 (Signs). 22. A Special Events Permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside the normal operational characteristics of the approved use, as conditioned, or that would attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include any form of on-site media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the Newport Beach Municipal Code to require such permits. 23. During construction activities, the project applicant shall allow representatives of cultural organizations, including Native American tribes (i.e., Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians), to access the project site on a volunteer basis to monitor grading and excavation activities. Representatives shall follow all site safety and security protocols. 24. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Planning Commission shall review the final exterior building materials, landscaping, and resident site amenities for substantial conformance with the project plans as approved. 25. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may 130 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 14 of arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of the Museum House Residential Project including, but not limited to, the General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001, Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001, Site Development Permit No. SD2016-001, Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001, Traffic Study No. TS2015-004, Development Agreement No. DA2016-001, certification of Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. Fire Department Conditions 26. Provide on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. See NBFD Guideline B.01 for determination of fire flow. The number of fire hydrants will also be determined by the required fire flow for the structure. CFC Sec. 507.5.1 27. Effective emergency responder radio coverage (800 MHz) will be required and shall comply with Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline & Standards D.05 Public Safety Radio System Coverage. CFC Sec. 510.1 28. One (1) Gurney sized elevator with phase I recall will be required as per California Building Code (CBC) Sec. 3002.4a. 29. In buildings with an occupied floor more than 120 feet above the lowest level of Fire Department vehicle access, no fewer than two fire service access elevators, or all elevators, whichever is less, shall be provided in accordance with Section 3007. Each fire service access elevator shall have a capacity of not less than 3500 pounds. CBC Sec. 403.6.1. Only one (1) fire service access elevator shall be required to provide Gurney access. 30. The fire service access elevator shall open into a fire service access elevator lobby. CBC Sec. 3007.7. 31. The fire service access elevator lobby shall have direct access from the enclosed elevator lobby to a smokeproof enclosure complying with Section 909.20. Exception: Access to a smokeproof enclosure shall be permitted to be through a protected path of travel that has a level of fire protection not less than the elevator lobby enclosure. The protected path shall be separated from the 131 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 15 of enclosed elevator lobby through an opening protected by a smoke and draft control assembly in accordance with Section 716.5.3. 32. Actuation of any building fire alarm -initiating device shall initiate Phase I emergency recall operation on all fire service access elevators in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Division 1, Chapter 4 Subchapter 6, elevator Safety Orders. CFC Sec. 3007.2 33. The fire service access elevator lobby shall be enclosed with a smoke barrier having a fire -resistance rating of not less than 1 hour, except that lobby doorways shall comply with Section 3007.7.3. CBC Sec. 3007.7.2 34. Other than the door to the hoistway, each doorway to a fire service access elevator lobby shall be provided with a 3/ hour fire door assembly complying with section 716.5. The fire door assembly shall also comply with the smoke and draft control door assembly requirements of Section 716.5.3.1 with the UL 1784 test conducted without the artificial bottom seal. CBC Sec. 3007.7.3 35. The enclosed fire service access elevator lobby shall be not less than 150 square feet in area with a minimum dimension of 8 feet. CBC Sec. 3007.7.4 36. The following features serving each fire service access elevator shall be supplied by both normal power and Type 60/Class 2/ Level 1 standby power: a. Elevator equipment. b. Elevator hoistway lighting. c. Elevator machine room ventilation and cooling equipment. d. Elevator controller cooling equipment. CBC Sec. 3007.9 37. Wires or cables that are located outside of the elevator hoistway and machine room and that provide normal or standby power, control signals, communication with the car, lighting, heating, air condition, ventilation and fire -detecting systems to fire service access elevators shall be protected by construction having a fire - resistance rating of not less than 2 hours, or shall be circuit integrity cable having a fire -resistance rating of not less than 2 hours. CBC Sec. 3007.9.1 38. A class I standpipe hose connection in accordance with Section 905 shall be provided in the interior exit stairway and ramp having direct access from the fire service access elevator lobby. CBC Sec. 3007.10 39. The exit enclosure containing the standpipe shall have access to the floor without passing through the fire service access elevator lobby. CBC Sec. 3007.10.1 40. Building and structures shall be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 and a secondary water supply where required by Section 903.3.1.1 and a secondary water supply where 132 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 16 of required by Section 903.3.5.2. A sprinkler water -flow alarm -initiating device and a control valve with a supervisory signal -initiating device shall be provided at the lateral connection to the riser for each floor. CBC Sec. 403.3 41. Redundant fire pump systems shall be required for high-rise buildings having an occupied floor more than 200 feet above the lowest level of Fire Department vehicle access. Each fire pump system shall be capable of automatically supplying the required demand of the automatic sprinkler and standpipe systems. CBC Sec. 403.3.2.1 42. An automatic secondary on-site water supply having a usable capacity of not less than the hydraulically calculated sprinkler demand including the hose stream requirement shall be provide for high-rise buildings and Group 1-2 occupancies having occupied floor located more than 75 feet above the lowest level of Fire Department vehicle access assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E, or F as determined by the California Building Code. The secondary water supply shall have duration of not less than 30 minutes as determined by the occupancy hazard classification in accordance with NFPA 13, whichever is greater. CFC Sec. 903.3.5.2 43. Required fire pumps shall be supplied by connections to no fewer than two water mains located in different streets. For purposes of this project, a water main off of San Clemente Drive and a second water main off of the project's access lane located along the east edge of the property satisfy this requirement. Separate supply piping shall be provided between each connection to the water main and the pumps. Each connection and the supply piping between the connection and the pumps shall be sized to supply the flow and pressure required for the pumps to operate. CBC Sec. 403.3.2 44. Fire pumps shall be located in rooms that are separated from all other areas of the building by 2 -hour fire barriers constructed in accordance with Section 797 or 2 -hour horizontal assemblies constructed in accordance with section 711, or both CFC Sec. 913.2.1 45. Engine -driven fire pumps and electric drive fire pumps supplied by generators shall both be provided with an on -premises fuel supply, sufficient for not less than 8 -hour full -demand operation at 100 percent of the rated pump capacity in addition to all other required supply demands in accordance with Sections 9.6 and 11.4.2 of NFPA 20 and this section. CFC Sec. 913.2.1 46. Area smoke detectors shall be provided in accordance with this section. Smoke detectors shall be connected to an automatic fire alarm system. The activation of any detector required by this section shall activate the emergency voice/alarm communication system in accordance with Section 907.5.2.2. In addition to 133 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 17 of smoke detectors required by Sections 907.2.1 through 907.2.1-0, smoke detectors shall be located as follows: a. In each mechanical equipment, electrical, transformer, telephone equipment or similar room which is not provided with sprinkler protection. b. In each elevator machine room and in elevator lobbies. CFC Sec 907.2.13.1.1 47. Smoke detectors listed for use in air duct systems shall be provided in accordance with this section and the California Mechanical Code. The activation of any detector required by this section shall initiate a visible and audible supervisory signal at a constantly attended location. CFC Sec. 907.2.13.1.2 48. A fire alarm system shall be provided in accordance with Section 907.2.13. CBC Sec. 403.4.3 49. Smoke detectors will be required for the individual dwelling units as per CFC Sec. 907.2.11.2. 50. A high-rise building shall be equipped with a standpipe system as required by CFC Section 905.3. CBC Sec. 403.4.3 51. An emergency voice/alarm communication system shall be provided with a fire command center for fire department operations. CFC Sec. 911.1 52. The location and accessibility of the fire command center shall be approved by the fire chief. The fire command center shall be located at the perimeter of the structure and accessible from the fire access roadway. CFC Sec. 911.1.1 53. The fire command center shall be separated from the remainder of the building by not less than a 1 -hour fire barrier constructed in accordance with Section 707 or horizontal assembly constructed in accordance with Section 711, or both. CFC Sec. 911.1.2 54. The fire command center shall be a minimum of 200 square feet with a minimum dimension of 10 feet. CFC Sec. 911.1.3 55. A layout of the fire command center and all features required by this section to be contained therein shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. CFC Sec. 911.1.4 56. The fire command center shall comply with NFPA 72 and shall contain the following features: a. The emergency voice/alarm communication system control unit. b. The fire department communications system. 134 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 18 of _ c. Fire alarm system zoning annunciator panel required by CFC Section 907.6.3.3. d. Annunciator unit visually indicating the location of the elevators and whether they are operational. e. Status indicators and controls for air distribution systems. f. The fire-fighter's control panel required by CFC Section 909.16 for smoke control systems installed in the building. g. Controls for unlocking stairway doors simultaneously. h. Sprinkler valve and water flow detector display panels. L Emergency and standby power status indicators. j. A telephone for Fire Department use with controlled access to the public telephone system k. Fire pump status indicators. I. Schematic building plans indicating the typical floor plan and detailing the building core, means of egress, fire protection systems, fire -fighting equipment and fire department access and the location of fire walls, fire barriers, fire partitions, smoke barriers and smoke partitions. m. An approved Building Information Card that contains all items listed in CFC Sec. 911.1 (13). n. Work table. o. Generator supervision devices, manual start and transfer features. p. Public address system, where specifically required by other sections of this code. q. Elevator fire recall switch in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Division1, Chapter 4, Subchapter 6, Elevator safety Orders. r. Elevator emergency or standby power selector switch, where emergency or standby power is provided. s. A master switch for unlocking elevator lobby doors permitted by Section 1008.1.4.6. CFC Sec. 911.1.5 57. The fire command center shall be provided with an independent ventilation or air- conditioning system. CFC Sec. 911.1.6 58. Emergency power outlets are required as per Newport Beach Fire Department Amendment to the California Fire Code. Amendment states: Provided and install electrical outlets (120 volt, duplex) that are connected to the emergency generator circuitry/ system when a generator is required by Section 604.2 of the CFC. The electrical outlets shall be provide in the flowing locations: a. In the main exit corridor of each floor, adjacent to each exit enclosure. b. On every level in every stairwell. c. In each elevator lobby. d. In public assembly areas larger than 1,500 square feet. e. In every fire control room. f. In such other areas as may be designated by the fire code official. 135 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 19 of 59. High-rise buildings shall be provided with a passive or active smoke control system or combination thereof in accordance with Section 909. CBC Sec. 403.4.7.1 60. Smoke proof enclosures shall be constructed and shall consist of an enclosed interior exit stairway that conforms to California Fire Code Section 1022.2 and an open exterior balcony or vestibule meeting the requirements of this section. Where access to the roof is required by the California Fire Code, such access shall be from the smokeproof enclosure (all exiting stairwells) where a smokeproof enclosure is required. CFC Sec. 909.20 61. The smokeproof enclosure shall be separated from the remainder of the building by not less than 2 -hour fire barriers constructed in accordance with Section 707 or horizontal assemblies constructed in accordance with Section 711, or both. Openings are not permitted other than the required means of egress doors. The vestibule shall be separated from the stairway by not less than 2 -hour fire barriers constructed in accordance with California Building Code Section 707.1 (Fore Barrier Requirements) or horizontal assemblies constructed in accordance with California Building Code Section 711.1 (Horizontal Assembly Requirements), or both. The open exterior balcony shall be constructed in accordance with the fire -resistance rating requirements for floor assemblies. CFC Sec. 909.20.2 62. The parking garage shall meet requirements of CFC Sec. 914.5 if applicable. 63. No vehicular parking shall be allowed along the first 200 feet of the access lane located at the eastern property line (beginning at San Clemente Drive). 64. If fire access is to cross a property line then an agreement for access will need to be legally recorded for fire access use. 65. For all vegetated roofing systems abutting combustible vertical surfaces, a Class A -rated roof system complying with ASTM E 108 or UL 790 shall be achieved for a minimum 6 -foot wide continuous border placed around rooftop structures and all rooftop equipment including, but not limited to mechanical and machine rooms, penthouses, skylight, roof vents, solar panels, antenna supports, and building service equipment. CFC Sec. 317.3 66. Buildings or structures that have rooftop gardens or landscaped roofs and that are equipped with a standpipe system shall have the standpipe system extended to the roof level on which the rooftop garden or landscaped roof is located. CFC Sec. 905.3.8 67. A 2A 10BC fire extinguisher will be required for the R-2, M and B occupancies. The extinguishers must be located so that it is not more than 75 feet travel 136 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 20 of _ distance to reach an extinguisher from the front door of each unit. CFC Sec. 906.1 68. The parking garage is classified as an ordinary hazard occupancy which requires a 2A 20BC fire extinguisher. This fire extinguisher will cover 1500 square feet of floor area and the extinguisher must be located so that it is not more than 50 feet travel distance to reach an extinguisher from the garage floor area. CFC Sec. 906.1 69. Car charging stations will need to be shown on plans and must comply with National Electrical Code Sec. 625.5. 70. Address shall be placed on all new buildings in such a position that is plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. CFC Sec. 505.1 71. Stairwell signage shall meet Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline & Standards D.01. 72. Areas with an "A" occupancy will need to meet all requirements for an assembly type occupancy referenced in CFC Sec. 1028. 73. Dumpster locations will need to meet Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline & Standard A.16 with regard to requirements for locations of dumpsters. 74. A pictorial symbol of a standardized design designating which elevators are fire service access elevators shall be installed on each side of the hoistway door frame on the portion of the frame at right angles to the fire service access elevator lobby. CBC Sec. 3007.7.5 75. The fire service access elevator shall be continuously monitored at the fire command center by a standard emergency service interface system meeting the requirements of NFPA 72. CBC Sec. 3007.8 76. A telephone or other two-way communications system connected to an approved constantly attended station shall be provided at not less than every fifth floor in each stairway where the doors to the stairway are locked. CBC Sec. 403.5.4 77. Provide standby power system as per CFC Sec. 604.2.14.1. 78. A Knox box will be required for the proposed structure. The Knox box must contain keys which will gain entrance to the building in an emergency situation. Also, keys to any mechanical room or equipment room will need to be placed in the Knox box. CFC Sec. 506.1 137 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 21 of 79. Barbecues on balconies will require fire sprinklers in balcony area over the barbecues. Terraces open to above and with Barbeques will not require sprinklers. 80. Access areas will need to meet Newport Beach Guideline C.01 with regard to weight supported, turnaround, widths, etc. 81. Fire lane access markings for the front entrance shown on Fire Master Plan will need to comply with Newport Beach Guideline C.02 with signs and red curbs or signs only. 82. Rooftop garden or landscaped roof areas shall not exceed 15,625 square feet in size for any single area with a maximum dimension of 125 feet in length or width. A minimum 6 -foot wide clearance consisting of a Class A -rated roof system complying with ASTM E 108 or UL 790 shall be provide between adjacent rooftop gardens or landscaped roof areas. The gardens and landscaped areas at the podium deck level, and rooftop pools are not subject to these limitations. CFC Sec. 317.2 83. Clearances with the gas fire table must be met as per the manufactures recommendations and the California mechanical Code. Building Division Conditions 84. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City -adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans must meet all applicable State Disabilities Access requirements. Approval from the Orange County Health Department is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. 85. The applicant shall employ the following best available control measures ("BACMs") to reduce construction -related air quality impacts: Dust Control • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas. • Sweep or wash any site access points within two hours of any visible dirt deposits on any public roadway. • Cover or water twice daily any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material. • Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if average winds exceeding 25 mph. 138 Emissions Resolution No. 2016 - Page 22 of Require 90 -day low-NOx tune-ups for off road equipment. Limit allowable idling to 30 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment Off -Site Impacts • Encourage carpooling for construction workers. • Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods. • Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways. • Wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site. Sweep access points daily. Encourage receipt of materials during non -peak traffic hours. Sandbag construction sites for erosion control. Fill Placement The number and type of equipment for dirt pushing will be limited on any day to ensure that SCAQMD significance thresholds are not exceeded. 86. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the General Permit for Construction Activities shall be prepared, submitted to the State Water Quality Control Board for approval and made part of the construction program. The project applicant will provide the City with a copy of the NOI and their application check as proof of filing with the State Water Quality Control Board. This plan will detail measures and practices that will be in effect during construction to minimize the project's impact on water quality. 87. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the approval of the Building Division and Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division. The WQMP shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that no violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements occur. 88. A list of "good house -keeping" practices will be incorporated into the long-term post -construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be used, stored or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may include frequent parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills, limited use of harmful fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of storm water away from potential sources of pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list and describe all structural and non-structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also identify the entity responsible for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs. 89. A grading and shoring bond shall be required prior to grading or building permit issuance. The bond shall be based on the total value of excavation, grading and shoring work. 139 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 23 of 90. A geotechnical report shall be submitted to the Building Division for review prior to permit issuance. The review shall include a study on the potential for liquefaction. 91. A drainage and hydrology study shall be submitted for review prior to permit issuance. 92. Cal Green and Energy commissioning and acceptance testing may be required at the time of permit issuance. 93. A shoring plan shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. Tie back system will not be allowed under street or public improvements without obtaining public works approval. 140 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 24 of _ EXHIBIT "B" PROJECT PLANS 141 OCMA ENTITLEMENT SET OCTOBER 12, 2016 �iSA OCMA f BS4 San Clemente Drive V.M}'. P 0. 5Trx 1 AACWT279 ` t r.•. w e. S COVER SHEET suaEr�x_ra„a m eAWa co- s nrirs 4£y '19Yw'f6 YIiP -. LK.u]PEL9f - aBrt.AIE)I.CSWM R� s4 '-NQ;.�FlfLt.Vag tdi�IR 1'YiGiA�.9Ei. _ — RNiIMi ReTY-SKI-iOGPf �W�gEE1 R1RivdihAV[-XYZ rW5a4a5 IVM6P+9g11 YXNfra Myo- R RELATED 142 IROJECT MFORMATION le Address: RESIDENTIAL DEttSr Y 0 San C memle Drh� 100 Micz.9ftipefAcre PARKING: wpod Beach, CA 925fi0 RgEF +IF ARCHnEC1 DE4Q1AACWTECT .RMMIE--------------------------- WE';as ra.■■YsY■war.cs.:l;' RESIDENTIAL 200 STALLS nrr:rrnAaYr. ls+mse GUEST 50 STALLS .CAW. as UimlJ r wbre FSAMut.+ Trlxtsac a l arrssY R5n%Wti__-_--------------------25ISTALLS *WYMur■+/+o4 r�mt rteq3+x asaroll�s L/1�6Cn Luc usEcrosm RESIDENTIAL _ 200 STALLS :1L bF— GUEST STALLS 50 sr„Bn. �opwaw m almum-o i -pi. elm sru+AsoCAWA cmu—CAr3 lUI69COLPLANPi.5&2SPAmSP€NLw14r' wE51CD1mAM-5 mzvobee mM fl -1.3w T n�+x�so s x SPACESPER I.MIPTD56MOZIWFAAFi-tRFOR MVPAWQ D>tia.w fl-Mm'm TOJECT DEWAPT10N FLOOR AREA f PROJECT CONSISTS OF (11 MULTI -STORY IST FLOOR AFEt 21.40 SF 191HR00RAI1FJl 16J21 SIF -SIDENTLSLBUIDING. 2WROORWA 17gNSF ISTHROOFILEA 16p1tSF ,STORIES OFRESIDEN'T1AL 3RD9DOR"A. 17,591SF 16THROOB)Xk, 1501151 -EYELSOfUNDERGROUND PARKiNG ATHR_OORMEA: 1739TSF uTHROORAFEA H5a6SF ALDINGSHIALLBECOMPLETELY SPANKLERED, 5TH FLOMAFEJL- 17NSF 10HRMAFE STH RAXRAEEA 16215 SF t5MRAORAAEA lk%SF IMSF GAL1}ESCRF71I M A a 'It w. ft wr... *.t: on a ,cram B ADA sawn a M s ; a. ��� 14 � SMI w 4 MW ■[r0�.0 w BPM t. 7TH FLMAPFA 16,329SF 2681 RDORA)951� 1495951 6THFLOORAKk IMSF 21THFLOMA%k- I&W8F n aay.s ca +t a wws .a co.s .•A w n wn. 9TH FLOOR Af1EA 16,31951 ZN FLOCA M mm EF r 'm W-0. af.•► >� .■D � .■awn'+s rr.sra r•♦a...� a *o ,acw.r. IM FLOOR APEk 96.325 SF 22FDROORAFFk 12 15 6F YM w Ywwe■+t.sa+ArB c..a •u+ v - ■. ec r•Ati • ttTHFLONAFU 15229SF 24TH -FtOORXU 11,726 SF P000. YBie DMIa.■f sw D-E�.L Yi•O:1K MO S•aMi n 10 V W W sC■r +.o■ a■D u o as .+ aYr• ..vAs •aw u w s � +Bo w am a.u: no r•[ r•w u.A.s :^.r• 1TTH Fi4ORA 4 IEMSF $ STH FIOOi ARK 11,71 SF k so +aa, n a■ a:.ous ++e•cs .a urns .ua •saw. ". = CA r)iQ� M y■rpA+rY(( •■ M fYP WJ rb +a +orvY iti 13TH FLOLTIAiE1 161''1 SF TOTAL 191,1515E +s■ooaewa■u..Pw. acm sus w.ons ..o wns wcr• a• .Do a es t. Dw■ a■ A naao-r. sa •a++u_ -------- -`-------`-------'__--.-__-______� PAirIONG STALtCiUF#E GTbOSS ARFJS. 15828 S .al' tWM. l ■[.M. 0 CFL .s'4.K en 3.G• .l�S •maw. e.•x.. +. ro. a wu. -C s+� onve. Yc LEVEL Pt - 60x'59 SF we w , 4 .rsr..e7 tr sr aw.t I W V . •+t l •tea�to we 0& .6 W :Y.t'r a■ n< 100 CN sm .RT S •c womma Rw.+9 •`■T.. + 110. +IOY_ •�Q .N., a A.bMc YCN@l LEVEL P2 TOTAL GROSS HUKDLNGAREA, 55S69 SF 506.966 SF JLDINGCO0ECALIFORNIA BUILDIGCODE 21113 3TE'CBC M$&K2015CMEFFECTIVE iVt0*201T TD'TAL"QPQWFLQQB-MF.P---------- ------- RES:—,7 _ RLTLDWG: FLG -_ - 1AT1Q 391.158$F 143:11 JTLD>INGTYPE OFCONSFRUCTIOft 'PE I -A. FULLY SPAINKLERED HOrErG+k ICLos IA 6AC 41Lfi4r SPq-PLkVnCOfikhm r dp 3VE9NING AGENCY: TY OF NEIYPORT BEACH NNE DW ELLNG UNITS (BEDROOM + FIXTURE COUNT): 2 BA 3 EA ' DR _r B.A- -- _ _ TOTAL -- 54 UNITS UNITS - 100UIITS LOT ZONE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION IdRbgTraj PC -9 Sm1ea,Tx.ptaa +L+i12t6i{�: OPEI'1SPACE: S 30POED ZON E - RM -100 REQUIRED___--___---- )TAREA AND LOT AREA COVERAt R11J'5N6W§0CDACE 7syr. -p Ffg IT -------- COMf.40N INDOOR SPACE 5W S.F. 7,5]-OgF 500 SF A Mq o2� gg2gq q Cpm. Iiia#� 00apa1 PRMATEOPEN SPACE 30S-FPER5L.OFUNITS 1,500SF Tycr{ 2SiSilEA� ?I TOTALREOVIRED- 9,500 SF ............ 86Al2g4reaF) PRQv1Dm COMMON OPEN SPACE GROUND LEVEL OLaDOOfT AMENITIES • 52,523 SF 44,365 SF 3T6ACK5 _TBACK : WCL.EMENTEDR -------------------- 151=1= LEv_ELZ0U1 Q4AAWERIIY_---------------DRSE DE YARD - 5 FT TOTAL LAAO-SCAPM f 10% A1WJ - 17,581 SF =AR YARD - 5 FT TOTAL AIOW AVOSCAPED SPACE - 3e.536 SF 10VIDEO: vi'GLE1jEN bw------------------ i5FT COWAOONRVOORSPACE.. 19.343 SF DE YARD - (OKI 1D FT GRDL94D LEVEL INDOOR AMENITY - 6,991 SF EAR YARD - 19 FT LEVEL 2 INDOOR AMEWITY - 12,345 SF EIGHT fyO�xi{PeBcdst905'�84 •1 HxftAls�i 29SE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 21,444 SF 7AdWAHe4hIAbomFYM1•hP-,ft el kmi?9Ct;?5! ---W11aN5TANCES%504:AMNk� ----------------99UNFTS TOTAL PRiOYDED: 93,310 SF VoWMin H*t 29T`6"O(%dcl1ast(kcpl *a) VX* POW 00 SPACE UATOWIGEWPM&TDESIGN % L SImdRteas2LsAKfPubt2 EAC THEIEO0W91FaT14. �{ C 110 San Cleme+lte Drive r!.B€FJ AAt T1IrN ARC11aRCTs . . , ■ r w [ r s r ' r*.r .-IonuB r - r� ------------------------- 2tre..� roo� I I affu.•rJr. �eYea.+r+va •rI i -__ ------------'ti 7``'\FYI I. • m--••xwwrw �. �a.■.x+mrc:rf rz+. � I r FI F ca ttr T iN, 5 +•--•------- N IN n - 11L +lsAGB.a■.c �►:Ye w(L�.S .�.[Y... ,Eies_.�a+,•, ..n?+n4a.. �.r�a.c...c.-na � I � s.rzu►:. swCaE#IEtar6 DR, I i aI w:`I SITE PLAN Yr l+ROJEE' SLPh4A Ai.Y 7r GRELATED 143 CY�r..W0101 F w.rsII.CIBr>•� 9lYT fLiw650Ppi 51A�M15Fb9r� 5mpav> M . NQ24 !i 2 r�iu� CR 1p1VYcaw1 �Y ARiA .wr53 4rrlit`� PYS S .D60fll.rNlrNILS .tlCf15 �br nwCe6++{ 'P5u4 RAMSA 654 San Clemnnle Drive P:r�[�;; hhl S?EF;i ARC]lkTECTF Parr - N f. 5 r 5 lNF..r fu.@aA/x.OScl .4r rcS. �® OOI.CY011ml'IM O.[L A.r S�rOYs' 4}t gnb➢C4 'm Y. (� r�le!!3 NLCM _ HiQ ref la tPl.S nS�NAWI01iL6 P.pOpll. 'aS+ay vAMC iQ*i -�yi SR OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS - COMMON OPEN WACC G R E L AT E D 144 R"SA MVE QCMA Y W R ELATED 954 San GFemsnte Drive t?iT€N SPACE 01AGRAdw15 RIVATF t�PfaV SP 1C€ W-45 .- OJA STEW. ARGlrrtm , —.7 .B.c :�w_•arc 7.; r � 145 I � - .�'�':, �4:'�P3d--' XMi>YUM1'O • �Y�� - _..._ �, ICF TI I A-'-_ ! � •vvl � i Ulu 'zi -• 'N6LKMt L /" ` / XM1':1111nfr3'ul p.i i'AI •IK ._ i1A11.4k7MiA PF �� XIYJRNB['Y ZYSi ��"25C Lf i. � iWfT{-.XR - 3iS . 7'---___«��..r ✓ /� o p 'a+1�M11E522.aY S LSF P41E--iii.l ffi• :{]�4REiFSE;.. . �x. I , us -EVLL 1f LEVEL Z LEVEL 3 r45 TYP.! v ¢ LEVEL 73T -T3 riR.i _EGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY `i1rWJ11.8iPYO4i1 V' [BYYk1M.4Ym410r1m CWlml+-iurtUrJl ss YitT. nwaft oix VaCl u -s1 O CpwbM. wlQaPl s/ Se''1T-wnE; (Fd N'1N�sb Cawml.avinOOMv 3 P4E1. RMIFQIHiYA�u.q CNYPI-YTOLi1 MI\T � gplRl]11-EIp09R.E.r: � SCUiIlbu-»OCF1'.FER � GOf1Y.-.0001. YBQ � CERIbI•.ebb. RlFt .6 .l IAIa a ibffR-beC.v iEalX � fMwLFE-QHII SR.I:t� � Acuate-w]31g%£ '� q.YRE-P919J� u /wx+[[.0'G1e SI.6 �y W] C lO� u+f-fi 1 -r w+t6 c 7V c B S] l'IR{py/yb]S#606. 53.:£`Ju `: ri c?1]I'- a#WI(� R{bE40RY1R11fd �t£[T$441k;i111tld VKi ]gYKIGB ]•Ila1E YKIY ll.fc EID41 c..lY;RUBA Y... S.'�P' WfB ZPEN!P4T R�Jc hT ®SmiHl[. efae KF'-£�IL8SC4F:3�'JO R%-,x+l a} tl91o.7 iP.E+6'S BEp1�.glai-Me bl.s �bHa!)±FE[_4A+HC'FlFiOcl iiE •. 9+GI Me'a'2 Gc6Y 01S€ L] 25s _. EIHaelw - Y J... _-bE is4a] �� GC:•.SYR ii. "9 �cy3pAa0 >1K: �Ef'fN•4 a 3Y PSc9� ! XI'ygAMi AAL'[ _ awri£i9i: .Yt]^21►.Plli-v • ]f .• If•]1Yla]S'f �Y " :ef-9153Y..�. c -P> �S I�w• %ST SE' � H M.. lyl.t :. �� Inc.-.Itrtb: � � 2�%1 .' . .•. T'S�.�P37 '��f Gee ..'' T]S�lr'_R_5f f+.�a r.., r esl»� e .-,� _ ]a.mslelsrc muMEJIbIiTl .:kKIY +3cCAi�r1 Ww Vf.¢ 6. QiAr�ii iAn l'J itEa. ID sCYRipi'�4'A ••: �F •1 C• tMCI� .w •I �1BF'aK�SiT I y 1Gfc+td lrf [^1Y mmwdmLzm I—7.WY 'IR•11®4EfWf tltlllYH• �� lei OY .Y wy vK� K SSG -•;- P4f1iA E.ISf4B]A9Qa TW'f aS¢#3Sa� tl[YYPll01£POYK£AOIFKf! n01'RAI/It5➢M10.Mlllc-ICY ]FMft W�G'.#[6! y$, lPl.1 !b 1! OAKS blC'31Ei IlR P.P ]q#6F l<9 Ma:£16gf1•lf'E .EVEL to LEVET ti LF'YEi t6 trVELj _EGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY _�' mels+. o6rbAala �'].uT ...Aa -E mel pacAar« �� ar.T..nllE+mosu este ..#r.-eaEslv�®fs � €ai..>I. cmoo# rFE.. wnrecrw v.etcw � rnsuKovmc•:v sic.. Anwfteasv�is•n r �••, a... 5 I,.r I� �.. cala.on-.leool u.e[ ®cAol. ®oralrwu d` f oaol-�omas.� Q cc�lo..s: oalle*.aa - Yf T-! S _ M. +3 3 S]c 3� +�•4 2 25+Y _ d[s sracF � rwaE-aro-soucE � y5] ]�C nsF E IJ y notal[-osa 3'� 1*3# NZ A P. ff .In ev +y',LIXC�I1pNa �yCl na bin.--�a ��—J '.Rf.L ItUS VCCNHIbvd lvl uflP EM+. YM ��i4llRli6rn �;s��36'�rnc Bn lca.u�em �ecueslcflufn. � C: S S.NI£lM.lfsal�u qs R"SA MVE QCMA Y W R ELATED 954 San GFemsnte Drive t?iT€N SPACE 01AGRAdw15 RIVATF t�PfaV SP 1C€ W-45 .- OJA STEW. ARGlrrtm , —.7 .B.c :�w_•arc 7.; r � 145 LEVEL ve li$TVP.1 LEVEL go R PLEVEL V j FLOOR SUMMARY LEVEL TP' FLOOR SUMMARY EYL €L33 FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY CONNJN-LUTpOOA pa bHl'1 PN'ya110Y1�N nAck EL rf i.Y COYMGa-OOLppM 4YYC1 yir EF. PNNx16 OYEN SYACf FrW p�VFOYI•pYI➢OOaN sNYAI PWYnil IlpY-AI gaNGr It311 �COAaapw bUapppa AR M CT "MM111YNNRACa. A3af ®Epr,WON-pUliWpa 9o: X' p�� -5111—ry�Yl ppNYetl�l-1lmpga 3RAOf �� as � CpwMON-Wppa SRaCE lavF Noma rive- � OpYYOY•wngpa ARACC AnaYl AAM Ns! � epYYal-HleppA 9axf,{ 4a6 {�� L -1-1 CVM4HN-RIOCM3a.eYYCC •�._ C_ � L � � _ _ ._ ..I PAIYATE •OYErt 9PACp l+.+rt IlhaA aaYR'lli UHI9 tl1 11M ,L a... 1 Yi' � YIaYATL•OYAN tYa4E 1 1 w.6 S'v IIFIIT-A dl We6:C uAi Y 1 ! lmrt.p rud ® aY1YYAtr . M'[a RACY taaq 7l WI•• YU SF ' - _SF YY.- - 1 r:,p 51 aa.Itl r� -YFt1 Q rrATE.aP.fN YPaeE n6tl •A � 1 - W.Y -Y 11A „L ©Y a1Y/T[-PRLN RACL 621 V4rA 1( lwrw.r v1rt Y Y 2 ..a xA Nnlr.c 19 .D - .! YI Y uurt.n � 1/nYvl 1 i�Yu Wras •L MV a - I I Np - a • - - Y qK1 !af[-0�ll?ffaaan�cwal :'ti'1 tYtti l6Yt LONIIT4p tf'f YYRapaR FOR - 4f YPYYUTS Ip�4SOW1l9Ril[lYR 1. N [dMdp YFi lata YCa A C tY,Y pEta1 [CNIII RRurR "S'ILYiYaY t4 rz tlNnlr➢pNtt ilYEM 1p YYei•Ar1Y n hRs(Orr.YNffA LC#.if g9�Gt:rS itl Y-cs¢Mmyp(11:I.-1. x at•Fa'C V 6M4 ■EFt YR',4Ar[Pa'EN'FJUEIFHTSI LEVE TA - !LOWER LEVE670WNIIOAAE81 .EVEL 75- LUETEf.14F.VEL jQWKHQME51 R PLEVEL LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY JraNNpw•waoopn..yRAc SFHYP•PYuvAPA [1app WY1GF O,tIF u p9YVwYN-pweeOpA YPAC rWeFTPTaan,Y dew Y.PApC M.^iq u epNYpi•WIYOpa OPAe1 WNA1➢NmpppP'YPaCP ry6 .4ax w+67e 1 4 ©pOYWM•INWpA SPACE _ lw6 _ CLv9 xRA y.n'vs SFFd 211 CP ©COYYOY•I4pptlN YRaC[ YPAVAT!-pPAN OPaCY j�—,Y tM t-�r'.�1K 6_ _ afi ":P- � PMYAI6.OPEw HPaGE I u� LJ PMYff6. bYAry aa'aCE OGMA 850 San Cfernenle Drive +tea R T Al t a i .wRra al.r u cfL6Lcwslnn "aAl1Yn• Y Y=17L RtIY 1p i,Y C{Y➢TYkpa]S Yaa1}aF apt RuE�lw �YFIFliiit YNa 9tliAatTYKdS aJQI! pp;1p Y Cpnnpt AC NR W *xW rnvatf [WA wtr mpY�Am[V OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS PRtVA FE OPEN SPACE r REL7ATED 146 OGIrYA _ $541 $3f1 r.1prt12Jit!r DrivekUeEKi Ah637E111t/JpL`t3RE�-TS - x a 91 F n s +.••. +�••• �b F xv o ag�"Wa'Wrr4 F.5ES 1 9 r ,.q„ ' I• p f 1 Imo oM� oQa v I I i I' 11= C I i I 1�'I I ig I •(J, 91PIC2 I I i i 11 p I �tlt i II ®17 ®OY- (NLIE Q dElr r �I G -J--I _--- - -- Ip - I 1z� - ��f= � I I �.H V"3zi rS:�iOC.` Y:(F.' YB HST:` 1 •'r0 f'F'� I r- R ® �D r r Y I I I 111 1 1 A.gT renA�s, so+�l� ilk ���„ 1 000 �or� ®oo 000 ora®�' I 1 ic.:wl ��:.>Rrar-l:FaeB h l4'•l Y. PJ1.�'SIHL rs- rr I -4eyy,y�gn`yp� Y- I T i I 1 f ��,{ T 1 r ' I I I �' � r r • 1 I .i.l dP.Ysim �� �.�.�.�. �.� .i.L. i. 3 elf r 1 a I i 1 I • PARKING 1 VVV nxo w� �I r� L� FLOOR PLAN - t >_vEt BI r R E L QT E D s.. I r..7i'tiTcli S.sr�-y OGIrYA _ $541 $3f1 r.1prt12Jit!r DrivekUeEKi Ah637E111t/JpL`t3RE�-TS - x a 91 F n s +.••. +�••• r- ' t C Imo oM� oQa v C � 1�'I •(J, 91PIC2 p I �tlt i II ®17 ®OY- (NLIE Q dElr r �I G -J--I _--- - -- Ip - I 1z� - ��f= � I I �.H V"3zi rS:�iOC.` Y:(F.' YB HST:` 1 •'r0 f'F'� I r- R ® �D r r Y Y „ r I Y I A.gT renA�s, so+�l� ilk ���„ rl 000 �or� ®oo 000 ora®�' �I• 1 ' ic.:wl ��:.>Rrar-l:FaeB h I e' I -4eyy,y�gn`yp� Y- I T i I 1 f ��,{ T 1 r ' I I I �' � r r • sn.•srl�r.-s Yrr z li 1 I —. �.�.�. �..���T�. .�. �.�.�.�. �.� .i.L. i. 3 elf —. I i 1 r rte..a.lrsp Aa. s w �rrm�r.+ar=rrr � Y' IParaa�itF•=� ai r�vrcY b'rrr3rl-' t 6t tY - � Imo oM� oQa II ®17 ®OY- (NLIE Q dElr r . -J--I _--- - -- Ip 1 , i � I I �.H V"3zi rS:�iOC.` Y:(F.' YB HST:` 1 •'r0 f'F'� I `' 4+r 1 R ® �D r r Y „ r I Y I A.gT renA�s, so+�l� ilk ���„ rl 000 �or� ®oo 000 ora®�' �I• 1 ' ic.:wl ��:.>Rrar-l:FaeB h I e' I -4eyy,y�gn`yp� Y- I T i I 1 f ��,{ T 1 Y�1 r,�la•aaT-ard'ar4 2 Z cY �w..enna.rP s ' I I I �' � r r • sn.•srl�r.-s Yrr z li 1 I —. �.�.�. �..���T�. .�. �.�.�.�. �.� .i.L. i. 3 a�:< — —. a�Ta-� �.� I I I i 1 r rte..a.lrsp Aa. s w �rrm�r.+ar=rrr � Y' IParaa�itF•=� ai r�vrcY b'rrr3rl-' t 6t tY - r r V es 3 srl- as Ix'w ,r n rt..lr-ur rF rava r11 :s s5Y FLOOR PLAN - t >_vEt BI r R E L QT E D r..7i'tiTcli S.sr�-y 147 d a d WIE€f PilPt9d6 H[llpplpE 1 , , 91 1 E71 r>� n ods fl , , k !r Pr SAS r rY pr3.1' � Ir Yr I � P114�UIPNq IW(INS. II I I I I +....•. I�` I I �u ��4,,, I� I I I I ",.�, «.rl.rs.� I I I I 1 rMu .=M it-' I. -RPr4 I P+ ra i rr II 1M6Y° •� �I VwNIHV•vl,iT4r4'b f vi �1 1 I ! iii F 4 1 fa i I" 1 N +.9Yw-+C4 Ctd Unr nermNi Cwnn- rib ffietnl I aw 14 II5Y I 1 ' sawneE PPrnc I I I�I I I� Ill I I �vmcr�P,aKP.o axuL .Pb [B no aau -' a :term, ; i I I - �� --_. EOLP'�V I ura[n%j Imo. {] ER El ZI PS• em ZI ,1 I� '� Q Q Q flEm_ El] 7rtPrCMriwIF R"SA OCMA 880 San Clemente ❑nve WIE€f PilPt9d6 H[llpplpE 1 I 91 1 E71 r>� n ods ' 1 I 1 I !r Pr SAS r rY pr3.1' i ' (rvl TMwnwM1:.,r H— —U F I. -RPr4 P+ ra �urduaxlP •C6 n.>�wi wwnlr.r.�r rr Pa �I VwNIHV•vl,iT4r4'b f vi F M6M.1 -x a• fa PF N +.9Yw-+C4 Ctd Unr nermNi Cwnn- rib ffietnl S - of aw 14 II5Y sawneE PPrnc I M3 d �� [B no aau -' a MW't"iNol V •.y - �� --_. EOLP'�V Imo. {] ER El ZI PS• em ZI ,1 I� '� Q Q Q flEm_ El] r I'P 44rr r: aP 'a Ia l5 tr I ra 5a rr r rr .P rx av ^ r- rr t r: f jP I o ®a oQIED ea ran nw®o o I Jslnra h II l III _ 1 rWICelyP SE1&rR 1 ' fI OOR PLAN - LEVEL 6- ,IDA FE.1. tiY-!ei+F TA11 RRELATEQ 148 WIE€f PilPt9d6 H[llpplpE (rvl TMwnwM1:.,r H— —U F I. -RPr4 P+ ra �urduaxlP •C6 n.>�wi wwnlr.r.�r rr Pa �I VwNIHV•vl,iT4r4'b f vi F M6M.1 -x a• fa PF N +.9Yw-+C4 Ctd Unr nermNi Cwnn- rib ffietnl S - of aw 14 II5Y TA11 RRELATEQ 148 SSR FAnFlx 0CMA RAMSA IEJ , 0 S.JI an CIE-monle Driveaw RN AMOTICTS FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 2 _WD ATTU SHEET T BRELATED 149 i.vcssr w. - A ac T , �• r 1 • I �t�a I • • I ' I ' 4Y{�ElM aS1 ' � • I I II � - - Ic � I'j 1 F" - xe I�� • ----------------- ------------------ Iq LI I I r •II I - I 1j I I I Y 1 1 11 I I I 1 1 1 , V I i [�. .r.�-�......�.r�r_t� � p � ��.�.� �. �. �.L.L.�. � .�•r.•r_..�..`.���f � � � .raw •r. .�.r.r.i.•L...�.� a ar�wsurr�rw.ur[ a.a.n.wr9arrcr r+al.c olxal•+a:lr•R v.r.+=•u �a.w.,a+Rsw.... r•p? Itraa•uu.r x+.Rw.. aac nnsua uaaw.=..� enalr�wrarwtM=w� a.s.ac awr sa.'»-,� l R 1J. M SA I- oGMA SSii San Clemente Qlive nc�ae�r�vasrau•nacli/Hers . • . , . � . • •`•• ' FLDOR Pt -AN - LEWEt 3 - 6 o.,eiac,nar 1.�_ e�+woaRmurs t st a mus +.3 ne xm zt•.asc G RELATED 150 l - 1 I 1 I "'r I 01 � � 4CMA„ d C A -t Clemente Drive KIAL CMn.SCIAMI,91C11ITFCi3 +} r V r r f. f �•. >�-- A FLOOR PLAN - LEVEt 7 - 14 �.. as aKi.i.u,.+r r,►t..tnraoum..: sn T s. ! agc55. Ye q0 5. ASMI SF G RELATED 151 � ii.-��'��i����.r»iii��i•',''T:>•iii•��T--a�ti������siil.:-sxt•iil�'i•T�'�zii���l =MM""MEM0IFI 10a - vOEiII: .7©01�©iE9�E30i�aE * �a ai i© 17- IxMln tQiaT'�a'*�tE>�o o l a—oolw��=� -=IEa©�o�©©orT Iii IvsFa�r3�s* //,✓\\\ _�_�: ,i I a�ao�o®�IEa®rE'.���IQII�o�={�©o�yQ>��oo>�it�•,-�©o��o�x—s,-��sn�o�� I ; e' 11 I 1 � 1 I II I I I [ I I- I I I [ ; a I aaa—•--•—•—•---.—a—.l�— O [l�Bl a-lifiw i — 01 � � 4CMA„ d C A -t Clemente Drive KIAL CMn.SCIAMI,91C11ITFCi3 +} r V r r f. f �•. >�-- A FLOOR PLAN - LEVEt 7 - 14 �.. as aKi.i.u,.+r r,►t..tnraoum..: sn T s. ! agc55. Ye q0 5. ASMI SF G RELATED 151 � ii.-��'��i����.r»iii��i•',''T:>•iii•��T--a�ti������siil.:-sxt•iil�'i•T�'�zii���l =MM""MEM0IFI 10a - vOEiII: .7©01�©iE9�E30i�aE * �a ai i© - *i I�tsEaii:£3�E J:..-eJta>17�I[�i tQiaT'�a'*�tE>�o o l a—oolw��=� -=IEa©�o�©©orT IvsFa�r3�s* I�rrlotr�s��al�a�o�asEaoe> �©o���* ©o�mQ�s=- a�ao�o®�IEa®rE'.���IQII�o�={�©o�yQ>��oo>�it�•,-�©o��o�x—s,-��sn�o�� 01 � � 4CMA„ d C A -t Clemente Drive KIAL CMn.SCIAMI,91C11ITFCi3 +} r V r r f. f �•. >�-- A FLOOR PLAN - LEVEt 7 - 14 �.. as aKi.i.u,.+r r,►t..tnraoum..: sn T s. ! agc55. Ye q0 5. ASMI SF G RELATED 151 r— -----= X50 San Clemente give kl.KILT A.0 FTFIW MGYI7fiCii •. e w e a s Y , FLOOR PIAN -LEVEL IS- 16 wart un rw� _ �anw Cof.* la• oc. •,.,.[mw ate•. un+.r c� rt . ' x t y ] msals• e. f �xa9 iG• •N 1R 1:1.95 GRELATED 152 • , _ _ I .r tiff I II QQE O >® .iQi>'i�SE�iQi���QQi��a�QQi�>! Q�O�aa1F#Ita>ii>•I t �' n o . .,�• I 1 Qe�i onova—:. phi c/�ct�.eat,.alF 1 .il muQ� �ao�slawl�:a®�Qomum oloQllEzcrs�r�s. iI iI � `.tib \ .. • 1 F I � - � 1 I tk , \ 1 h`; ^N! 1 t' 1 I I J1 _. � \n I I 1 / r 1 I I I I I I I i1 1 1 1 I 1 I t I I t 1 •11' t I 1 � a I 1 • L-------- i _ J I ! e Ot><vE sy rts'_.r X50 San Clemente give kl.KILT A.0 FTFIW MGYI7fiCii •. e w e a s Y , FLOOR PIAN -LEVEL IS- 16 wart un rw� _ �anw Cof.* la• oc. •,.,.[mw ate•. un+.r c� rt . ' x t y ] msals• e. f �xa9 iG• •N 1R 1:1.95 GRELATED 152 • , _ _ V --m— --___--- II QQE O QQ�B�ElQ�90��1QED-�Q.�T....�QQ3ls��©Q�'.o®Q .iQi>'i�SE�iQi���QQi��a�QQi�>! Q�O�aa1F#Ita>ii>•I t �' n o �EaQ�o� EaQ oma,: r Qe�i onova—:. Qrrs[�QEa�o3�fanQn�o�esr' t .il muQ� �ao�slawl�:a®�Qomum oloQllEzcrs�r�s. d i�ti'T" _�Ii��30�-::.-r�s-.r�rr•.-rEjMrjl 1 I t I J1 _. � \n Y I `• I 1 , 1 bra t � -. i lam. � • i 4t tli I � ! L- _.______ A 4 1__ — �.cva u r•xa X50 San Clemente give kl.KILT A.0 FTFIW MGYI7fiCii •. e w e a s Y , FLOOR PIAN -LEVEL IS- 16 wart un rw� _ �anw Cof.* la• oc. •,.,.[mw ate•. un+.r c� rt . ' x t y ] msals• e. f �xa9 iG• •N 1R 1:1.95 GRELATED 152 QQE O QQ�B�ElQ�90��1QED-�Q.�T....�QQ3ls��©Q�'.o®Q .iQi>'i�SE�iQi���QQi��a�QQi�>! Q�O�aa1F#Ita>ii>•I Halal �l ="I= �' n o �EaQ�o� EaQ oma,: r Qe�i onova—:. Qrrs[�QEa�o3�fanQn�o�esr' �wl�lQ—�EaQ�a�* muQ� �ao�slawl�:a®�Qomum oloQllEzcrs�r�s. -- __QQ�®�,"��•,.QO�7�QQl�QOI��Iti�i�"0�3:.r�a�'QOts-F���+-�w�QQE"�- i�ti'T" _�Ii��30�-::.-r�s-.r�rr•.-rEjMrjl X50 San Clemente give kl.KILT A.0 FTFIW MGYI7fiCii •. e w e a s Y , FLOOR PIAN -LEVEL IS- 16 wart un rw� _ �anw Cof.* la• oc. •,.,.[mw ate•. un+.r c� rt . ' x t y ] msals• e. f �xa9 iG• •N 1R 1:1.95 GRELATED 152 m aFrn x_ ------------------------ Y ` —___— --_._ ----------------- -.. �__________ �__.�— ......__ __ _ r i FQ.. II j j l , I II. I j I",jutl a I IjR I uan ' • �, � � •III I ' I � � : \ 3� 6' n xslF ��\ ^ �`- � '., I - III I I '" wss �•.�. rl 1 I I WE I I� ' r _ I e I I --- y -- _-_---------_-_ —______________ ---- __ ------ ---�_ -----_ Ll `■1 1 I Y - —i..—.—.—.—..�.—T���.� sa�rw'.�l � .R �. ..---------------�..:.... ......i.�..... ; r :..:.i.-�...�..�T�.*.�.. �3..-n'•n --.,�. 01!1111� arter. A: u.,v µuw ----- --------- I I I, Il, jI Ilj - IIIt IIj I ill1 I II III �r�rrfllrrarr�ri������w�t�wr� t��lr�lrrirtlitr��m��i i � I rFarrt+E�t9 Awmm �I���®©�v�®©o�o�®©�®o�®®trw�ra[�Irrt.;'rrm®Irl�m MOM �> arsxeuc.. j ----- --------- OCMA Bs0 Sin Clemente Drlve RAMSA the BERT M9. STERN ARC 9ITEM FI OOR FLAN-t.EVE1 1?- 13 trvrtu.m uml h?E. dEMt� C0 T F.ne. .OA u ,fgaw sr v.. ,w xxc+a ss AU, G RELATED 153 �r�rrfllrrarr�ri������w�t�wr� t��lr�lrrirtlitr��m��i rFarrt+E�t9 Awmm �I���®©�v�®©o�o�®©�®o�®®trw�ra[�Irrt.;'rrm®Irl�m MOM �> OCMA Bs0 Sin Clemente Drlve RAMSA the BERT M9. STERN ARC 9ITEM FI OOR FLAN-t.EVE1 1?- 13 trvrtu.m uml h?E. dEMt� C0 T F.ne. .OA u ,fgaw sr v.. ,w xxc+a ss AU, G RELATED 153 er vN@YIiVC}MW+�+IIE dW[Lt+U V*'9w�+�"r�!-E �+�44�?a�`1�.r�6F C��/4 un xruat rash __Jcunsa�ewiSr[ �atwGun s�r�uvLaa n�wcurl Ll�+r. T+a�S tr�G�nGtM�a1MM.'a�xiz I OC AA L5® Sara Clemente Orrve "EVA"SUAMO CHERCTl ,e e i M E 9 5 aT �� FLOOR PLAN - tRfEL 2E1- 21. 1 e.9II -4 1— —E • etc(oo.. �a aa� �W. •J W ay. W Saw �� la.a/.o G�p3sa' i sr a ao s v ease wa is eats a +meg +.a .r. �m vawa sF N7 P R ELATED 154 6fNplii6 UNR SlR.ppAY Tr6lE. p.'.ELix.4l,ani 5yuuaFli an6{E IE�rtL.n rnv9aNc tial SyWupTT.LDCE vevELLr04 LtAS SravMPYTBEk[ O'NFlltw^UIrt+SUM,MRY T+rM[ GW'lLLiktl+JNR'n11dMMYT�I.E RCMA SA ` 150s $�4 Saea Olemerile 011>re R-AEKT M,-STEp n QJLTECTS UW FLING'IfWT�MYAPY tIHLE FLOOR FLAN - LEVFI 22 - Z3 vfa�Lwp Lf+p SM,uaMi•u c mvrw Cam Carol E�}a G� Nva Ai# rl, iHe ygx�pF � ICt SP uR PIG W W mveuwGtmiT r.oE .9EtvlaoMCaaa wT„»��r� ��r Gay....• RRELATED 155 ---------- --------- --- ---- 1-Z A M� A 0CMA MVE � 1 850'son clamenle Dave +7- . . —,n E 4 5 1-7 1.— a FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 211 ' : RRELATED 156 t L. -----------------s--=--- — — 0 1-Z A M� A 0CMA MVE � 1 850'son clamenle Dave +7- . . —,n E 4 5 1-7 1.— a FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 211 ' : RRELATED 156 ,-- S ►. �,_�.EFT. AAt X nkk ARCIIITWTi MVE rsmr Ir�c OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive 707 PLAN - ROOF LEVEL R RELAITED 157 R LL V SA E CrCMA $SEF San CFamenie Drive u.uw_k+rxsTua.�nw=nrncn ,�..:•�x.-_. _. t ra�r�tas t t. w L FRONT ELEVATION UF�Tr'G� GRELATED 158 RA SSA ' ocMA G R ELATED 850 San Clemency Drive BACK ELE"JATId�! 9Lffi€A1 KJ.L S7illf.h&{Gi1flKiS + e a. — E Is F� -F--r 7- F - T -u --L LL IT j JFF. M RAMSA WW00AX$T1MAWMTKCn WOCMA E 850 San Clemente Drive w NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATIONS urfmlEo ShEf, BRELATED 160 SOUTH-'dVlEST ELEVATION 17, KEY PLAN UCMR RAMSA 854 San Clene+,te Drive N,:;aE�I AA!$T£eua hkC111;{SFS — w a r n E a 3 r PAINTED METAL: WINDOW MULLIONS, ENTRY CANOPY, RAILINGS, ENTRY DOORS PRE -CAST CONCRETE: LIMESTONE -LIKE BUILDING CLADDING, PARAPETS, SILLS LIMESTONE: BUILDING BASE, TRIM, FASCIAS, COLUMNS, BAYS GRANITE: WATER TABLE AMATERIA0, BOARD GRELATED 161 SA M! R. REL,A�TED $50 San Clemente _ gine 517E T�ECTIQh4 1 i - -- n. t..t: -EPN tiRC DUCTS + p � N T ft [ A 5 nMvrui �nw� I r.♦ ,IPPA YF..0 Ft:•E T 162 w«-. �� � 51Gw R FAt4 Fe�+T'� %EEClg15F£.EN75 nomEn Erarw#T compul � ----. 1 �^... ' - - - _ - •r♦__ lo�cliMnNarAnk M& SiIOOM - - - 4W{IYi6 #Fi lltfi.. g ^moi f o 1 - n • _ � - • j ! art moceFF4F7tt N:F• fL q[[gl.H.F! _ _ g+rfcrr�.ry. STOM FM -TTI-�:�.."...�:, . , ^ r..rwrf 6>•+�e9pdCk...-kks- NOTICE `!' e7sZ1 Zi1f�5 • n�1QalfrM w�lm. tmr4..L �re.� - `. �rrr+.r.ar�r -.�.�._- E+ar[It�on rls - it � rrwFr a.r.w .. � ��• t G�..I�V. N.+r.. fFQ Cf l9d aCCYSS yp. _ -^+�• �,_ ��� r,...u,......r. oe,. ....� " _e •.....•.� .....s.....s ...rr»....................�_.w..._.. ..... ���� .is.....�a-,�.. ` rof W3 T.rWMoti3 ��. �.�. r.n r•+•• Y•••�-+ �-•.....�-......- �W.I+P..t.111..�4 MSR .ec.�m.rax�r.area.es> �. ...r.c - ww A+..f� v +..R9. K'brinrr-Y Wi wr.a��wa •..ces �.. �w ..-....rw.rw- w..s..r.+..�..s ` w...-..�...�_.,_�_.-.�......+. ra.r.rr+�rr�.� •rw•.rrr..re �.ryw^w+.www e.� -�w.�... .wyw+ranov� •r+n�•+�r.-r-�`i�� w .......-. - �..�•.w�""���^" `�i.ua. wo... _ � � .w �— ..r ...w�+.r.•.� .....r.,i+....,..�.�. ..n+P .t+. o..s..ef.+.u.a•.v. s.. � .o. �....r� • ���w•r�� _ _ wl svr r.-yr-..� �'_- ••Y _ r.rr.r..+r..w.ww....a...+rw.r. �� r.CrI R!/t.Aaw,b.vmR.w r.r..w.a...ri. SECTION AA im p nmmc..P- s�+-w.•"n,rc= .Yr. el.t.. s _ w�b� u.��a..Re..n..4w•.. iAMFn #ey cl OCT— YI?lM row La .-- - I - rra iLi+.�E!� -.-Z! W IVCD _ - � �1 '4 .�,}'�+?-4 - r•'`' iJ �-4 va - ' _;�� �.� s� = � J 3 ss �: y9 _ - _ - - _ � � r wv- :arv+c _� I rctcrnrnrr. .a.. w1odR nYb...f�io•r � ..Cna.�o..i vRw.�e..v..+..6ees..Y•an vao _ �.r.�ww-.—•�.—H.•r � -, -^ � _ _ _ _ en01YPru.w++;Nf+Sf..•<.v+P PIF.M.T.tr✓. r.wr-v.rr.r � a�r�rw �ro1.� w 3sr. trP/Cm. x.wr.tiA rsrtrrr � � ..-�..s.=s: - �+•• c••� r.r... �.�Fr�.�� ��i. i�w.ws.`.���w�`w.e�r6.wr - s r..r Tom.+ ter. en�rw-. .Mss. -n.. .....�•rr.r.er w.�. .r'r`w•+tr..SrmoAw.......r.W..c +� �-CodusMEC04fTNv07FONSETrn ..r. s`.�f.�w+���.+....�. s. -� -.•--�-�. — IECAo �w..rw...r..•.rwe...n..... e - - _ �. a �...--.... Ferry SOUR 3e f IfT R Cp6f14tICIlW lQtES r......d ..� uw �a•++e..l� (] w..,.�..p ,...„- a.,...w�"•.r...e.�%.w.�...�..� _ _ _ _ _ - _ •rT a v....u.r GRELATED .cis r... aAs.wsd. ae�'1l n..,uuwa FUSCQE — t • • i [ 1 .-...,.v fir 5�r _ .�..--- •.a.n(aE NEFAur+rORUSA Mlr►E ��R>R - Mag S+t/�6ELE11tE Om'F_ NEWPORT BEACH F_1 u��.ar�m.y` ..-t_.ru+..iaa •-wwa.+a.s�r...ts 163 PROPERT:E4 V - - WE ADDRESS I �---------LEGAL OESICRIKION � �(FI I _tv � vii m.s++•a s. a w.�m .vs . +c ana � Yc nr*. �sa¢v . I � � _ EKPt 1�¢ ns x A �T. � i >•luc +n[� �.a G�.nRI I . " r aur .mss. tm� .o aau,.e nem�rc +e s•.�- ".� +j . m aivra.ni. ario .e.x ti.ss ..a z.rs ;.om � � ariM D yI- li a�aME nwtiF M T.: M& !m �m rs � I rt 1 •� a . � X. NTf, r may .S.d HLT t5.:. � W4r< .E.:+QS BAMS OF BEARINGS d L r aa• - '' a�wa°Sm�'� i , iv N:aamt o- wx r x z+u s � BENCH MARK PROPERTY LINE EARTHVVOft Wig`` I 1 j -x off' lfa. !4� �� 4Nw+a 1�4r•R� tTr✓C r Yk i w ���--� I �'f��0i GR �LY9F Y9i#IR�611GLE6'F E I y1bVY V V e0 'Ll J]thal ais:6-ai1 Yt r SE mat ..1 � !'s 3M my4 i ✓Ian.. u n � I 'I :: r�"iun .ds.c+• a �a sc� ..a t.e ac. �x. DPERTY I i • . UNE CIVIL ENCsiiVEER lel wtoi. Pw✓I'fM-tw �a�.r C isl eMl uaSiR LEGEND 4 _ - li cm::acr. I R _ — — _ _ _ — T — s _ -?- w �tiPaSTL >hBC wttr L1 ; _ 6 _ .,� ra.e oml v.b sie .way' �a 4 IIk ocw�c sac+ w He +�w* r c3ec�o- - SAN CLEMENTE PROPERTY --- ,- ,UNE-.�--- pd C-01 - —�= 11e/02/2026 RAMSA OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive = FUSCOE ... , ...... . I.wH.ne,.,..re..o..,I......r.....r.,...... CONCEPTUAL GRADING 1� R E LATE[ } P A R t N E If S R0BERTAMSTERN ARCH MECTS Ni.1rla.DnftCA .,,,. �•"m ».. 164 220 210 200 144 l lab 170 166 c SAN CLEMENTE A SCLC! 1'a 10' 25 206 146 wr R+1V lML r SOP 76P Sao FF arts SECTIGNS r RELe4T�D 170,` ' �"�ls, tuo r ....ems:.: IS6 ISO w e SECTIONSCALC \Q:02 4`1 - hr� pp KEY MAP SECTION C 1112 1 10' GO I i lur�.for ----------- --'---- --------- ---- u"0`Aaar s,7r7or ..7 C -OL (18102/2016 R"SA C1CMA.III FUSCC)E 85U San Clemente [?ripe II'��III�= r f r . , . . SECTIGNS r RELe4T�D H —a tao �"�ls, tuo r ....ems:.: ISO 170, 180 k r7 130 I 4`1 - hr� pp KEY MAP SECTION C 1112 1 10' GO I i lur�.for ----------- --'---- --------- ---- u"0`Aaar s,7r7or ..7 C -OL (18102/2016 R"SA C1CMA.III FUSCC)E 85U San Clemente [?ripe II'��III�= r f r . , . . SECTIGNS r RELe4T�D 1WBERTA.M.STERNARCHITECTS _ °. ° n�n . ,� a �._.. de.p,.r�.�n,to hb,eCw�eeywa, Fe}ge P�etepr geW/+ft Fe CMnye wear a•,pp•re. e•Pe+a}1,} 165 200 190 log 170 160 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 tF 2UG MVE OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive IOU FUSCOE SECTIONS ISO K$ *IERT A.)Vt STERN ARCHITECTS 190 SECTION ISO tF 2UG MVE OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive IOU FUSCOE SECTIONS ISO K$ *IERT A.)Vt STERN ARCHITECTS 190 ISO 7 -Izi; I - 170 -M %so 160 SECTION SECTION SCALE t --Io, \223 --n KEY MAP 190 W W 2W SW 160 C-03 01'02�2015 RAMSA MVE OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive IOU FUSCOE SECTIONS ISO K$ *IERT A.)Vt STERN ARCHITECTS 170 160 C-03 01'02�2015 RAMSA MVE OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive IOU FUSCOE SECTIONS WRELATED K$ *IERT A.)Vt STERN ARCHITECTS 166 200 190 1$0 170 4611 M z�v E t90 oar 1 180 i 170 1 ayr. �y 160 150 SECTION G SCALE'. 1'-l0' G 4 mrmcuue lni.e= nai-.maa Mu r SECTION H SCALE; f'••10' 204 wu�r wor srvrxr{ 200 190 tea. wcl 7J30 au 170 200 190 980 170 a' wr 160 zauuuw 150 .f KEY MAP 1. scu[: r • ao C-04 09/02/203.6 R"SA MW OCMA San Clemente rive 850 SClD = FUSC0E �'": _ r SECTIONS - - r R E LAtT E D RUBERTA.M.STERN ARCHITECTS + a a e r H ¢ er s xawa B. -h. CA .: v .+• oime°9 � kao: ce.,�.pn,.r n..�r.�l.y. s.,MKr r<+�+r• u. v.a ar:.ia`en ro, v.v .r. 5��1 167 IA— PROPERTY1 ZINE i i I � ROPERTY 1 r SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE LEGEND - - � IOd1 6 Mkt.WOmfAIY UiC C-05 U102tzais S MW QCMA�q Tt5!! - FUSCCyE TREE EXHIBIT R R E LATED j s 0 say Clemente Drive T a M A T A E B 5 qS}r3EElTA.M57ECt3s1ARCilCtECTS Nso�BmN.G —4a c. rsa Wy—Ta 168 I a t e we darn ncooeroc.Ae. iRx�dor mamr�xw � wrx In rCa'%aw 4 NWFF�RIINSNNI I�1P -------------- ----- ��_»_ t r I r6•wx! ��� _f 'li=-,.1i-11—,1 I i.-�I SECTION G SCALE: 1' = 14' C 4 SECTION r H SCALE I" Ta' C 64 THE RETAINING WALL IS DESIGNED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MITIGATING THE ELEVATION GRADE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADJACENT PROPERTY AND FINISH GRADE ELEVATION OF THE DELIVERYIBACK OF HOUSE AREA. IT ALSO SERVES AS A SCREEN WALL TO PRESERVE AESTHETIC VIEWS OF THE ADJACENT APARTMENT FROM DIRECT LINE OF SIGHT TO THE BACK OF HOUSE OPERATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT u,---- _._._._._._-._. KEY MAP C-0 AOCnnA $50 San Clemente Drive � •� FUSCOE . , , . , . SECTIONS r R E L AT E D # A A N T N r F S j.l ;l',Lit1 A.M.S -f LILN AN.CIIi"!"ECf$ --A C, Ca NON�Lw+cyW�l d.rar.l A��Ay.S�,IMl Tq CARIrQ! m r.i K��. wLY.1a„tla a'�>, 169 �....w�.amo.w..°.�.aw=a•�� p ;9310N 1N3AHSI13V1S3 AHVONnoa 2IN3AnNON :310N AHdVJ90d01 dVW SINIVUISNOD :SMN383=1321 VIVO 08003J u« xaVwHON39 1N3W31V1S Wf11V0 .. a �sONI8V3a =10 SISVS 170 T :SMN383=1321 VIVO 08003J u« xaVwHON39 1N3W31V1S Wf11V0 .. a �sONI8V3a =10 SISVS 170 uN[ f 4UK I f _ MPCRtx \\ 4 WN[ PROPEY— SAN LEGEND r— •,• — ! gpaa Oc taMY/PRiIPpl1\ LM[ ate@ M myp T Wo (dpp'j 4_� aTppg,'p fads M1Aa�ai lUC0.MMY t ar w W 3w ow scut 4—m R"SA MW L}CNtA 85QSan Clemente Drive li -USCCJE !I�,i _ FGRE HYDRANT LOCATION EXHIBIT C RELA.TEQ RUBCRTA.M.STERNARCFiITEC75 + P A P T N[ R S Npwp S-.w,CA HaJ�� Ca++e+PfuN bosyn Pxkape.5ub/�c� to Chanps la%aivpl+. ,L:.am W 4aq t9ea + dv 9�a.�r+.SES! 171 '. i NESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17970arm ��„ IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA fitL_ _ ---(FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES)RAWWANCE �r h,.Tw Sa vA. L � ..—.—..T..—�'- —'— • � , �.. .1 � "I'-. ..- .�,.. '—_..-_Ylmntwadw3,lu EXISTING EASEMENTS ,Rramr rAa•aa .. c � �A a �� msc a awa �� • n (i0 8E ABANDONF� QURCLAIMED) aAal mA m I ✓! imi➢E � W I I I �` � man •ma Aw Pmin Paoaxw ~ a�M LOCATION 11AAP .. � . /% I L_ . _...__ ... {. �,. moi. PrWm.. ,Aamcnaslaw a¢ImC•. macer nm Is Q % _ _ _ I ePi o paw " _ �.m es,e I�Ii,, Is saa+m i f- - �IS*aom - .J'/ Pmamw w. ,am w.aa GENERAL NOTES so,' .... -� . - Aflml>F A Ivl4i 3•s won •ma L wm Ildc aaue a°mrt rcmil a Am HaIQ1Anr p�e®m Sb 2 nasa,m wm � tommmme6 �,�, a aa.aa ®mn mac n "a�am er aw a ora•r aAo, TUR W `Aa,S mn6f� W mlmW� annaom •/RnA. a , ys I munm m aa+nm ra,r a ,aeon ma AREAS awllw¢ 1 :t , -`► 3 - �: \._ ma�m.a ma: uo 30.1mmaou ' rlun i / P.M.H. BY ,✓ B=B-. , aIm ma. ' ! 1 "-" Pomamc ma �,aam PPaa „3,,•nAv. � �n,r m,om - ee°,04iwx a >mA< 5 I 1 1.. - AFI64 A PmaaP a 9w Ie1D AS Y•IR r ! - ° , e• - r _ ... slxaem r s.a FLOOD ZONE r 7I PARCEL 2� :. ! eIsra Aro I •a,a o.� - au� .. a�m]xal�eaa wn �raanm a�mm�misr an w. rlo r. 1 i OWNER LOT1 �� ^ 3a' •ar aew rusaa uc as 35x asSUBDIVIDER t 1l,41 my ae ` 1T —,�wml'F'..ar,i ac moR am /� -_ann i ' my °L O1 CIVIL ENGINEER PARCEL 7 / i----------�- i , ma ( amka s,ao•. Pi , r--------1— SAN CLEMENTE A Saeoe t• -m' i waML• imWl +,ttVW nm_ I I 1 1 � i WLA:!¢tltl I I I I ODS,la1 m[Dr 1 1 I 1 f � R: -i w aE la,O,m 1 1 I 1 ma kY�uWyLw�mo 1 1 I 13 �- .,i LEGEND SITE ADDRESS jl I SDC N L,mLE 1 I j I 144Eva=t6i 1a[ ea Ysc — /i,im Lom n m I"r'i• LEGAL DESCRIPTION --------- ' 1 I ESEwa ail3a T w onnsrc mou rAran a v Ta area rv, w na mr,r r i •^'�// '/ i I o' r —" '-------- P"posm MTR Gmalr m+ r.O°m a Mia v m i Vn2 eTc mrrr° I� Op e • I % i aarNmla •ASL . pswd NIt1aR tm✓B01.1 Om -a mI Pam y�nl ham' ,M�N:+NY� fid+'-aNEV mom" A!... ymy_ I ,-,,. PfanASC SIta4 r rales fpYU Sr PearA.;alm m.:m� :ar LY• C 1'iaaa - 3 4_ _� I o I�6RCIIw Of i18m Fe mmY '�' iW" - lil"YCIIuM3 wi NSW �R:Y i fiWM_ �Q 501"1 U8w6 SMlap YAq m Atm P V yi +WI i M••Pc,. w - Pr• ml, ar �.ayl w L•1 :.' ba M5 i ty _. .. JUD'L9.a � SESRit YAp w Wm _ 4 h WIVE x.w...' a u i'_ ' _ _ _ �_ _� 7 „ „� [26wic al®1 aaAm m PAIR � w 1 .Tw Rmw2 _ yc_ �q atm :1 _ _ ___ - _-_____-_ J I f t$wa a•._: n u¢ ° Tm ,„' ---- -, r . SE18W�DG*TaNE _. ..__ '' - amlaw 6tt,ms NR ei"m4Ml,134 , .., t l; .r-- . aa9W« CJI "i- � Cm'°'i - ,• -- -- _ I ;`q.• .,. _ c 6 vx LK CAl6UIr - i51: �' I 4 H NN 'Y' Y3.. I5 1. R J BASIS OF BEARINGS - -- L; - '. _t m IE a°oIm _ - :. �� _. cmaac ,um,orE Isco eaAa"a] mmni ,arm. A,R a� ,avl M erAam mnwal ••• mi !— ,•� i �T-' .-... .. "LL" f�Ww m111aL mma co] IEiBe am mrw os w+e ama r¢°ol � e t , - u w-. tm,mc SnRcr umrt ouA10A1Xrc mrAi, wirm amew w nc m nc oss[ ar na emP mm n BENCH MARK m,azz•sw - - F» • • 4 T o . - � h �v� L avm ,vmu mmn-on ,00a uennmrt - _ awou+ �. _ — aarAme Wawa rm tllA� a w a [i M *� m �� � Na�Gtlmm MlFA i MDtlEnaml : IRW 3� ! R3 YureY eCiCd� mml 6L+Pm SAN CLEMENTE1, DRIVE m�m+sman amRma s` +s��a" M C 17 lO •, - - - -• --- Q ` `�, sn,aAP,acr a ,Ice mmunumnr Pam: a ,sc rarr � e.. e. ,• . M AIm e rt ImaElnr a aR SOIA,anT aen iAt! a „[ - rau+ mnPmrt n as uvm °,x T• moewr< VESTING TENTATIVEcl1 FUSCOE TRACT MAP NO. 17970 mase 1 ' ' ' ° CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH aa,Is°� P3 4 wrz o aaswrro• e r . k l o 172 n77.5 {®1.m -t&T.0 NiWo SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE P. Z SA [3o cQ OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive F.0BERTAnL$TEPLNARcrnTEC73 �---. NnxperaeyPcf�'GA NOM' Cencmon•�Y mnsfnn P�cAaoo.^.vMuca Ta C LEGEND Il TR Cli IT7 ME) M1YfNTRAPATH NATLIAAi GRAY PAM TE CONCREPE a 60 fl rYPATN€ TYr, I- VEHICLE RATED •1 p 000 0 DECORATNE NA fl TYPE Z . GAADEO WN WALKLK STONE ACCENT PAVER NEW CION AMONIN n 165 Q INC DRIVEWAY RIGHTOF WAY \\\ SY xURF DCKa G RUNPC RUN PCRMLTCR PODIIAA LM ORNAA{ENTAL METAL PENCE WITH PILASTERS, GK HID" MAX. 5zmn`TIN, T7 \ BU LBiNG IIII11111171 L5'-0"nIGn. IRE rlVdD OVERHEAD \ 11PA11KIN8 L9ry {PLASTER COLUMNS O GARAGEGE RCC€9S L'1 S SCE NPT- DFLOW j �I BWLOING PLANTING AREA OVERHEAD >1aS_o I� pA) \ U t 5 -184.8 •i8C.5 Iv .� aRlve n77.5 {®1.m -t&T.0 NiWo SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE P. Z SA [3o cQ OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive F.0BERTAnL$TEPLNARcrnTEC73 �---. NnxperaeyPcf�'GA NOM' Cencmon•�Y mnsfnn P�cAaoo.^.vMuca Ta C LEGEND ME) M1YfNTRAPATH NATLIAAi GRAY INTEGRALLY fALOR€D TE CONCREPE rYPATN€ TYr, I- VEHICLE RATED INTEGRALLY CREQ DECORATNE NA TYPE Z . GAADEO WN WALKLK STONE ACCENT PAVER NEW CION AMONIN INC DRIVEWAY RIGHTOF WAY WATER FEATURE SY xURF DCKa G RUNPC RUN PCRMLTCR PODIIAA LM ORNAA{ENTAL METAL PENCE WITH PILASTERS, GK HID" MAX. 5zmn`TIN, T7 GARDEN TRELLIS IIII11111171 L5'-0"nIGn. IRE rlVdD 1111111 11111 �J.VIU LV Ai, L9ry {PLASTER COLUMNS O UCNt1CPENTSIGNAGE S SCE NPT- DFLOW j PLANTING AREA NOTES 1 ENTRY MONUMENTSIGNA VE: ALL PROPOSED SIC*AGE SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY STANOMD { ML ANO MUNIQPAL CODE 30,130•TVP. 2. REFER TO CML SHEET DOI FOR ALL SITE WALL HEIGW S AND MTERLALS a m +n• as lea r,aaa HARDSCAPE PLAN - GROUND FLOOR 'AdlEfT i�[ V 1Grlifiolu LL.Q GRELATED 173 gYURg TO PGD]U.11EVE1 MELLM,, PER ARCHITECT, 19- HOW Ee Pppt a --- liz — y x�" $0'.3• r� 11 fFI-TI;l rTm n FTM F11 IIl1]I 111III IIIIIII L.4LLWIJ 'l'ju11WJ 4 I I x LEVEL 2 ROOF TERRACES i TRELLIS PER ARCF MT , IY HEIGHT STAWSTG PLIGIUMLEVEL LEGEND N gTRUC PRYERS rVPE 1 STRUCTURE PAYERS TYTLIRE TYPE 7 `RATER FEATt,IR€ 6 PLANTING AkCA I" = Ptx�m ee. s.. u.o-• eo-ra:nuo� Ll:l RAMSA JOCMAi7. jI I W R E LATE D i' Q� �'� 85� San Clemente Drive F4ARDSCAPE PLAN - ROOF GARDENS RQURT A.M. STERN ARCHITECTS No-rvPcn � N01�"COAcaPfualW M+r FerAnW S.fitxf Fb ch - 174 LMIEDUSEAR la MWEV+SL 3TREEr ULaR uMTE3/1#f aleft SEE IIQIE R.VQ raEsr. TY} OCMA RAM PB�co 850 San Clemente drive oc,JA-A- �j bu]BEEiT A6L STERN AReHITECTs sar fYP r � Ju1T 6i �5 ] �+[[ I t✓Wr 5E� 14aTE rl?i7 Q vaT�llar+TEC �rSE wFEl Ta PLANT SCHFDOLE TREFs floTla Ma,4E w�suasT ay. _w FAO ME 0—o",f' [eLYa 11f.]Ineara+FSY Pilrn C f:T1aTlrll TREES Attv •4riu Ihvr ierr4rt^Yew - y Imm o -w c -.P + wyu.TPaneb]t,mf P✓5sawrarsF>� De- Apra Oiw PTwafsll'�'Y'MWVY ae¢ Pear G ACCENTEiEAGREEN FREE ..rrsepPreo EarEM 0ar1cary TiEE Pure Pr'+e u�.� we Ps. Scnr.n ao�s Cssror.s Frrn. nrr STREET T+fkS ff5U ROU3 ELOWI F nngnaa �Laey lsy Fq _ EXTSTI[AT SE T Trl£E .�� jTO�raE3Y,TVEop GR[7{R�31-lEYE1. SrRjI� k[3t � � T:r "a Sat.�s' aya.r IC�SiS �SRp �Pa.e xir�r amen 4'neb 0een 1r�c 0iV L.�] rAeeq trltlbr imyp uT NQTF'PUCTt Gh A OY SINVC'TiEfE_ ��� or ] PAaYaff t— ,3[.k. Ff�A sme No l.saraYe] sever' Goeerw Cww � e/ G-� G� 4+]r laves rV.,sena� r T+ry Tay FUaPvrrs as^in Grass aasu€Ye� Raw' :lCa��f+u d`��a FafmT �e rig PCanwn .u� :a�PH 4m�ran STAEET:SaPF axa 9tFCEx � Nr. ACParagn ar.yfaraa isrgh s� Ectn nracare lrruv d SRwwra �a�r�erY r9e'e Oau Grua Sa0.v • FvvY 84a Saps Rezivyia t_erov l�r4lrY. �b-5T9M��R�n vsvia.n+' :m.as Caren Pena knn�ne Sar�p4rre 5.6p TNS Ceve©he 7a•"a rotetoe rers.. Far C.ateraet mraFlNb �yr�aE.• NOTES S lAtpSCiPE #SaarSTO CGanY V/iTN CPry pr nE;Y ilril QFJ.(iy WwTN FFFOEni 1 E11 Wja TREET 7 rEEST O F 2 au Ft BE ► rREET TREES Ta pE 1E IKM PTR lft"VP{ PE AT M Cf- TWEE SWV.i !E Yu. S9' SX Sr.E . a LC R0PCG i1" 5 PER rA Sn aP9NP�015 a Tw 57 EVT 3 frfTR1'110MlElrr SK.lam 2d-1 IXTv. pSldlall 5ryAl1 COIPkv YW'r3t Cfpv5T4Aaiyp a WA avir fIIMC,6'K CaOE 1a]Q 1]D. TYP as r -ma PLANTING PLAN- GROUND FLOOR gear e]rM RRELATED LEVEL 2 ROOF TERRACES :tiaa,rNc sFl&t. Q 5F PLANT SCHEDULE lAeFs so'.wcx NNJE L>.>ti�17++ (�c3`j /TZ oaa.naEisae. iTF�? . 4..• MBr119AM rAsra � iet NOTES 1 L.N(`Ei E O=S��' IS TO COYPLY VATN CMV OF +E1N BE A4:11 6pr "TfR EMC Dff �J.µp_;J� F_ ORD -R CE{I,eEM 14 1rj MkF[' me x •,. 1-2.1 OCMA l i"S �EE3 ,co 850 San Clemente Drive PLANTING PLAN - ROOF GARDENS 'RELATED r. -k CA n�BEkf,t�c S7FR�nRCF7l�fcls *'•--� No�CawuW/q.Nn PYtlw. as�cr ricn... 176 InNv+e.r1+ real {i.qr rAaa ✓6f l�Nt♦ iru-us �f�Ta m�ya� G'eTll. aael BngrlvMa NCM Rte• C.agp)FNS }MT'1.38 .NR W1FGK';y N.Li Cy` R4K1N 4131E YYq.'�a'fRfe.' 9mse FRga 1•s3�0+R' kt N. ^..aar LnTl ?it CoF..I 61 Ylri! Grm QIN'i bGt ivtryJ L!1 GYienlrrwl. tW. Gr. nMr4vu1bMd1 �t!a+Y�x u.a�^_.1dr•�-'Gmbn c—C,.y GRI—c—c—L.Mlls GGrwoPrrCavKacu lwpTlw� Srs W+rs Gaa R�4a.'�i�Gm.Fl.n'Nani �nt�+eh'W{Nr/J ile{HW"/v'Cipf {yp✓'kk� 1M�b+CmrT[. Gt�s–sl NOTES 1 L.N(`Ei E O=S��' IS TO COYPLY VATN CMV OF +E1N BE A4:11 6pr "TfR EMC Dff �J.µp_;J� F_ ORD -R CE{I,eEM 14 1rj MkF[' me x •,. 1-2.1 OCMA l i"S �EE3 ,co 850 San Clemente Drive PLANTING PLAN - ROOF GARDENS 'RELATED r. -k CA n�BEkf,t�c S7FR�nRCF7l�fcls *'•--� No�CawuW/q.Nn PYtlw. as�cr ricn... 176 )BkNc4 u�wEkA auarow x cPrwoAPkr ,... -. SAT! CLEMENTE DRIVE SANTAMARIA ORIVE GRANGE COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART RESIDENCES OCTOBER 121 2015 LEGEND GROUND LEVEL (A) El TRY ORIvE S GATE NLUS Ill WATEPFEATURE TRELL[S-[INWG AREA 'A LGE gra TPYfEYJ7 {E VALET PARKIf✓iC,., { TEMPOPLQY PARNPNI,, LAWN 01H P GARLICM TRELLIS T OLIVE ALLEE Q FOUNTAIN PLAZA OK S:,-ULPTUR£ Gr RDEN DOG RrNd £+Ug PER LANDSCAPE PROJECT SIG:44GE LOADMG hOCM, SERNIcE TUR41 AROUND UPPER LEVELS 177 itor"*Y EOGr POOL TRELLrS - CAIR.ANA TRELL[S-[INWG AREA OuTpQ%R L,VING 5PA-IE 177 Attachment E Draft Resolution Approving the Tentative Tract Map 178 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2016-001 FOR THE 100 - UNIT MUSUEM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific 179 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the Draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 2016-_ approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to amend Anomaly No. 49 to Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of _ remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM - 100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-_ to change the San Joaquin Plaza PC land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi - Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade; WHEREAS, a tentative vesting tract map is requested for residential condominium purposes, to create 100 condominium units. In accordance with NBMC Section 19.12.070 (Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps), the following findings and facts in support of a tentative tract map are set forth: Finding: A. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with the applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City Subdivision Code. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The subdivision is consistent with the amended Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) General Plan land use designation and amended PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza PC Development Plan) Zoning District. 2. The Tentative Tract Map provides for the development of residential condominium project located in a mixed-use area developed with residential, office and service/retail uses. 3. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and found it consistent with NBMC Title 19 and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 4. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance with NBMC Title 19. Finding: B. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. 181 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The site has a gentle sloping condition from the front (San Clemente Drive) towards the rear. The building design accommodates this slope by with a podium wall at the westerly and northerly sides that maintain 10 -foot setbacks. A caisson retaining wall along the easterly property line adjacent to the parking structure and a portion of the adjoining apartment development accommodates the design of the emergency/service access road. The site is safe and suitable for development. The site is not located in a flood zone. The geotechnical feasibility study and geotechnical report provides additional recommendations for construction of the project. Additional analysis of the structural design will be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. The approximate two -acre site is large enough to accommodate 100 units while providing sufficient landscape, setback and useable open space areas as well as vehicle access and guest parking areas that meet applicable standards. The existing developed site is devoid of natural resources, and it is located in an area that provides adequate access to roadways and utilities. 3. The General Plan designates the properties to north as mixed-use and an apartment community is currently under construction. Other multi -family residential uses are been developed in the Newport Center area and have proven suitable for the area. Finding: C. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision-making body may nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Under existing conditions, the project site and surrounding land areas are fully developed with urban uses and do not contain sensitive biological resources. The on-site vegetation is ornamental in nature, including trees and shrubs, groundcover, and vines growing on the existing building's facades and screen walls. Compliance with standard construction practices including avoiding removal of trees and 182 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of vegetation during nesting season will ensure protection of any indigenous or migratory nesting birds during the construction. 2. No natural drainages traverse the property and no potential jurisdictional waters or wetlands areas are present on or immediately adjacent to the site. 3. An EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the proposed project. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment, with the exception of temporary construction noise, with the incorporation of mitigation measures for air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils. The mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. Finding: D. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. At full build -out, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions associated with construction of the project will be less than significant, as documented in the Final EIR. 2. Mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR reduce potential impacts associated with air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils, and transportation and traffic to a level of less than significant. 3. Although a significant unavoidable impact related to construction noise has been identified, mitigation measures have been included to reduce the impact as much as feasibly possible. The impact is short term and no long term or permanent impacts related to noise have been identified. 4. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the planned subdivision pattern will generate any serious public health problems. 5. All construction for the project complies with Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes. Public improvements will be required of the developer per NBMC Section 19.28.010 and Section 66410 et seq. of the Subdivision Map Act. This project shall comply with all ordinances of the City and all conditions of approval. Finding: E. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, 183 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 6 of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision-making body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within a subdivision. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Public improvements, consisting of the reconstruction of the curb, gutter, and sidewalks, three curb cuts along the San Clemente Drive frontage, and street trees along San Clemente Drive will be required of the applicant per the NBMC and the Subdivision Map Act. Sewer and water connections will be provided for the project as approved by the Public Works Department. 2. The existing sewer easement is no longer necessary and will be abandoned. The existing water easement will be abandoned and a new water easement, integrated into the design of the project, will be established. Finding: F. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land. Fact in Support of Finding: The project site does not contain prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance and no portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act contract. Finding: G. That, in the case of a "land project' as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included within the land project, and (b) the decision-making body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. Fact in Support of Finding: ME Resolution No. 2016 - Page 7 of California Business and Professions Code Section 11000.5 has been repealed by the Legislature. However, this project site is not considered a "land project" as previously defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code because the project site does not contain 50 or more parcels of land nor is it located within the boundaries of a specific plan. Finding: H. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act. Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed Tentative Tract Map and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Building Code that requires new construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location and climate. The Community Development Department enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process. Finding: 1. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. Fact in Support of Finding There are no existing dwelling units on the project site. Rather, the proposed project includes the construction of 100 new condominium units to contribute to the City's population needs, and 100 units above what is included in the General Plan, prior to the approved amendment. The applicant will be responsible for the payment of appropriate traffic fair share, San Joaquin Transportation Corridor, park, and development agreement public benefit fees for the development of these new dwelling units as conditions of approval. Finding: J. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 185 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 8 of Facts in Support of Finding: 1. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for the proposed construction activities. A permit is required for all construction activities that include clearing, grading, and/or excavation that disturb at least one acre of total land area. Additionally, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared, pursuant to the requirements of the NPDES permit. 2. Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction -related activities, which would specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the project would be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that all potential pollutants of concern (including sediment) are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged from the subject property. 3. Sewer connections have been conditioned to be installed per City Standards, the applicable provisions of NBMC Chapter 14.24 (Sewer Connection, Permits), and the latest revision of the Uniform Plumbing Code. 4. The sewer analysis determined that a 12 -inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) sewer line would be needed to replace the existing 8 -inch VCP in the downstream reach in Santa Barbara Drive. Thus, the project would install a 12 -inch VCP sewer pipe at this location to connect with the Orange County Sanitation District sewer system. With this improvement, there will be adequate sewer system capacity to serve the requirements of the project. Finding: K. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act. Fact in Support of Finding: The project site is not located within the Coastal Zone. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications proposed by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for its recommendation. Resolution No. 2016 - Page 9 of Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001, as set forth in Exhibit "A", subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "B." Both exhibits are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. The Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) and adopted "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-_ is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon the effective date of City Council Ordinance No. 2016-_ adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 29th day of November, 2016. Diane B. Dixon Mayor ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown 187 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 10 of City Clerk APPROVED A5 TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE , Z, '41 rt- - .r l Aaron C`fylarp City Attorney Exhibit A: Tract Map No. NT2016-001 Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval 188 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 11 of _ EXHIBIT "A" Tract Map No. NT2016-001 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17970 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA —;,, e°Q (FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES) / m AINT ANCE _ ,,. L �" N E . FH ,]e— �- PROPSD ,�"A •1� — — — PUMP-�' \\.. .. .. ... _,. i N7921'58 W 27594' / - SD � e SD s0 �— s0 s0 soSD `" `"F4 � vrn �� POP \ i T NFOM \ BLDG AT GRADE BLbG BELOW PROP CT PRIVATE \' -- �CRADE BUIL bJONNNG) TO To I EX WATER L BE'REMOVED 5 MIN f / SETBACK D EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED I m � 5 841 ' 1 � � I — �// % �18' 1 --- % / � rN NANCE 7 74 GRADEBELOW J-\ 6' ii :227) BLDG AT 6PODIUM LEVELm WTR BLDG AT (GRAD IESMT -) LO-- psi V PROP 6" FIR`I WATER 34' 2 B ® PODIUM ---- fff LEVE ® 7 z I � . P/L �� 1 PA - ------t- t 1 WDETLAN - _ EXISTING BUILDING I TO BE REMOVED P P MODUS -�� II BLJyG AT POD�� W\_ IUM LEVEL I I I. 1 /cI--'BLDG AT GRADE J I oFP ��17. x(178) i o ( - — B OD CLEANOUT LEVEL 1 m UTLET TO EX 3 / PROP SEWER_.. - -- ----------_/4_ L,---------I----------- / I — — I— — s — — — — — EX SEWER ER 3 - CLEANOUT'J — k TO SEW SREOEaPRIVATE -� -- - r`--J� - - ----- a I --- -- ----- - - -4- f- �- EX SEWER EWWEERR5' IN n - - ----- _.. --- ------ S CK / ��� ��� HUAA O Std 1 BLDG BELOWLDC, f1T�SAD1= _ e v 1 GRADE/- — — — — - - - - -J — — I e WATERP=r nvpn --�-- PA_�i- ��� PROP TfItENC� - - --w -SEWER l;i 20' 175 '. R-6 as DRAIN I I DRIVE - -- =N79 -22'13"W 232.01 - PRO MODULA - — D — _ a a — D - - — - - — — G— _ a \— Ll _---_ --- - --_ _-L-- - - -_ -- _ - -- - __-- --- _ _-- --- PIiOF�EWER —CLEANDUT-- 'W I21V 12'W ®- PROP D VEWAY W=50' PROP 6" LRE_. _ _ PROP 2" EX. — WATER IRRIGATI WATER S N CL ME TE DRIVE PRG 4" DO IC WATER 16+89 78 16+00 15 00 — e•s — — a•ss — — — — e• — — e•ss — — a•ss — tp-- --- - - - - ----- --- - - - - - - - - --- ----- - 6�7 N0. I DATE I REMSION Wfi WATER SCH FW PARKING STRUCTURE \\ BIG CANYON COUNTRY CLUB LEGEND SITE ADDRESS -qxrm-� RIGHT OF WAY/PROPERTY LINE BF BACKFLOW 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE LOT LINE BLDG BUILDING NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 CB CATCH BASIN - CENTER LINE CL CENTER UNE HUILL Q' P - - - - - - - EXISTING EASEMENT DW DOMESTIC WATER PARCEL 2 OF THE PARCEL MAP, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF STORM DRAIN LINE m �R P yll EASEMENT ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81, s PAGES 8 AND 9, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF EXISTING EASEMENTS RETAINING WALL EX. � NSP RADIUM RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER FH FIRE HYDRANT — EXISTING NEWPORT FASHION/) 5P0SP'O FIRE WATER (TO BE ABANDONED/QUITCLAIMED) BEACH ISLAND GAS RIGHTS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS BY WHATSOEVER NAME KNOWN, OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH Dw PROPOSED PUBLIC WATER L u COUNTRY SO STORM DRAIN WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER THAT MAY BE WITHIN OR UNDER SAID LAND TOGETHER WITH THE PERPETUAL RIGHT EASEMENT(S)FOR THE OTHERETO, SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL UTILITY CLUB w EXISTING GRANTED N A DOGS) LOCATION MAP ® MINES, WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT TO DRILL, MINE, STORE, EXPLORE AND „ s GRANTED TO: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY NTS PURPOSE: UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SUPPLY AND EXISTING ELECTRIC LINE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS OF SAID LAND, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED — E— RECORDING DATE: MARCH 17, 1977 GENERAL NOTES FEBRUARY 28, 1977, IN BOOK 12085, PAGE 1561, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORDING NO: IN BOOK 12108, PAGE 671, OFFICIAL EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT REPORTS — —E(rs)_ — AFFECTS: A PORTION OF SAID LAND AS MORE 1. EXISTING LAND USE: ORANGE COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART BASIS OF BEARINGS PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SAID 2. PROPOSED LAND USE: CONDOMINIUMS DOCUMENT. 3. SEWAGE DISPOSAL SERVICE IS PROVIDED BY CIN OF NEWPORT BEACH 4. WATER SERVICE IS PROVIDED BY CIN OF NEWPORT BEACH EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL 5. THERE ARE NO AREA'S SUBJECT TO INUNDATION OR STORMWATER OVERFLOW. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE BEARING BETWEEN O.C.S. O4 THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT: HORIZONTAL CONTROL STATION GPS #6268 AND STATION GPS6249 BEING AREAS GRANTED TO: CIN OF NEWPORT BEACH PURPOSE: SEWER AND WATER GROSS AREA = 86,942 SF (2.00 AC) RECORDING DATE: JULY 19, 1977 RECORDING NO: IN BOOK 12296, PAGE 1131, OFFICIAL LOT 1 RESIDENTIAL CONDOS = 86,942 SF (2.00 AC) RECORDS AFFECTS: A PORTION OF SAID LAND AS MORE FLOOD ZONE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT THIS PROPERTY IS IN ZONE "X" OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, MAP NO. 06059CO382J, PANEL DATED DECEMBER 3, 2009. OWNER OCMA URBAN HOUSING, LLC EX. R/w SUBDIVIDER 35.2' 38.5' THE RELATED COMPANIES 25.2' 12.5' 26' 1 26' 18201 VON KARMAN AVE., SUITE 900 IRVINE, CA 92612 8.5' 4' PHONE: (949) 660-7272 ......... CONTACT: STEVEN OH '- EX. PARKWAY - - - I EX. WALK PROP it CIVIL ENGINEER BLDG I ORIANA SLASOR, P.E. Dss,Dw,( FUSCOE ENGINEERING, INC. Apar SAN CLEMENTE A Q 16795 VON KARMAN, SUITE 100 Fy IRVINE, CA 92606 App n SCALE: 1 "=20' PHONE: (949) 474-1960 =' N0. C83e51 m FAX: (949) 474-5315 u m Fxa n 09/29/18 z LEGEND SITE ADDRESS -qxrm-� RIGHT OF WAY/PROPERTY LINE BF BACKFLOW 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE LOT LINE BLDG BUILDING NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 CB CATCH BASIN - CENTER LINE CL CENTER UNE LEGAL DESCRIPTION MODULAR WETLAND - - - - - - - EXISTING EASEMENT DW DOMESTIC WATER PARCEL 2 OF THE PARCEL MAP, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF STORM DRAIN LINE --------- PROPOSED WATER EASEMENT ESMT EASEMENT ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81, P/L PAGES 8 AND 9, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY OTHER LANDS, INCLUDING THE RETAINING WALL EX. EXISTING SAID COUNTY. RADIUM RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER FH FIRE HYDRANT — EXISTING WATER MAIN CONTOUR LINES FW FIRE WATER EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, OIL RIGHTS, MINERALS, MINERAL RIGHTS, NATURAL GAS RIGHTS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS BY WHATSOEVER NAME KNOWN, OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH Dw PROPOSED PUBLIC WATER L LENGTH GEOTHERMAL STEAM AND ALL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANY OF THE FOREGOING, SO STORM DRAIN WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER THAT MAY BE WITHIN OR UNDER SAID LAND TOGETHER WITH THE PERPETUAL RIGHT e•ryvo EXISTING STREET LIGHT NORTH 03'13'27" WEST PER RECORDS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ® ® ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR. _ I �ELDCATEQFtID- BENCH MARK -- --- ' K BENCHMARK DESIGNATION: 3N-56-77 E - -- OCPW VERTICAL CONTROL-OCS 1995 ADJUSTMENT E E "-w 12'V I2'V — T— ELEVATION: 119.926 FEET (NAVD88) n SIX. TO BE s CATER— DESCRIPTION FOUND 3-3/4" OCS ALUMINUM BENCHMARK DISK STAMPED N "3N-56-77", SET IN THE TOP NORTHERLY CORNER OF A 4.5 FT. P DRIVEWAY BY 8 FT. CONCRETE CATCH BASIN. MONUMENT IS LOCATED IN 20' 21 THE SOUTHEASTERLY PORTION OF THE INTERSECTION OF — ——Be 20' 0' 1O' 20' 40' JAMBOREE ROAD AND SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD, SET IN THE G 14+ 0 CENTER MEDIAN FOR SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD, 14 FT. SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHWESTERLY NOSE OF THE MEDIAN 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' AND 4 FT. NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY CURB FACE OF THE MEDIAN. MONUMENT IS SET LEVEL WITH THE SIDEWALK. DATE: 08/02/2016 VESTING TENTATIVE SCALE: AS SHOWN N • JOB NO.: 0622-013 FUSCOE TRACT MAP NO. 17970 DRAWN: MI E N 6 I N E E R 1 R G CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CHECKED: OS DESCRIPTION f u l l c i r c l e t h i n k i n 9 SHEET 1 OF 1 190 MW MODULAR WETLAND PRIVATE STORM DRAIN LINE OF DRILLING, MINING, EXPLORING AND OPERATING THEREFORE, AND STORING IN P/L PROPERTY UNE AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY OTHER LANDS, INCLUDING THE -.— DIRECTION OF FLOW R RADIUM RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER — — w — — EXISTING WATER MAIN R/W RIGHT OF WAY THAN THE SAID LAND, OIL OR GAS WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS INTO, THROUGH OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH EXISTING SEWER MAIN SO STORM DRAIN WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER UTIL UTILITY AND BENEATH OR BEYOND THE EXTERIOR LIMITS THEREOF, AND TO REDRILL, EXISTING STORM DRAIN RERINNEL, EQUIP, MAINTAIN, REPAIR, DEEPEN AND OPERATE ANY SUCH WELLS OR ® TREE MINES, WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT TO DRILL, MINE, STORE, EXPLORE AND „ s EXISTING CABLE TV LINE OPERATE THROUGH THE SURFACE OR THE UPPER 500 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE EXISTING ELECTRIC LINE OF SAID LAND, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED — E— FEBRUARY 28, 1977, IN BOOK 12085, PAGE 1561, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT — —E(rs)_ — BASIS OF BEARINGS EXISTING GAS LINE a EXISTING TELEPHONE LINE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE BEARING BETWEEN O.C.S. a HORIZONTAL CONTROL STATION GPS #6268 AND STATION GPS6249 BEING e•ryvo EXISTING STREET LIGHT NORTH 03'13'27" WEST PER RECORDS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ® ® ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR. _ I �ELDCATEQFtID- BENCH MARK -- --- ' K BENCHMARK DESIGNATION: 3N-56-77 E - -- OCPW VERTICAL CONTROL-OCS 1995 ADJUSTMENT E E "-w 12'V I2'V — T— ELEVATION: 119.926 FEET (NAVD88) n SIX. TO BE s CATER— DESCRIPTION FOUND 3-3/4" OCS ALUMINUM BENCHMARK DISK STAMPED N "3N-56-77", SET IN THE TOP NORTHERLY CORNER OF A 4.5 FT. P DRIVEWAY BY 8 FT. CONCRETE CATCH BASIN. MONUMENT IS LOCATED IN 20' 21 THE SOUTHEASTERLY PORTION OF THE INTERSECTION OF — ——Be 20' 0' 1O' 20' 40' JAMBOREE ROAD AND SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD, SET IN THE G 14+ 0 CENTER MEDIAN FOR SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD, 14 FT. SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHWESTERLY NOSE OF THE MEDIAN 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' AND 4 FT. NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY CURB FACE OF THE MEDIAN. MONUMENT IS SET LEVEL WITH THE SIDEWALK. DATE: 08/02/2016 VESTING TENTATIVE SCALE: AS SHOWN N • JOB NO.: 0622-013 FUSCOE TRACT MAP NO. 17970 DRAWN: MI E N 6 I N E E R 1 R G CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CHECKED: OS DESCRIPTION f u l l c i r c l e t h i n k i n 9 SHEET 1 OF 1 190 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 12 of EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Project -specific conditions are in italics) 1. A Tract Map shall be recorded. The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAVD88). Prior to the recordation of the Map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital -graphical file of said map in a manner described in Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual Sub article 18. The Map submitted to the City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City's CADD standards. Scanned images will not be accepted. 2. Prior to the recordation of the Tract Map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the horizontal control system established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and the Orange County Subdivision Manual, sub article 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag shall be set on each lot corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer). Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of the construction project. 3. Vesting Tract Map No. 17970 shall expire 24 months from the date of approval pursuant to NBMC Chapter 19.16.010, unless an extension is otherwise granted by the City for the period of time provided for in the Development Agreement pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6(a). 4. Prior to recordation of the tract map, Park Fees shall be paid for the 100 new dwelling units (currently $26,125.00 per unit) in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 2007-30. 5. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 6. The approximate 82 -foot existing 8 -inch VCP in Santa Barbara Drive at Jamboree shall be replaced with a 12 -inch VCP sewer line as determined by the Sewer Analysis Report. 7. Reconstruct the existing broken and/or otherwise damaged concrete sidewalk panels, curb and gutter along the San Clemente Drive frontage. 8. Each unit shall be served by its individual water meter and sewer lateral and cleanout. Each water meter and sewer cleanout shall be installed with a traffic - 191 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 13 of grade box and cover. Water meter and the sewer cleanout shall be located within the public right-of-way. Alternatively, if a waiver is approved by the Public Works Department, the building may be served by one water meter and sewer lateral. 9. All unused sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be capped at property line. If the sewer lateral to be abandoned has an existing cleanout, abandonment shall include removal of the cleanout riser, the 4TT box and the wye. Sewer lateral shall then be capped where the wye used to be. 10. A new sewer cleanout needs to be installed on the proposed sewer lateral per STD -406-L adjacent to the property line in the San Clemente Drive public right- of-way. 11. Per Chapter 13 of the NBMC, 36 -inch box street trees shall be planted along the San Clemente Drive frontage. Tree species shall be per Council Policy G-6. Quantity and location of tree to be determined by Municipal Operations Department at plan check. 12. All improvements, including the proposed monument signage and landscaping, shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. See City Standard 110-L and Municipal Code 20.30.130. 13. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by the private construction, additional reconstruction within the public right- of-way could be required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector. 14. All on-site drainage shall comply with the latest City Water Quality requirements. 15. The parking structure and drive approaches shall be constructed per City Standards. 16. No permanent structures can be built within the limits of the proposed and existing easements. 17. All proposed street trees to be located at least 10 feet away from all utility services and driveway approaches. 18. No temporary or permanent structural encroachments will be permitted within the public right-of-way or city easement areas, including but not limited to, caissons, tie -backs, shoring, etc. No excavation will be permitted within the public right-of- way as part of the foundation shoring installation. 19. Prior to the recordation of the Tract Map, a Subdivision Agreement shall be obtained and approved by the City Council. 192 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 14 of _ 20. Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant shall provide a Faithful Performance Bond and a Labor and Materials Bond, each for 100 percent of the estimated public improvements. An engineer's cost estimate shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Public Works Director. 21. Prior to commencement of demolition and grading of the project, the applicant shall submit a construction management and delivery plan to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The plan shall include the following: • Provide detail on planned lane closures, including scheduling and duration; • Detail applicable lane closure restrictions during peak hours and holiday periods and noticing to surrounding property owners and tenants; • Provide measures to prevent blocking of surrounding property access points (due to construction vehicle queuing, etc.); • Document specific off-site parking locations for construction workers; • Project phasing; • Parking arrangements for off-site parking location and on-site during construction; • Anticipated haul routes; and • All materials transported on and offsite shall be securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust or dirt. Upon approval of the plan, the applicant shall be responsible for implementing and complying with the stipulations set forth in the approved plan. 22. During the construction process, truck hauling shall be prohibited during the PM peak hour after 4:00 p.m. 23. Prior to commencement of demolition and grading of the project, traffic control and truck route plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department before their implementation. Large construction vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets as determined by the Public Works Department. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagman. 24. Prior to commencement of demolition and grading of the project, an adequate off-site construction employee parking arrangement shall be finalized. 25. Any lane closures shall be subject to the discretion of the Public Works Department and require a separate Temporary Street and Sidewalk Closure Permit. Lane closures shall not occur between Thanksgiving Day and New Year's Day. 192 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 15 of 26. City Council approval of Tentative Vesting Tract Map No. 17970 is in conjunction with its approval of Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 for the same project (the `DA'). Pursuant to Sections 2.2 and 2.4 of the DA and the terms used therein that are defined in Section 1 of the DA, the "Term" of the DA becomes effective on the "Effective Date" of the DA. Tentative Vesting Tract Map No. 17970 and the DA comprise parts of a single integrated action and are not severable from one another. Accordingly, notwithstanding any other provision set forth in Tentative Vesting Tract Map No. 17970 to the contrary, in no event shall the owner, lessee, or other occupant or any person or entity holding any interest in the subject property acquire any right to develop or use the subject property as authorized or provided herein unless and until the Effective Date in the DA occurs and the Term of the DA commences. In the event the DA is terminated for any reason before the Effective Date of the DA occurs, including without limitation as a result of the mutual termination of the DA by the Parties thereto, the occurrence of an uncured material default under the DA by either Party and a termination of the DA by the non -defaulting Party, or the failure of the Effective Date of the DA to occur prior to the deadline set forth in the DA, as said deadline may be extended by mutual agreement of the Parties to the DA, then in such event Tentative Vesting Tract Map No. 17970 automatically shall become null and void and of no further force or effect, without any need or requirement for the City to schedule any public hearings or take any affirmative action or actions to revoke or rescind the same. 194 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 195 Attachment F Draft Resolution Approving the Traffic Study 196 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2015-001 FOR THE 100 -UNIT MUSEUM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map —To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 197 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of • Development Agreement —To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the Draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and • :, Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of _ purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 2016-_ approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM - 100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-_ to change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade; WHEREAS, In accordance with NBMC Section 15.40.030(A) (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) a traffic study was prepared because the proposed project is projected to generate a net increase of more than 300 average daily trips above the existing development. The following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter [15.40] and Appendix A. Facts in Support of Finding_ 1. A traffic study, titled "Traffic Impact Analysis, OCMA — Residential Project, City of Newport Beach" dated April 29, 2016, was prepared by DKS Associates under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer. The analysis included a project trip generation study to establish existing trip generation for the museum. A supplemental traffic analysis dated July 15, 2016, was also prepared that studied five additional intersections. Both studies were prepared and reviewed for compliance with NBMC Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance). 2. Based on the proposed project description, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 418 average daily trips where the existing museum use generates 108 average daily trips. Since the net increase exceeds 300, a TPO 199 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of study has been completed. No significant impacts related to traffic have been identified. Finding: G That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (8) can be made: Fact in Support of Finding: Construction of the project is anticipated to be completed in 2020. If the project is not completed within 60 months of receiving, preparation of a new traffic study is required. The traffic study included 15 study intersections plus five additional intersections in the supplemental traffic analysis. Eighteen of these intersections were analyzed for potential impacts based on the City's Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology. Intersections under the jurisdiction of Caltrans were analyzed for potential impacts using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. Utilizing these methodologies, the traffic study determined that the intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the TPO. Finding: H. That the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection. Fact in Support of Finding: No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications to the project made by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation. 200 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of _ Section 2: The City Council hereby approves Traffic Study No TS2015-004 based upon the findings provided in this resolution and the information and evidence presented at the public hearing. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. The Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) and adopted "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-_ is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon the effective date of City Council Ordinance No. 2016-_ adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 29th day of November, 2016. Diane B. Dixon Mayor 201 Resolution No. 2010 - Page B of ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATT -S--OFFICE Aaron C. Harp City Attorney 202 Attachment G Draft Ordinance Approving the Development Agreement 203 ORDINANCE NO. 2016 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2016-001 FOR THE 100 -UNIT MUSEUM HOUSE MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement — To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific W1 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 2 of discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the Draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 2016 - approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to amend Anomaly No. 49 to 205 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 3 of _ remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM - 100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-_ to change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade; WHEREAS, a development agreement is requested by the applicant as the project would add more than 50 new residential dwelling units within Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center); WHEREAS, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Newport Beach General Plan. The City Council concurs with the conclusion of the consistency analysis of the proposed project with these goals and policies provided in the Museum Residential Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023); and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement includes all the mandatory elements for consideration and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the General Plan, NBMC Chapter 15.45, and Government Code Sections 65864 et. seq. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has determined that modifications to the project made by the City Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Development Agreement No. DA2016-001, as set forth in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this ordinance. 206 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 4 of Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: The Museum House Project Final EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. By Resolution No. 2016-_, the City Council, having final approval authority over the project, adopted and certified as complete and adequate the Museum House Project Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016021023) and adopted "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program." Resolution No. 2016-_ is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 6: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published pursuant to City Charter Section 414. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 29th day of November 2016, and adopted on the 13th day of December, 2016, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS DIANE B. DIXON, MAYOR 207 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 5 of ATTEST: LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 14cl -- (.(-r) AARON C. HARP. CITY ATTORNEY Exhibit A: Development Agreement 208 Ordinance No. 2016 - Page 6 of _ EXHIBIT "A" DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 209 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attn: City Clerk (Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only) This Agreement is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383. 111 *104 IM 905 10101 Iffix" 11-1104 Old I oleo N between and OCMA URBAN HOUSING, LLC concerning 850 & 856 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE -1- 210-1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45 and California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5) This DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is dated for reference purposes as of the —day of , 2016 ("Agreement Date"), and is being entered into by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City") and OCMA URBAN HOUSING, LLC ("Developer"). City and Developer are sometimes collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party." RECITALS A. Developer is in the process of purchasing that certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California commonly referred to as the 1.99 - acre Museum House project site, located at 850 San Clemente Drive (APN # 442-261-05), and generally bounded by Santa Cruz Drive on the east, San Clemente Drive on the south, and Santa Barbara Drive to the west ("Property"). As of the Agreement Date, the Property is owned by the Orange County Museum of Art ("OCMA"), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, but Developer has a legal or equitable interest in the Property and therefore is authorized to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45. The Property is more particularly described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit A and is depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit B. B. OCMA owns that certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California commonly referred to as the 0.9 -acre parcel, located at 856 San Clemente Drive (APN # 442-261-17), and generally bounded by Santa Cruz Drive on the east, San Clemente Drive on the south, and Santa Barbara Drive to the west ("0.9 Acre Parcel"). The 0.9 Acre Parcel is more particularly described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit C and is depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit B. In connection with this Agreement, OCMA has agreed to enter into that certain Donation Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D pursuant to which OCMA will donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth therein. C. To encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and public facilities financing, strengthen the public planning process and encourage private implementation of the local general plan, provide certainty in the approval of projects to avoid waste of time and resources, and reduce the economic costs of development by providing assurance to property owners that they may proceed with projects consistent with existing land use policies, rules, and regulations, the California Legislature adopted California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 ("Development Agreement Statute") authorizing cities and counties to enter into development agreements with persons or entities having a legal or equitable interest in real property located within their jurisdiction. D. On March 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2007-6, entitled "Ordinance Amending Chapter 15.45 of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Regarding Development Agreements" ("Development Agreement Ordinance"). This Agreement is consistent with the Development Agreement Ordinance. 1 210-2 E. As detailed in Section 4 of this Agreement and the Development Plans (as defined herein), and in consideration of the significant benefits outlined in this Agreement, Developer has agreed to pay a Public Benefit Fee (as defined herein) in the sum of seventy-one thousand and one -hundred dollars ($71,100) per residential dwelling unit, or seven -million, one -hundred and ten thousand dollars ($7,110,000) for the one -hundred (100) residential dwelling units proposed by the Project (as defined herein). Developer shall pay the Public Benefit Fee to the City as follows: The Developer shall pay the entire Public Benefit Fee to City prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the Project. F. This Agreement is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan, including, without limitation, the Property's proposed "Multiple Residential (RM -100)" General Plan designation that is being adopted and approved by the City Council concurrently with its approval of this Agreement to establish appropriate standards to regulate land use and development of the Property consistent with the General Plan. G. In recognition of the significant public benefits that this Agreement provides, the City Council has found that this Agreement: (i) is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan as of the date of this Agreement; (ii) is in the best interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, the City's police power; (iv) is consistent and has been approved consistent with the Project's final Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2016021023) ("EIR") that has been certified by the City Council on or before the Agreement Date, all of which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Project on the Property, and all of the findings, conditions of approval and mitigation measures related thereto; and (v) is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California Government Code Section 65867 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45. H. On October 20, 2016, City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Agreement, made findings and determinations with respect to this Agreement, and recommended to the City Council that the City Council approve this Agreement. I. On November 29, 2016, the City Council also held a public hearing on this Agreement and considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Developer, and members of the public. On December 13, 2016, consistent with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and Development Agreement Ordinance, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. ("Adopting Ordinance"), finding this Agreement consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and approving this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, City and Developer agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In addition to any terms defined elsewhere in this Agreement, the following terms when used in this Agreement shall have the meanings set forth below: 2 210-3 "0.9 Acre Parcel" is located at 856 San Clemente Drive in the City, as described in Exhibit C and depicted on Exhibit B. "Action" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.10 of this Agreement. "Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. approving and adopting this Agreement. "Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended from time to time. "Agreement Date" shall mean the date first written above, which date is the date the City Council adopted the Adopting Ordinance. "CE A" shall mean the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code sections 21000-21177) and the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder by the Secretary for Resources (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000 et seq.), as the same may be amended from time to time. "CC" shall mean the City of Newport Beach, a California municipal corporation and charter city, and any successor or assignee of the rights and obligations of the City of Newport Beach hereunder. "City Council" shall mean the governing body of City. "City's Affiliated Parties" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this Agreement. "Claim" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this Agreement. "CPI Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index published from time to time by the United States Department of Labor for all urban consumers (all items) for the smallest geographic area that includes the City or, if such index is discontinued, such other similar index as may be publicly available that is selected by City in its reasonable discretion. "Cure Period" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. "Default" shall have the meaning ascribed to that term in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. "Develop" or "Development" shall mean to improve or the improvement of the Property for the purpose of completing the structures, improvements, and facilities comprising the Project, including but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project, whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of all of the private improvements and facilities comprising the Project; the preservation or restoration, as required of natural and man-made or altered open space areas; and the installation of landscaping. The terms "Develop" and "Development," as used herein, do not include the maintenance, repair, reconstruction, replacement, or redevelopment of any structure, improvement, or facility after the initial construction and completion thereof. 3 210-4 "Developer" shall mean OCMA Urban Housing, LLC, a California limited liability corporation, and any successor or assignee to all or any portion of its right, title, and/or interest in and to ownership of all or a portion of the Property and/or the Project. "Development Agreement Ordinance" shall mean Chapter 15.45 of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. "Development Agreement Statute" shall mean California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5, inclusive. "Development Exactions" shall mean any requirement of City in connection with or pursuant to any ordinance, resolution, rule, or official policy for the dedication of land, the construction or installation of any public improvement or facility, or the payment of any fee or charge in order to lessen, offset, mitigate, or compensate for the impacts of Development of the Project on the environment or other public interests. "Development Plan" shall mean all of the land use entitlements, approvals and permits approved by the City for the Project on or before the Agreement Date, as the same may be amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement. Such land use entitlements, approvals and permits include, without limitation, the following: (1) the Development rights as provided under this Agreement; (2) General Plan Amendment No. 2015-001 (amending the land use designation from Private Institutional (PI) to Multiple Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units); (3) San Joaquin Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD 2015-001 (amending the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential and to allow new residential development standards including a 300 -foot height limit); (4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT 2016-001; (5) Traffic Study No. TS 2015-004; (6) Site Development Review No. SD2016-001); (7) the EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2016021023); and (8) all conditions of approval and all mitigation measures approved for the Project on or before the Agreement Date. "Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as of the Effective Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Property, but excluding any amendment or modification to the Development Regulations adopted, approved, or imposed after the Effective Date that affects the Development of the Property, unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized by this Agreement or is agreed to by Developer in writing: the General Plan; the Development Plan; and, to the extent not expressly superseded by the Development Plan or this Agreement (see Section 4.3 in particular), all other land use and subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses, density and intensity of use, design, and improvement, procedures for obtaining required City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters that may apply to the Development of the Project on the Property during the Term of this Agreement that are set forth in Title 15 of the Municipal Code (buildings and construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (subdivisions and inclusionary housing), and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning, zoning and density bonus), but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code, including without limitation Title 5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and regulations). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the term "Development Regulations," as used herein, does not include any City ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy governing any of the following: (i) the conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (ii) taxes and assessments; (iii) the control M 210-5 and abatement of nuisances; (iv) the granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; or (v) the exercise of the power of eminent domain. "Effective Date" shall mean the latest of all of the following occurring: (i) the date that is thirty (30) calendar days after the Agreement Date; (ii) if a referendum concerning the Adopting Ordinance, the Development Plan, or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date is timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning the Adopting Ordinance or any of such Development Regulations, the date on which the referendum is certified resulting in upholding and approving the Adopting Ordinance and the Development Regulations; (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, the Development Plan, and/or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of the validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, the Development Plan, and/or the applicable Development Regulations, whether such finality is achieved by a final non -appealable judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to appeal an involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement; or (iv) the date on which title to the Property has been transferred to, and vested in, Developer as evidenced by an instrument duly recorded with the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange. Promptly after the Effective Date occurs, the Parties agree to cooperate in causing an appropriate instrument to be executed and recorded against the Property memorializing the Effective Date. "Environmental Laws" means all federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations which are in effect as of the Agreement Date, and all federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local laws, statutes, rules, ordinances, rules, and regulations which may hereafter be enacted and which apply to the Property or any part thereof, pertaining to the use, generation, storage, disposal, release, treatment, or removal of any Hazardous Substances, including without limitation the following: the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Sections 9601, et sem., as amended ("CERCLA"); the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Sections 6901, et sec ., as amended ("RCRA"); the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. Sections 11001 et seq., as amended; the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. Section 1801, et seq., as amended; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401 et seq., as amended; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et seq., as amended; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 2601 et seq., as amended; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 136 et seq., as amended; the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 300f et seq., as amended; the Federal Radon and Indoor Air Quality Research Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401 et seq., as amended; the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. Sections 651 et seq., as amended; and California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et SeMc . "General Plan" shall mean City's 2006 General Plan adopted by the City Council on July 25, 2006, by Resolution No. 2006-76, and any amendments to the 2006 General Plan that became effective before the Effective Date. The term "General Plan" shall exclude any amendments that became effective after the Effective Date unless such amendment is expressly authorized by this Agreement, or is specifically agreed to by Developer. The Land Use Plan of 5 210-6 the Land Use Element of the General Plan was approved by City voters in a general election on November 7, 2006. "Hazardous Substances" means any toxic substance or waste, pollutant, hazardous substance or waste, contaminant, special waste, industrial substance or waste, petroleum or petroleum -derived substance or waste, or any toxic or hazardous constituent or additive to or breakdown component from any such substance or waste, including without limitation any substance, waste, or material regulated under or defined as "hazardous" or "toxic" under any Environmental Law. "Mortgage" shall mean a mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, or any other form of conveyance in which the Property, or a part or interest in the Property, is pledged as security and contracted for in good faith and for fair value. "Mortgagee" shall mean the holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage or any successor or assignee of the Mortgagee. "Notice of Default" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. "Party" or "Parties" shall mean either City or Developer or both, as determined by the context. "Project" shall mean all on-site and off-site improvements, including a 100 -unit residential condominium tower at the Property measuring approximately 295 feet in height (25 stories) as well as all ancillary uses, such as club rooms, fitness facilities, lobbies, business services, amenities, and other building services, as provided in this Agreement and the Development Regulations, as the same may be modified or amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement and applicable law. "Property" is located at 850 San Clemente Drive in the City, as described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B. "Public Benefit Fee" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 3.1 of this Agreement. "Subsequent Development Approvals" shall mean all discretionary development and building approvals that Developer is required to obtain to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property after the Agreement Date consistent with the Development Regulations and this Agreement. "Term" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 2.4 of this Agreement. "Termination Date" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 2.4 of this Agreement. "Transfer" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 11 of this Agreement. 2. General Provisions. 2.1 Plan Consistency, Zoning Implementation. 0 210-7 This Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan as amended by the approvals in the Development Plan adopted concurrently herewith. 2.2 Binding Effect of Agreement. The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is hereby authorized and shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.3 Developer Representations and Warranties Regarding Ownership of the Property and Related Matters Pertaining to this Agreement. Developer and each person executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer hereby represents and warrants to City as follows: (i) that Developer has an option to purchase the fee simple title to the Property and will be the owner of fee simple title to the Property approximately one -hundred and eighty (180) calendar days following the Effective Date; (ii) if Developer or any co-owner comprising Developer is a legal entity that such entity is duly formed and existing and is authorized to do business in the State of California; (iii) if Developer or any co-owner comprising Developer is a natural person that such natural person has the legal right and capacity to execute this Agreement; (iv) that all actions required to be taken by all persons and entities comprising Developer to enter into this Agreement have been taken and that Developer has the legal authority to enter into this Agreement; (v) that Developer's entering into and performing its obligations set forth in this Agreement will not result in a violation of any obligation, contractual or otherwise, that Developer or any person or entity comprising Developer has to any third party; and (vi) that neither Developer nor any co-owner comprising Developer is currently the subject of any voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency petition; and (vii) that Developer has no actual knowledge of any pending or threatened claims of any person or entity affecting the validity of any of the representations and warranties set forth in clauses (i) -(vi), inclusive. 2.4 Term. The term of this Agreement ("Term") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall terminate on the "Termination Date." Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if any Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date of this Agreement will not occur because, for example, (i) the Adopting Ordinance or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date for the Project has/have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election or (ii) a final non -appealable judgment is entered in a judicial action challenging the validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations for the Project approved on or before the Agreement Date such that this Agreement and/or any of such Development Regulations is/are invalid and unenforceable in whole or in such a substantial part that the judgment substantially impairs such Party's rights or substantially increases its obligations or risks hereunder or thereunder, then such Party, in its sole and absolute discretion, shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon delivery of a written notice of termination to the other Party, in which event neither Party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder except that Developer's indemnity obligations set forth in 7 210-8 Article 10 shall remain in full force and effect and shall be enforceable, and the Development Regulations applicable to the Project and the Property only (but not those general Development Regulations applicable to other properties in the City) shall be repealed by the City after delivery of said notice of termination except for the Development Regulations that have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election and, therefore, never took effect. The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date, unless such date has been extended in accordance with Section 5.1 of this Agreement; (ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in accordance with Articles 5, 7, and/or Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or 65868 of the Development Agreement Statute; or (iii) completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including Developer's complete satisfaction, performance, and payment, as applicable, of all Development Exactions, the issuance of all required final occupancy permits, and acceptance by City or applicable public agency(ies) or private entity(ies) of all required offers of dedication. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 14.11 (as well as any other Developer obligations set forth in this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the Termination Date) shall survive the Termination Date of this Agreement. 3. Public Benefits. 3.1 Public Benefit Fee. As consideration for City's approval and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement, Developer shall pay to City a fee that shall be in addition to any other fee or charge to which the Property and the Project would otherwise be subject (herein, the "Public Benefit Fee") in the sum of seventy-one thousand and one -hundred dollars ($71,100) per residential dwelling unit, or seven -million, one -hundred and ten thousand dollars ($7,110,000) for the Project's one -hundred (100) residential dwelling units, with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased beginning on January 1St following the second anniversary of the Effective Date by the percentage increase in the CPI Index between the Effective Date and said January 1St date (the first "Adjustment Date") and thereafter with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased on each subsequent January 1St during the Term of this Agreement (each, an "Adjustment Date") by the percentage increase in the CPI Index in the year prior to the applicable Adjustment Date. The amount of the percentage increase in the CPI Index on the applicable Adjustment Dates shall in each instance be calculated based on the then most recently available CPI Index figures such that, for example, if the Effective Date of this Agreement falls on July 1 and the most recently available CPI Index figure on the first Adjustment Date (January 1 of the following year) is the CPI Index for November of the preceding year, the percentage increase in the CPI Index for that partial year (a 6 -month period) shall be calculated by comparing the CPI Index for November of the preceding year with the CPI Index for May of the preceding year (a 6 -month period). In no event, however, shall application of the CPI Index reduce the amount of the Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable Adjustment Date. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, during the Term of this Agreement City shall not increase the Public Benefit Fee except pursuant to the CPI Index as stated in this Section 3.1. 210-9 The Developer shall pay the Public Benefit Fee to the City as follows: The Developer shall pay the entire Public Benefit Fee to City prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the Project. The City has not designated a specific project or purpose for the Public Benefit Fee. Developer acknowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to pay the Public Benefit Fee, that its obligation to pay the Public Benefit Fee is an essential term of this Agreement and is not severable from City's obligations and Developer's vested rights to be acquired hereunder, and that Developer expressly waives any constitutional, statutory, or common law right it might have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the payment of the Public Benefit Fee on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution Article I Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq.), or otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth in this Agreement for Developer's default, if Developer shall fail to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee when due, City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any further building permits, occupancy permits, or other development or building permits for the Project. 3.2 0.9 Acre Parcel Donation As part of this Agreement, Developer shall cause OCMA to enter into that certain Donation Agreement with the City, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D, pursuant to which OCMA shall execute a quitclaim deed to donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City within thirty (30) calendar days of the Effective Date, or such other transfer timeline agreed upon by City. The City affirms that no physical redevelopment of the 0.9 Acre Parcel is contemplated as of the Agreement Date, and that the City intends to continue to operate the 0.9 Acre Parcel in a manner consistent with its operations on the Agreement Date for the foreseeable future. To the extent that the City may wish to change the use or development of the 0.9 Acre Parcel at a currently - unforeseen point in the future, such a change would be required to adhere to all applicable provisions of planning, zoning and environmental law, including but not limited to Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning, zoning and density bonus), the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code sections 21000-21177) and CEQA's implementing regulations as promulgated thereunder by the Secretary for Resources (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000 et seq.). 3.2.1 Public Benefit Reopener In the event OCMA is unable, for any reason, to donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City as provided in Section 3.2, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith to determine an alternative public benefit to be provided by Developer to City under this Agreement. The alternative public benefit shall be of similar value to the 0.9 Acre Parcel. No permits or other approvals shall be provided or approved by City for the Project until the Parties have completed their negotiations to the satisfaction of the City Council. This alternative public benefit reopener provision shall not require an amendment to this Agreement. 3.3 Other Public Benefits. In addition to the Public Benefit Fee and the 0.9 Acre Parcel donation, the direct and indirect benefits City expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement are as follows: 0 210-10 3.3.1 In -Lieu of Park Land Dedication Fee and On -Site Private Recreational Amenities. Based upon the anticipated number of residents at the Project, the City calculated that Developer's park land dedication for the Project pursuant to the City General Plan, Government Code Section 66477 ("Quimby Act") and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 19.52 at 1.1 acres. City acknowledges that Developer shall be eligible to receive credit against the payment of fees or dedication of land consistent with the General Plan, Quimby Act and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 19.52. As of the Agreement Date, the City's established fair market value per acre is $2,500,000, and this shall be used in assessing in -lieu of park dedication fees and credit. 3.3.1.1. Credit for Private Recreational Amenities. Developer shall construct and improve private recreational amenities pursuant to the Development Plan. Private recreational amenities shall be privately owned and maintained in perpetuity by Developer or any governing homeowners' association. For private recreational amenities, Developer may be eligible to receive up to twenty percent (20%) credit against the payment of City fees (e.g., Park In -Lieu Fees) or dedication of land in exchange for the provision of private recreational amenities consistent with Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 19.52. The dollar amount of the credit shall be based on land value established by multiplying the eligible acreage by Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000). 3.3.1.2. Payment of Park In -Lieu Fees. In -lieu of parkland dedication fees ("Park In -Lieu Fees") shall be paid to the City on a per unit basis prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for such unit. The fee amount for Park In -Lieu Fees shall be calculated on a per-unit basis consistent with Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 19.52. 3.3.2 Bond Financing of Public Improvements and Fees. City and Developer may cooperate in good faith with each other in connection with the formation of, or annexation into, an assessment district or community facilities district, if any, to facilitate bond financing of eligible public improvements and development impact fees. 4. Development of Project. 4.1 Applicable Regulations; Developer's Vested Rights and City's Reservation of Discretion With Respect to Subsequent Development Approvals. Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, during the Term of this Agreement, (i) Developer shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property in accordance with the terms of the Development Regulations and this Agreement and (ii) City shall not prohibit or prevent development of the Property on grounds inconsistent with the Development Regulations or this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein is intended to limit or restrict the City's discretion with respect to (i) those review and approval requirements contained in the Development Regulations, (ii) the exercise of any discretionary authority City retains under the Development Regulations, (iii) the approval, conditional approval, or denial of any Subsequent Development Approvals that are required for Development of the Project as of the Effective Date, or (iv) any environmental approvals that may be required under CEQA or any other federal or state law or regulation in conjunction with any Subsequent Development Approvals that may be required for the Project, and in this regard, as to future actions in connection with the Subsequent Development Approvals, the City reserves 10 210-11 its full discretion to the same extent that it would have such discretion in the absence of this Agreement. In addition, it is understood and agreed that nothing in this Agreement is intended to vest Developer's rights with respect to any laws, regulations, rules, or official policies of any other (i.e., non -City) governmental agency or public utility company with jurisdiction over the Property or the Project; or any applicable federal or state laws, regulations, rules, or official policies that may be inconsistent with this Agreement and that override or supersede the provisions set forth in this Agreement, and regardless of whether such overriding or superseding laws, regulations, rules, or official policies are adopted or applied to the Property or the Project prior or subsequent to the Agreement Date. Developer has expended and will continue to expend substantial amounts of time and money planning and preparing for Development of the Project. Developer represents, and City acknowledges, that Developer would not make these expenditures without this Agreement, and that Developer is and will be making these expenditures in reasonable reliance upon its vested rights to Develop the Project as set forth in this Agreement. Developer may apply to City for permits or approvals necessary to modify or amend the Development specified in the Development Regulations, without amending this Agreement, provided that the request does not propose an increase in the maximum density, intensity, height, or size of proposed structures, or a change in use that generates more peak hour traffic or more daily traffic and, in addition, Developer may apply to City for approval of minor amendments to the existing tentative tract map, or associated conditions of approval, consistent with City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 19.12.090. This Agreement does not constitute a promise or commitment by City to approve any such permit or approval, or to approve the same with or without any particular requirements or conditions, and City's discretion with respect to such matters shall be the same as it would be in the absence of this Agreement. 4.2 No Conflicting Enactments. Except to the extent City reserves its discretion as expressly set forth in this Agreement, during the Term of this Agreement City shall not apply to the Project or the Property any ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other measure relating to Development of the Project that is enacted or becomes effective after the Effective Date to the extent it conflicts with this Agreement or Developer consents in writing. This Section 4.2 shall not restrict City's ability to enact an ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other measure applicable to the Project pursuant to California Government Code Section 65866 consistent with the procedures specified in Section 4.3 of this Agreement. In Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Ca1.3d 465, the California Supreme Court held that a construction company was not exempt from a city's growth control ordinance even though the city and construction company had entered into a consent judgment (tantamount to a contract under California law) establishing the company's vested rights to develop its property consistent with the zoning. The California Supreme Court reached this result because the consent judgment failed to address the timing of development. The Parties intend to avoid the result of the Pardee case by acknowledging and providing in this Agreement that Developer shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property at the rate, timing, and sequencing that Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of Developer's sole subjective business judgment, provided that such Development occurs in accordance with this Agreement and the Development Regulations, notwithstanding adoption by City's electorate of an initiative to the contrary after the Effective Date. No City 11 210-12 moratorium or other similar limitation relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the Development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or another method, affecting subdivision maps, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlement to use, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other similar limitation restricts Developer's vested rights in this Agreement or otherwise conflicts with the express provisions of this Agreement. 4.3 Reservations of Authority. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the laws, rules, regulations, and official policies set forth in this Section 4.3 shall apply to and govern the Development of the Project on and with respect to the Property. 4.3.1 Procedural Regulations. Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals, and any other matter of procedure shall apply to the Property, provided that such procedural regulations are adopted and applied City- wide or to all other properties similarly situated in City. 4.3.2 Processing and Permit Fees. City shall have the right to charge, and Developer shall be required to pay, all applicable processing and permit fees to cover the reasonable cost to City of processing and reviewing applications and plans for any required Subsequent Development Approvals, building permits, excavation and grading permits, encroachment permits, and the like, for performing necessary studies and reports in connection therewith, inspecting the work constructed or installed by or on behalf of Developer, and monitoring compliance with any requirements applicable to Development of the Project, all at the rates in effect at the time fees are due. 4.3.2.1 Vested Development Impact Fees. All City development impact fees and fee in lieu of parkland dedication fees shall be fixed at the rates in place on the Agreement Date as shown on attached Exhibit E. Fees and charges levied by any other (i.e., non -City) governmental agency or public utility company with jurisdiction over the Property or the Project shall not be fixed in place by the Development Agreement. 4.3.3 Consistent Future City Regulations. City ordinances, resolutions, regulations, and official policies governing Development which do not conflict with the Development Regulations, or with respect to such regulations that do conflict, where Developer has consented in writing to the regulations, shall apply to the Property. 4.3.4 Development Exactions Applicable to PropertX. During the Term of this Agreement, Developer shall be required to satisfy and pay all Development Exactions at the time performance or payment is due to the same extent and in the same amount(s) that would apply to Developer and the Project in the absence of this Agreement; provided except where the extent the timing, value, scope and/or extent of a particular Development Exaction for the Project has been established and fixed by City in this Agreement, the Project's conditions of approval, or the Development Regulations. City shall not alter, increase, or modify said Development Exaction in a manner that is inconsistent with this Agreement, the Project's conditions of approval, or the Development Regulations without Developer's prior written consent or as may be otherwise 12 210-13 required pursuant to overriding federal or state laws or regulations (Section 4.3.5 below). In addition, nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be deemed to vest Developer against the obligation to pay any of the following (which are not included within the definition of "Development Exactions") in the full amount that would apply in the absence of this Agreement: (i) City's normal fees for processing, environmental assessment and review, tentative tract and parcel map review, plan checking, site review and approval, administrative review, building permit, grading permit, inspection, and similar fees imposed to recover City's costs associated with processing, reviewing, and inspecting project applications, plans, and specifications, including CEQA review; (ii) fees and charges levied by any other public agency, utility, district, or joint powers authority, regardless of whether City collects those fees and charges; or (iii) community facility district special taxes or special district assessments or similar assessments, business license fees, bonds or other security required for public improvements, transient occupancy taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, sewer lateral connection fees, water service connection fees, new water meter fees, and the Property Development Tax payable under Section 3.12 of City's Municipal Code. 4.3.5 Overriding Federal and State Laws and Regulations. Federal and state laws and regulations that override Developer's vested rights set forth in this Agreement shall apply to the Property, together with any City ordinances, resolutions, regulations, and official policies that are necessary to enable City to comply with the provisions of any such overriding federal or state laws and regulations, provided that (i) Developer does not waive its right to challenge or contest the validity of any such purportedly overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation; and (ii) upon the discovery of any such overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation that prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of this Agreement, City or Developer shall provide to the other Party a written notice identifying the federal, state, or City law or regulation, together with a copy of the law or regulation and a brief written statement of the conflict(s) between that law or regulation and the provisions of this Agreement. Promptly thereafter, City and Developer shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to determine whether a modification or suspension of this Agreement, in whole or in part, is necessary to comply with such overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation. In such negotiations, City and Developer agree to preserve the terms of this Agreement and the rights of Developer as derived from this Agreement to the maximum feasible extent while resolving the conflict. City agrees to cooperate with Developer at no cost to City or Developer in resolving the conflict in a manner which minimizes any financial impact of the conflict upon Developer. City also agrees to process in a prompt manner Developer's proposed changes to the Project and any of the Development Regulations as may be necessary to comply with such overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation; provided, however, that the approval of such changes by City shall be subject to the discretion of City, consistent with this Agreement. 4.3.6 Public Health and Safety. Any City ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, program, or official policy that is necessary to protect persons on the Property or in the immediate vicinity from conditions dangerous to their health or safety, as reasonably determined by City, shall apply to the Property, even though the application of the ordinance, resolution, rule regulation, program, or official policy would result in the impairment of Developer's vested rights under this Agreement. 4.3.7 Uniform Building Standards. Existing and future building and building - related standards set forth in the uniform codes adopted and amended by City from time to time, 13 210-14 including building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, housing, swimming pool, and fire codes, and any modifications and amendments thereof shall all apply to the Project and the Property to the same extent that the same would apply in the absence of this Agreement. 4.3.8 Public Works Improvements. To the extent Developer constructs or installs any public improvements, works, or facilities, the City standards in effect for such public improvements, works, or facilities at the time of City's issuance of a permit, license, or other authorization for construction or installation of same shall apply. 4.3.9 No Guarantee or Reservation of Utility Capacity. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be interpreted to require City to guarantee or reserve to or for the benefit of Developer or the Property any utility capacity, service, or facilities that may be needed to serve the Project, whether domestic or reclaimed water service, sanitary sewer transmission or wastewater treatment capacity, downstream drainage capacity, or otherwise, and City shall have the right to limit or restrict Development of the Project if and to the extent that City reasonably determines that inadequate utility capacity exists to adequately serve the Project at the time Development is scheduled to commence. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City covenants to provide utility services to the Project on a non-discriminatory basis (i.e., on the same terms and conditions that City undertakes to provide such services to other similarly situated new developments in the City of Newport Beach as and when service connections are provided and service commences). 4.4 Tentative Subdivision Maps City agrees that Developer may file and process new and existing vesting tentative maps for the Property consistent with California Government Code Sections 66498.1-66498.9 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 19.20. Pursuant to the applicable provision of the California Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code section 66452.6(a)), the life of any tentative subdivision map approved for the Property, whether designated a "vesting tentative map" or otherwise, shall be extended for the Term of this Agreement. 5. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual written and executed consent of the Parties in compliance with California Government Code Section 65868 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45.070 or by unilateral termination by City in the event of an uncured default of Developer. 5.1 Extension. Developer may request up to, and upon receipt of a written request from Developer, City shall grant one (1) five (5) year extension to extend the Term of this Agreement for a total of five (5) additional years provided that Developer has timely submitted its written request to extend this Agreement prior to its expiration and that Developer is not in default of this Agreement. 6. Enforcement. Unless amended or canceled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868, Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45.070, or modified or suspended pursuant to 14 210-15 Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45 or California Government Code Section 65869.5, and except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b) of Section 65865.3, this Agreement shall be enforceable by any Party despite any change in any applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulation or other applicable ordinance or regulation adopted by City (including by City's electorate) that purports to apply to any or all of the Property. 7. Annual Review of Developer's Compliance With Agreement. 7.1 General. City shall review this Agreement once during every twelve (12) month period following the Effective Date for compliance with the terms of this Agreement as provided in Government Code section 65865.1. Developer (including any successor to the owner executing this Agreement on or before the date of the Adopting Ordinance) shall pay City a reasonable fee in an amount City may reasonably establish from time to time to cover the actual and necessary costs for the annual review. City's failure to timely provide or conduct an annual review shall not constitute a Default hereunder by City. 7.2 Developer Obligation to Demonstrate Good Faith Compliance. During each annual review by City, Developer is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Developer agrees to furnish such evidence of good faith compliance as City, in the reasonable exercise of its discretion, may require, thirty (30) days prior to each anniversary of the Effective Date during the Term. 7.3 Procedure. The Zoning Administrator shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Developer has, for the period under review, complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the Zoning Administrator finds that Developer has so complied, the annual review shall be concluded. If the Zoning Administrator finds, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Developer has not so complied, written notice shall be sent to Developer by first class mail of the Zoning Administrator's finding of non-compliance, and Developer shall be given at least ten (10) days to cure any noncompliance that relates to the payment of money and thirty (30) days to cure any other type of noncompliance. If a cure not relating to the payment of money cannot be completed within thirty (30) days for reasons which are beyond the control of Developer, Developer must commence the cure within such thirty (30) days and diligently pursue such cure to completion. If Developer fails to cure such noncompliance within the time(s) set forth above, such failure shall be considered to be a Default and City shall be entitled to exercise the remedies set forth in Article 8 below. 7.4 Annual Review a Non -Exclusive Means for Determining and Requiring Cure of Developer's Default. The annual review procedures set forth in this Article 7 shall not be the exclusive means for City to identify a Default by Developer or limit City's rights or remedies for any such Default. 15 210-16 8. Events of Default. 8.1 General Provisions. In the event of any material default, breach, or violation of the terms of this Agreement ("Default"), the Party alleging a Default shall deliver a written notice (each, a "Notice of Default") to the defaulting Party. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the alleged Default and a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (twenty (20) days if the Default relates to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less than thirty (30) days in the event of non -monetary Defaults) in which the Default must be cured ("Cure Period"). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in Default for the purposes of termination of this Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. If the alleged Default is cured within the Cure Period, then the Default thereafter shall be deemed not to exist. If a non -monetary Default cannot be cured during the Cure Period with the exercise of commercially reasonable diligence, the defaulting Party must promptly commence to cure as quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) days after it receives the Notice of Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City is not required to give Developer notice of default and may immediately pursue remedies for a Developer Default that result in an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare. 8.2 Default by Developer. If Developer is alleged to have committed Default and it disputes the claimed Default, it may make a written request for an appeal hearing before the City Council within ten (10) days of receiving the Notice of Default, and a public hearing shall be scheduled at the next available City Council meeting to consider Developer's appeal of the Notice of Default. Failure to appeal a Notice of Default to the City Council within the ten (10) day period shall waive any right to a hearing on the claimed Default. If Developer's appeal of the Notice of Default is timely and in good faith but after a public hearing of Developer's appeal the City Council concludes that Developer is in Default as alleged in the Notice of Default, the accrual date for commencement of the thirty (30) day Cure Period provided in Section 8.1 shall be extended until the City Council's denial of Developer's appeal is communicated to Developer in writing. 8.3 City's Option to Terminate Agreement. In the event of an alleged Developer Default, City may not terminate this Agreement without first delivering a written Notice of Default and providing Developer with the opportunity to cure the Default within the Cure Period, as provided in Section 8.1, and complying with Section 8.2 if Developer timely appeals any Notice of Default. A termination of this Agreement by City shall be valid only if good cause exists and is supported by evidence presented to the City Council at or in connection with a duly noticed public hearing to establish the existence of a Default. The validity of any termination may be judicially challenged by Developer. Any such judicial challenge must be brought within ninety (90) calendar days of service on Developer, by first class mail, postage prepaid, of written notice of termination by City or a written notice of City's determination of an appeal of the Notice of Default as provided in Section 8.2. 8.4 Default by City. 16 210-17 If Developer alleges a City Default and alleges that the City has not cured the Default within the Cure Period, Developer may pursue any legal or equitable remedy available to it, including, without limitation, an action for a writ of mandamus, injunctive relief, or specific performance of City's obligations set forth in this Agreement. Upon a City Default, any resulting delays in Developer's performance hereunder shall neither be a Developer Default nor constitute grounds for termination or cancellation of this Agreement by City and shall, at Developer's option (and provided Developer delivers written notice to City within thirty (30) days of the commencement of the alleged City Default), extend the Term for a period equal to the length of the delay. 8.5 Waiver. Failure or delay by any Party in delivering a Notice of Default shall not waive that Party's right to deliver a future Notice of Default of the same or any other Default. 8.6 Specific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature, and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its pre-existing condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, both Developer and City may be foreclosed from other choices they may have had to plan for the development of the Property, to utilize the Property or provide for other benefits and alternatives. Developer and City have invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement. It is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate Developer or City for such efforts. For the above reasons, except as set forth in Section 8.7, City and Developer agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if either City or Developer fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement. Therefore, except as set forth in Section 8.7, specific performance of this Agreement is necessary to compensate Developer if City fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement or to compensate City if Developer falls to carry out its obligations under this Agreement. 8.7 Monetary Damages. The Parties agree that monetary damages shall not be an available remedy for any Party for a Default hereunder by the other Party; provided, however, that (i) nothing in this Section 8.7 is intended or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict City's right to recover the Public Benefit Fees due from Developer as set forth herein; and (ii) nothing in this Section 8.7 is intended or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict Developer's indemnity obligations set forth in Article 10 or the right of the prevailing Party in any Action to recover its litigation expenses, as set forth in Section 8.10. In no event shall damages be awarded against the City upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement. Developer expressly agrees that the City, any City agencies and their respective elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives (collectively, for purposes of this Section 8.7, "City") shall not be liable for any monetary damage for a Default by the City or any claims against City arising out of this Agreement. Developer hereby expressly waives any such monetary damages against the City. The sole and exclusive judicial remedy for Developer in the event of a Default 17 210-18 by the City shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance, or other injunctive or declaratory relief. 8.8 Additional City Remedy for Developer's Default. In the event of any Default by Developer, in addition to any other remedies which may be available to City, whether legal or equitable, City shall be entitled to receive and retain any Development Exactions applicable to the Project or the Property, including any fees, grants, dedications, or improvements to public property which it may have received prior to Developer's Default without recourse from Developer or its successors or assigns. 8.9 No Personal Liability, o�y Officials, Employees, or Agents. No City official, employee, or agent shall have any personal liability hereunder for a Default by City of any of its obligations set forth in this Agreement. 8.10 Recovery of Legal Expenses by Prevailing Party in Any Action. In any judicial proceeding, arbitration, or mediation (collectively, an "Action") between the Parties that seeks to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or arises out of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall recover all of its actual and reasonable costs and expenses, regardless of whether they would be recoverable under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 or California Civil Code section 1717 in the absence of this Agreement. These costs and expenses include court costs, expert witness fees, attorneys' fees, City staff costs (including overhead), and costs of investigation and preparation before initiation of the Action. The right to recover these costs and expenses shall accrue upon initiation of the Action, regardless of whether the Action is prosecuted to a final judgment or decision. 9. Force Majeure. No Party shall be deemed to be in Default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused, through no fault of the Party whose performance is prevented or delayed, by floods, earthquakes, other acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes or other labor difficulties, state or federal regulations, or court actions. Except as specified above, nonperformance shall not be excused because of the act or omission of a third person. In no event shall the occurrence of an event of force majeure operate to extend the Term of this Agreement. In addition, in no event shall the time for performance of a monetary obligation, including without limitation Developer's obligation to pay Public Benefit Fees, be extended pursuant to this Section. 10. Indemnity Obligations of Developer. 10.1 Indemnity Arising From Acts or Omissions of Developer. Except to the extent caused by the intentional misconduct or gross negligent acts, errors or omissions of City or one or more of City's officials, employees, agents, attorneys, and contractors (collectively, the "City's Affiliated Parties"), Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and against all suits, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, penalties, obligations, and expenses (including but not limited to reasonable 210-19 attorneys' fees and costs) (collectively, a "Claim") that may arise, directly or indirectly, from the acts, omissions, or operations of Developer or Developer's agents, contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in the course of Development of the Project or any other activities of Developer relating to the Property or Project, or pursuant to this Agreement. City shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to select and retain counsel to defend any Claim filed against City and/or any of City's Affiliated Parties, and Developer shall pay the reasonable cost for defense of any Claim. The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.1 shall commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the Termination Date. 10.2 Third Part.atg ion. In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and against any Claim against City or City's Affiliated Parties seeking to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement, the Adopting Ordinance, any of the Development Plan approvals for the Project (including without limitation any actions taken pursuant to CEQA with respect thereto), any Subsequent Development Approval, or the approval of any permit granted pursuant to this Agreement. Said indemnity obligation shall include payment of reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, City staff costs (including overhead), and court costs. City shall promptly notify Developer of any such Claim and City shall cooperate with Developer in the defense of such Claim. Developer shall not be responsible to indemnify, defend, and hold City harmless from such Claim until Developer is so notified and if City fails to cooperate in the defense of a Claim Developer shall not be responsible to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City during the period that City so fails to cooperate or for any losses attributable thereto. City shall be entitled to retain separate counsel to represent City against the Claim and the City's reasonable defense costs for its separate counsel shall be included in Developer's indemnity obligation, provided that such counsel shall reasonably cooperate with Developer in an effort to minimize the total litigation expenses incurred by Developer. In the event either City or Developer recovers any attorney's fees, expert witness fees, costs, interest, or other amounts from the party or parties asserting the Claim, Developer shall be entitled to retain the same (provided it has fully performed its indemnity obligations hereunder). No settlement of any Claim against City or City's Affiliated Parties shall be executed without the written consent of both the City and Developer. The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.2 shall commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the Termination Date. 10.3 Environmental Indemnity. In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, from and after the Effective Date Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and against any and all Claims for personal injury or death, property damage, economic loss, statutory penalties or fines, and damages of any kind or nature whatsoever, including without limitation reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs, based upon or arising from any of the following: (i) the actual or alleged presence of any Hazardous Substance on or under any of the Property in violation of any applicable Environmental Law; (ii) the actual or alleged migration of any Hazardous Substance from the Property through the soils or groundwater to a location or locations off of the Property; and (iii) the storage, handling, transport, or disposal of any Hazardous Substance on, to, or from the Property and any other area 19 210-20 disturbed, graded, or developed by Developer in connection with Developer's Development of the Project. The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.3 shall commence on the Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the Termination Date. 11. Assignment._ Developer shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign (hereinafter, collectively, a "Transfer") Developer's interest in or fee title to the Property, in whole or in part, to a "Permitted Transferee" (which successor, as of the effective date of the Transfer, shall become the "Developer" under this Agreement) at any time from the Agreement Date until the Termination Date; provided, however, that no such Transfer shall violate the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or City's local subdivision ordinance and any such transfer shall include the assignment and assumption of Developer's rights, duties, and obligations set forth in or arising under this Agreement as to the Property or the portion thereof so Transferred and shall be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (i) no transfer or assignment of any of Developer's rights or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the Transfer of all or a part of Developer's interest in the Property; and (ii) prior to the effective date of any proposed Transfer, Developer (as transferor) shall notify City, in writing, of such proposed Transfer and deliver to City a written assignment and assumption, executed in recordable form by the transferring and successor Developer and in a form subject to the reasonable approval of the City Attorney of City (or designee), pursuant to which the transferring Developer assigns to the successor Developer and the successor Developer assumes from the transferring Developer all of the rights and obligations of the transferring Developer with respect to the Property and this Agreement, or interest in the Property, or portion thereof to be so Transferred, including in the case of a partial Transfer the obligation to perform such obligations that must be performed outside of the Property so Transferred that are a condition precedent to the successor Developer's right to develop the portion of the Property so Transferred. Any Permitted Transferee shall have all of the same rights, benefits, duties, obligations, and liabilities of Developer under this Agreement with respect to the portion of, or interest in, the Property sold, transferred, and assigned to such Permitted Transferee; provided, however, that in the event of a Transfer of less than all of the Property, or interest in the Property, no such Permitted Transferee shall have the right to enter into an amendment of this Agreement that jeopardizes or impairs the rights or increases the obligations of the Developer with respect to the balance of the Property, without Developer's written consent. Notwithstanding any Transfer, the transferring Developer shall continue to be jointly and severally liable to City, together with the successor Developer, to perform all of the transferred obligations set forth in or arising under this Agreement unless there is full satisfaction of all of the following conditions, in which event the transferring Developer shall be automatically released from any and all obligations with respect to the portion of the Property so Transferred: (i) the transferring Developer no longer has a legal or equitable interest in the portion of the Property so Transferred other than as a beneficiary under a deed of trust; (ii) the transferring Developer is not then in Default under this Agreement and no condition exists that with the passage of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a Default hereunder; (iii) the transferring Developer has provided City with the notice and the fully executed written and recordable assignment and assumption agreement required as set forth in the first paragraph of this Section 11; and (iv) the successor Developer either (A) provides City with substitute security 20 210-21 equivalent to any security previously provided by the transferring Developer to City to secure performance of the successor Developer's obligations hereunder with respect to the Property, or interest in the Property, or the portion of the Property so Transferred or (B) if the transferred obligation in question is not a secured obligation, the successor Developer either provides security reasonably satisfactory to City or otherwise demonstrates to City's reasonable satisfaction, as determined in the City's sole discretion, that the successor Developer has the financial resources or commitments available to perform the transferred obligation at the time and in the manner required under this Agreement and the Development Regulations for the Project. 12. Mortgagee Rights. 12.1 Encumbrances on Property. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer in any manner from encumbering the Property, any part of the Property, or any improvements on the Property with any Mortgage securing financing with respect to the construction, development, use, or operation of the Project. 12.2 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Nevertheless, no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value. Any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in the Property or part of the Property by a Mortgagee (whether due to foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, lease termination, or otherwise) shall be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee who takes title to the Property or any part of the Property shall be entitled to the benefits arising under this Agreement. 12.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12.3, a Mortgagee will not have any obligation or duty under the terms of this Agreement to perform the obligations of Developer or other affirmative covenants of Developer, or to guarantee this performance except that: (i) the Mortgagee shall have no right to develop the Project under the Development Regulations without fully complying with the terms of this Agreement; and (ii) to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Developer is a condition to the performance of a covenant by City, that performance shall continue to be a condition precedent to City's performance. 12.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure. Each Mortgagee shall, upon written request to City, be entitled to receive written notice from City of. (i) the results of the periodic review of compliance specified in Article 7 of this Agreement, and (ii) any default by Developer of its obligations set forth in this Agreement. Each Mortgagee shall have a further right, but not an obligation, to cure the Default within thirty (30) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a monetary Default and within sixty (60) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a non -monetary Default. If the Mortgagee can only remedy or cure a non -monetary Default by obtaining possession of the 21 210-22 Property, then the Mortgagee shall have the right to seek to obtain possession with diligence and continuity through a receiver or otherwise, and to remedy or cure the non -monetary Default within sixty (60) days after obtaining possession and, except in case of emergency or to protect the public health or safety, City may not exercise any of its judicial remedies set forth in this Agreement to terminate or substantially alter the rights of the Mortgagee until expiration of the sixty (60) -day period. In the case of a non -monetary Default that cannot with diligence be remedied or cured within sixty (60) days, the Mortgagee shall have additional time as is reasonably necessary to remedy or cure the Default, provided the Mortgagee promptly commences to cure the non -monetary Default within sixty (60) days and diligently prosecutes the cure to completion. 13. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankrupts. 14. Miscellaneous Terms. 14.1 Joinder of OCMA OCMA is executing this Agreement for the sole and limited purposes of (i) consenting, in its capacity as record owner of the Property as of the Agreement Date, to the recordation of this Agreement against the Property pursuant to Section 14.18 hereof, and (ii) agreeing, in OCMA's capacity as record owner of the 0.9 Acre Parcel, to enter into the Donation Agreement with the City, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D, in accordance with Section 3.2 above and (iii) accepting its obligations to donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City on the terms set forth in this Agreement and the Donation Agreement. 14.2 Notices. Any notice or demand that shall be required or permitted by law or any provision of this Agreement shall be in writing. If the notice or demand will be served upon a Party, it either shall be personally delivered to the Party; deposited in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, and postage prepaid; or delivered by a reliable courier service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery with courier charges prepaid. The notice or demand shall be addressed as follows: TO CITY: City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Attn: City Manager With a copy to: City Attorney City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 TO DEVELOPER: Mr. Gino Canori OCMA Urban Housing, LLC 18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900 Irvine, California 92912 22 210-23 With a copy to: Sean Matsler, Esq. Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP 695 Town Center Drive, 14th Floor Costa Mesa, California 92626 TO OCMA: Mr. Todd Smith Orange County Museum Of Art 850 San Clemente Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Any Party may change the address stated in this Section 14.2 by delivering notice to the other Parties in the manner provided in this Section 14.2, and thereafter notices to such Party or Parties shall be addressed and submitted to the new address. Notices delivered in accordance with this Agreement shall be deemed to be delivered upon the earlier of. (i) the date received, or (ii) three business days after deposit in the mail as provided above. 14.3 Project as Private Undertaking, The Development of the Project is a private undertaking. Neither the Developer nor the City is acting as the agent of the other in any respect, and each is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants, and conditions set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement forms no partnership, joint venture, or other association of any kind. The only relationship between the Parties is that of a government entity regulating the Development of private property by the owner of the property. 14.4 Cooperation. Each Party shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other Party to the extent consistent with and necessary to implement this Agreement. Upon the request of a Party at any time, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgement or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record the required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary to implement this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 14.5 Estoppel Certificates. At any time, any Party may deliver written notice to the other Party requesting that that Party certify in writing that, to the best of its knowledge: (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and is binding on the Party; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if this Agreement has been amended, the Party providing the certification shall identify the amendments or modifications; and (iii) the requesting Party is not in Default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement and no event or situation has occurred that with the passage of time or the giving of Notice or both would constitute a Default or, if such is not the case, then the other Party shall describe the nature and amount of the actual or prospective Default. The Party requested to furnish an estoppel certificate shall execute and return the certificate within thirty (30) days following receipt. 23 210-24 14.6 Rules of Construction. The singular includes the plural; the masculine and neuter include the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; and "may" is permissive. 14.7 Time Is of the Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 14.8 Waiver. The failure by a Party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party, and failure by a Party to exercise its rights upon a Default by the other Party, shall not constitute a waiver of that Party's right to demand strict compliance by the other Party in the future. 14.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be identical and may be introduced in evidence or used for any other purpose without any other counterpart, but all of which shall together constitute one and the same agreement. 14.10 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, between the Parties with respect to the subject matter addressed in this Agreement. 14.11 Severability. The Parties intend that each and every obligation of the Parties is interdependent and interrelated with the other, and if any provision of this Agreement or the application of the provision to any Party or circumstances shall be held invalid or unenforceable to any extent, it is the intention of the Parties that the remainder of this Agreement or the application of the provision to persons or circumstances shall be rendered invalid or unenforceable. The Parties intend that no Party shall receive any of the benefits of the Agreement without the full performance by such Party of all of its obligations provided for under this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Parties intend that Developer shall not receive any of the benefits of this Agreement if any of Developer's obligations are rendered void or unenforceable as the result of any third party litigation, and City shall be free to exercise its legislative discretion to amend or repeal the Development Regulations applicable to the Property and Developer shall cooperate as required, despite this Agreement, should third party litigation result in the nonperformance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 14.11 shall apply regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs and after the Termination Date. 24 210-25 14.12 Construction. This Agreement has been drafted after extensive negotiation and revision. Both City and Developer are sophisticated parties who were represented by independent counsel throughout the negotiations or City and Developer had the opportunity to be so represented and voluntarily chose to not be so represented. City and Developer each agree and acknowledge that the terms of this Agreement are fair and reasonable, taking into account their respective purposes, terms, and conditions. This Agreement shall therefore be construed as a whole consistent with its fair meaning, and no principle or presumption of contract construction or interpretation shall be used to construe the whole or any part of this Agreement in favor of or against any Party. 14.13 Successors and Assigns; Constructive Notice and Acceptance. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the Parties to this Agreement. Except for those provisions relating to indemnity in Section 10, all other provisions of this Agreement shall, from and after the Effective Date hereof, be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land. Subject to occurrence of the Effective Date, each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act hereunder with regard to Development of the Property: (i) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property; (ii) runs with the Property and each portion thereof; and (iii) is binding upon each Party and each successor in interest during its ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. Every person or entity who now or later owns or acquires any right, title, or interest in any part of the Project or the Property is and shall be conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to every provision of this Agreement. This Section 14.13 applies regardless of whether the instrument by which such person or entity acquires the interest refers to or acknowledges this Agreement and regardless of whether such person or entity has expressly entered into an assignment and assumption agreement as provided for in Section 11. 14.14 No Third Partv Beneficiaries. The only Parties to this Agreement are City and Developer. This Agreement does not involve any third party beneficiaries, and it is not intended and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any other person or entity. 14.15 Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced consistent with the laws of the State of California, without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by any Party for the purpose of enforcing, construing, or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, or the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Parties waive all provisions of law providing for the removal or change of venue to any other court. 14.16 Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 25 210-26 14.17 Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits. All of the Recitals are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Exhibits A and B are attached to this Agreement and incorporated by this reference as follows: EXHIBIT DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION A Legal Description of Property B Depiction of the Property and 0.9 Acre Parcel C Legal Description of 0.9 Acre Parcel D 0.9 Acre Parcel Donation Agreement E Schedule of Development Impact Fees 14.18 Recordation. The City Clerk of City shall record this Agreement and any amendment, modification, or cancellation of this Agreement in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange within the period required by California Government Code section 65868.5 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.090. The date of recordation of this Agreement shall not modify or amend the Effective Date or the Termination Date. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] 26 210-27 ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney SIGNATURE PAGE TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT "DEVELOPER" OCMA Urban Housing, LLC a California limited liability corporation M. Name: Title: "CITY" 27 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Diane B. Dixon, Mayor 210-28 DRAFT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND CONSENT OF OWNER The undersigned duly -authorized officer of OCMA is executing this Agreement on behalf of OCMA for the limited purposes set forth in Section 14.1 above. "OCMA" L'In Name: Title: IN 210-29 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF On , before me, (here insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF On 9 , before me, (here insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. 112/066751-0090 2347819.1 all/22/16 -29- SD\611846.4 210-30 112/066751-0090 2347819.1 all/22/16 Signature (Seal) -30- SD\611846.4 210-31 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 2 OF THE PARCEL MAP, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81. PAGES v, AND 1). OF PARCEL. MAPS. IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL. OIL RIGHTS, MINERALS, MINERAL RIGHTS, NATURAL GAS RIGHTS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS BY WHATSOEVER NAME KNOWN, GEOTHERMAL STEAM AND ALL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANY OF THE FOREGOING. THAT MAY BE WITHIN OR UNDER SAID LAND, TOGETHER WITH THE PERPETUAL RIGHT OF DRILLING, MINING, EXPLORING AND OPERATING THEREFORE. AND STORING IN AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY OTHER LANDS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER THAN THE SAID LAND, OIL OR GAS WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS INTO, THROUGH OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER AND BENEATH OR BEYOND THE EXTERIOR LIMITS THEREOF, AND TO REDRILL, RETUNNEL, EQUIP, MAINTAIN. REPAIR, DEEPEN AND OPERATE ANY SUCH WELLS OR NINES, WITHOUT, HOWEVER. THE RIGHT TO DRILL, MINE, STORE, EXPLORE AND OPERATE THROUGH THE SURFACE OR THE UPPER 500 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE OF SAID LAND, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 1077, IN BOOK 12085. PAGE 1501, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, APN: 442-261-05 210-32 EXHIBIT B DEPICTION OF PROPERTY AND 0.9 ACRE PARCEL L This Map is being fumished as a ccnMentance to locate the f herein described land in relation to adjoining suets and other lands. The Company does not guarantee dlmansions, 442_ j 4 distances, bearings,or acreage staled theraon. nvr is i< L - Q A .I]r' •' .f v� Intended to Illustrate legal twllding sites or supersede City or GRunly Rralnances, i.e. zoning and buil3ing code&, eto.� d09olal Information concom tg the use or arty parcel shRWid i` fi' eq be obtained from t9Cal government 5jyencleS. Tr7v�N� c9rE' 1 a aRrv� ': WAC CL7F6.QR4 aRp1E psi p - ;� e f v PARCEL AVOCRS - ' - 1908f SUB 7l.,il. 1-88 SHaePv :N ::R!" r$ r aP .r: ixot TRACT NO. 4015 �s-=rr•s. U. M. Z34-78 ro 4t 1N:. .err rr Mao 1979 NE>rsraPrs W� TRACT AD. 1517d N. 737-45.46.47 rovt,ik}P� AI. ,g\ PARCEL NAR P. Al. 81-8: 73G?2. 175-22 3aw`Y 442 ?A:'= 26 `- I 1 210-33 a 29may+ 1 U rl 349 Ac. - bV �Yd a aAef RLR. 55 J E P.caAC, 0�, , R c7 � �-; Y ,J _ r19 ALP. r PeR..lS•SP Pat 'J.ld! Rf9 — `"LJ +�1• S ,+j'VR AV. 7517 WAC CL7F6.QR4 aRp1E psi p - ;� e f v PARCEL AVOCRS - ' - 1908f SUB 7l.,il. 1-88 SHaePv :N ::R!" r$ r aP .r: ixot TRACT NO. 4015 �s-=rr•s. U. M. Z34-78 ro 4t 1N:. .err rr Mao 1979 NE>rsraPrs W� TRACT AD. 1517d N. 737-45.46.47 rovt,ik}P� AI. ,g\ PARCEL NAR P. Al. 81-8: 73G?2. 175-22 3aw`Y 442 ?A:'= 26 `- I 1 210-33 EXHIBIT C LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 0.9 ACRE PARCEL THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND 1S DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS'. PARCEL A_ PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" OF CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, N.B.L.L.A. 95-3, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 31. 1995, AS INSTRUMENT" NO. 19950483821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY - EXCEPT FHEREFROM ALL OIL, OIL RIGHTS. MINERALS, MINERAL RIGHTS, NATURAL GAS RIGHTS. AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS BY WHATSOEVER NAME KNOWN, GEOTHERMAL STEAM AND ALL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANY OF THE FOREGOING, THAT MAY BE WITHIN OR UNDER SAID LAND, TOGETHER WITH THE PERPETUAL RIGHT OF DRILLING, MINING, EXPLORING AND OPERATING THEREFORE, AND STORING IN AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY OTHER LANDS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER THAN THE SAID LAND, OIL OR GAS WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS INTO, THROUGH OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER AND BENEATH OR BEYOND THE EXTERIOR LIMITS THEREOF, AND TO REDRILL, RETUNNEL, EQUIP, MAINTAIN, REPAIR, DEEPEN AND OPERATE ANY SUCH WELLS OR MINES, WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT TO DRILL, MINE, STORE, EXPLORE AND OPERATE THROUGH THE SURFACE OR THE UPPER 500 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950519960. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, EXCEPT ANY AND ALL WATER RIGHTS OR INTERESTS THEREIN APPURTENANT OR RELATING TO THE LAND OR WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND, WHETHER SUCH WATER RIGHTS SHALL BE RIPARIAN_ OVERLYING, APPROPRIATIVE, LITTORAL, PERCOLATING, PRESCRIPTIVE, ADJUDICATED, STATUTORY OR CONTRACTUAL, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT AND POWER TO DRILL, REDRILL, STORE IN AND REMOVE THE SAME FROM THE LAND OR TO DIVERT OR OTHERWISE UTILIZE SUCH WATER, RIGHTS OR INTEREST ON ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNED OR LEASED BY GRANTOR, BUT WITHOUT, HOWEVER ANY RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF THE LAND IN THE EXERCISE OF SUCH RIGHTS, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 199.50519960. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. Z'I'Mi1aAa AN APPURTENANT NON-EXCLUSIVE JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT FOR ACCESS, INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" OF CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L_L.A_ 95-3, RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950483821. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL L THENCE, NORT14ERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY PARCEL LINE OF SAID PARCEL I NORTH 070 03'01" WEST 55.00 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 820 56' 59" WEST 65.00 FEET: THENCE, SOUTH 07° 03'01" EAST 55.00 FEET TOA POINT ON THE MOST SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1, SAID POINT BEING ALSO ON THE MOST NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE; THENCE, EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND SAID RIGHT OF WAY LIME NORTH 820 56'59" EAST 65.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. APN: 412-261-1.7 210-34 EXHIBIT D 0.9 ACRE PARCEL DONATION AGREEMENT 210-35 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attn: City Clerk (Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only) This Agreement is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383. DONATION AGREEMENT by and between The City of Newport Beach and the Orange County Museum of Art Regarding 0.9 Acre Parcel (APN # 442-261-17) This Donation Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the City of Newport Beach ("City"), a California municipal corporation, and the Orange County Museum of Art (successor - in -interest by merger to Newport Harbor Art Museum) ("OCMA"), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, as of , 2016 ("Effective Date"). City and OCMA are referred to in this Agreement individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." RFCTTAT.S A. OCMA is the owner of fee title to that certain approximately 0.9 acre real property parcel located in the City located at 856 San Clemente Drive (APN # 442-261-17), as more particularly described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto, including all fixtures and improvements thereon (collectively, the "0.9 Acre Parcel"). B. OCMA is also the owner of fee title to a 1.99 -acre parcel located at 850 San Clemente Drive (APN # 442-261-05) (the "Museum Parcel"). OCMA has entered into a contract with OCMA Urban Housing, LLC ("Developer") for the purchase of the Museum Parcel (the "Museum Parcel Purchase Agreement"). 210-36 C. The Museum Parcel is subject to the provisions of that certain Development Agreement by and between the City and Developer (Ordinance No. , the "Development Agreement") regarding the entitlement and development of the Museum Parcel for the "Museum House" project comprised of one -hundred (100) residential dwelling units ("Project"). The Development Agreement was introduced on , 2016 and adopted by the Newport Beach City Council on , 2016. As a condition to the Development Agreement, Section 3.2 thereof requires Developer to cause OCMA to donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City. OCMA has agreed to such donation of the 0.9 Acre Parcel on the terms set forth herein. D. Consistent with the Development Agreement, the Parties desire that fee ownership of the 0.9 Acre Parcel be transferred via quitclaim deed to, and vested in, the City, subject to a limited -term Leaseback (defined below) to OCMA on the terms set forth herein, and that the 0.9 Acre Parcel be thereafter held and operated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above, OCMA offers to donate the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City in fee, and the City accepts said offer, upon the following terms and conditions: 1. Timing. Unless another transfer method and transfer timeline is agreed upon by City in writing, OCMA agrees to convey, assign, and transfer all of its interest in the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City pursuant to a quitclaim deed, duly executed and acknowledged by OCMA, within thirty (30) calendar days of the last of the following events to occur ("Transfer Date"): a. Thirty (30) calendar days after the date that the City Council adopts the Development Agreement via ordinance ("Adopting Ordinance"); b. If a referendum concerning: (i) the Adopting Ordinance: (ii) any of the land use entitlements, approvals and/or permits approved by the City for the Project, or any of the land use and subdivision regulations governing the Project (collectively, "Project Approvals") is timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning same, the date on which the referendum is certified resulting in upholding and approving same and allowing for the development of the Project; c. If a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the Project Approvals, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of same whether such finality is achieved by a final non -appealable judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to appeal an involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement; or d. The date on which title to -850 San Clemente Drive (APN # 442-261-05) has been transferred to, and vested in, OCMA Urban Housing, LLC as evidenced by an instrument duly recorded with the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange. 210-37 2. Leaseback. Beginning on the Transfer Date provided in Subsections 1(a) -(d) above, City shall lease the 0.9 Acre Parcel back to the OCMA for a term of five (5) years ("Leaseback"), pursuant to the following terms and conditions: a. Leaseback Financial Obligations. OCMA's annual rent obligation shall be fixed at one dollar ($1.00). During the Leaseback, OCMA shall be solely responsible for any maintenance expenses, building insurance, and property taxes (i.e., triple net lease). b. City's Leaseback Rights. The City shall retain limited access rights to the 0.9 Acre Parcel throughout the Leaseback to inspect, survey and/or analyze the 0.9 Acre Parcel. The City's access during the Leaseback shall occur, if at all: (i) during normal business hours; (ii) subject to three (3) calendar days' prior written notice to OCMA; and (iii) in strict compliance with OCMA's reasonable security procedures. The City's access shall not materially interfere with OCMA's use of the 0.9 Acre Parcel. The City has no right to make any physical improvements or modifications to the 0.9 Acre Parcel during the Leaseback. c. Leaseback Indemnification. City shall indemnify, defend, save, and hold harmless OCMA, its elected officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and all liability, expense (including defense costs and legal fees), and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever arising out of the City's use of the 0.9 Acre Parcel during the Leaseback. The foregoing terms shall be set forth in a lease agreement to be executed by OCMA, as tenant, and the City, as landlord, on or before the Transfer Date, in such form as may be reasonably acceptable to the Parties. 3. Physical Condition. OCMA offers the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City in "as is" condition, without any representations or warranties regarding physical condition of the 0.9 Acre Parcel or its improvements. OCMA shall have no obligation to the City to perform any repairs, alterations or improvements to the 0.9 Acre Parcel (other than normal maintenance during the Leaseback). 4. Declaration of Special Land Use Restrictions. As a condition precedent to OCMA's donation of the 0.9 Acre Parcel to City while the Special Land Use Restrictions are in effect, the City shall deliver to OCMA written consent to said transfer from The Irvine Company, as well as The Irvine Company's waiver of its future rights and OCMA's future obligations under the Declaration of Special Land Use Restrictions, Right of First Refusal, Mortgage Lien and Other Remedies recorded in the County of Orange, California (Instrument No. 19950519961) and attached hereto. 5. City Use of 0.9 Acre Parcel. The 0.9 Acre Parcel shall be used in a manner that is consistent with the City's General Plan and corresponding zoning. No physical redevelopment of the 0.9 Acre Parcel is contemplated as of the Effective Date, and the City intends to continue to operate the 0.9 Acre Parcel in a manner consistent with its operations on the Effective Date for the foreseeable future. To the extent that the City 210-38 may wish to change the use or development of the 0.9 Acre Parcel at a currently - unforeseen point in the future, such a change would be required to adhere to all applicable development controls, including but not limited to Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning, zoning and density bonus), Title 5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and regulations), the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.), the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21177) and CEQA's implementing regulations as promulgated thereunder by the Secretary for Resources (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). 6. Condition of 0.9 Acre Parcel. City acknowledges that neither OCMA, its agents, employees nor its other representatives have made any representations or warranties regarding any matter relating to the 0.9 Acre Parcel, including but not limited to the 0.9 Acre Parcel's physical condition, title, environmental conditions, adequacy of design, suitability for a particular purpose, effect of zoning and/or other applicable laws, regulations and/or governmental rulings, or the accuracy, completeness or relevance of any materials or information regarding the 0.9 Acre Parcel. City agrees that it is relying exclusively on its own independent judgment of all such matters and the 0.9 Acre Parcel is being accepted in an "as -is, where -is, with -all -faults" condition with all physical or title defects. 7. Indemnification. Developer and/or OCMA shall indemnify, defend, save, and hold harmless City , its elected officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and all liability, expense (including defense costs and legal fees), and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever arising out of OCMA's donation of the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City excluding only claims arising during the term of the Leaseback which are proximately caused by the acts or omissions of City or its employees, agents or permittees on the 0.9 Acre Parcel. 7.1 Developer is executing this Agreement for the sole and limited purposes of providing the indemnity in Section 7. 8. Taxes and Assessments. OCMA shall pay all general and special real property taxes and supplemental assessments, as well as any assessments, special taxes or other payments arising from bonds, contracts, or liens created by, through or as a result of the efforts or activities of OCMA (collectively, "Obligations") that have accrued prior to the Transfer Date. Except as set forth in Section 2 of this Agreement, City shall pay for all Obligations accruing from the Transfer Date. 9. Transactional Fees. All recording, escrow, title, insurance and other fees necessary to effect the donation of the 0.9 Acre Parcel to the City shall be paid by the City. 10. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by the written mutual consent of OCMA and the City. 11. Required Actions of City and OCMA. City and OCMA agree to execute all such instruments and documents and to take all actions pursuant to the provisions of this 210-39 Agreement to consummate donation of the 0.9 Acre Parcel. City shall record this Agreement upon the Effective Date of the Development Agreement (as that term is defined in Section 1 of the Development Agreement). 12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties regarding the 0.9 Acre Parcel and supersedes all prior oral and written communications regarding same. 13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same Agreement. 14. California Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, with venue in Orange County. 15. Waivers. No waiver by either Party of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver of any other provision hereof or of any subsequent breach by either party of the same or any other provision. 16. Headings. The headings appearing in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of convenience and in no way define, limit, construe, or describe the scope or intent of such sections of this Agreement. 17. Severability. In the event any portion of this Agreement shall be declared by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, such portion shall be severed from this Agreement and the remaining parts shall remain in full force and effect as fully as though such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable portion had never been part of this Agreement, provided that the remaining provisions of the Agreement can be reasonably and equitably enforced. 18. Binding Effect. ffect. The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective successors -in -interest. 19. Individual Authority. The individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of both Parties affirm that they have the legal power, right, and authority to bind the Parties to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 20. Assistance of Counsel. Each Party either had the assistance of counsel or had counsel available to it, in the negotiation for, and the execution of, this Agreement, and all related documents. 21. Notices. All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or by Express Mail or Federal Express to the following address: To City: City of Newport Beach 210-40 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attn: City Attorney To OCMA: Orange County Museum of Art 850 San Clemente Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attn: Director and CEO Notice shall be deemed given two (2) business days after deposit with a carrier as specified above. Notice of a change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner detailed herein. ***********************SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS********************** 210-41 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement or caused it to be executed on their behalf, on the day, month, and year first written above. "OCMA" By: Name: Title: "DEVELOPER" OCMA Urban Housing, LLC a California limited liability corporation By: Name: Title: "CITY" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Diane B. Dixon, Mayor ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk 210-42 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney 210-43 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 0.9 ACRE PARCEL THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A_ PARCEL 2< AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" OF CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, N.B.L.L.A. 95-3, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 31. 1995. AS INSTRUMENT NO. 10950483821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN TI4E OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, OIL RIGHTS, MINERALS, MINERAL RIGHTS, NATURAL GAS RIGHTS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS BY WHATSOEVER NAME KNOWN. GEOTHERMAL STEAM AND ALL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM ANY OF THE FOREGOING, THAT MAY BE WITHIN OR UNDER SAID LAND, TOGETHER WITH THE PERPETUAL RIGHT OF DRILLING. MINING, EXPLORING AND OPERATING THEREFORE, AND STORING IN AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY O'T'HER LANDS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER THAN THE SAID LAND, OIL OR GAS WELLS. TUNNELS AND SHAFTS INTO, THROUGH OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE SAID LAND AND TO BOTTOM SUCH WHIPSTOCKED OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED WELLS. TUNNELS AND SHAFTS UNDER AND BENEATH OR BEYOND THE EXTERIOR LIMITS THEREOF, AND TO REDRILL. RETUNNEL. EQUIP, MAINTAIN, REPAIR, DEEPEN AND OPERATE ANY SUCH WELLS OR MINES, WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT TO DRILL. MINE, STORE.. EXPLORE AND OPERATE THROUGH THE SURFACE OR THE UPPER 540 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22. 1095, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950519960. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, EXCEPT ANY AND ALL WATER RIGHTS OR INTERESTS THEREIN APPURTENANT OR RELATING TO THE LAND OR WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND, WHETHER SUCH WATER RIGHTS SHALL BE RIPARIAN. OVERLYING, APPROPRIATIVE, LITTORAL, PERCOLATING, PRESCRIPTIVE, ADJUDICATED, STATUTORY OR CONTRACTUAL, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT AND POWER TO DRILL, REDRILL, STORE IN AND REMOVE THE SAME FROM THE LAND OR TO DIVERT OR OTHERWISE UTILIZE SUCH WATER, RIGHTS OR INTEREST ON ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNED OR LEASED BY GRANTOR, BUT WITHOUT. HOWEVER ANY RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF THE LAND IN THE EXERCISE OF SUCH RIGHTS, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY IN THE DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950i]9960OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 1."1Zo401.3 AN APPURTENANT NON-EXCLUSIVE JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT FOR ACCESS, INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" OF CITY OF NEWPORT 'BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L_L.A_ 95-3, RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950483821.. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE. NORTHERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY PARCEL LINE OF SAID PARCEL I NORTH 076 03'01" WEST 55.00 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 82' 56' 59" WEST 65.00 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 07' 03' 01" EAST 55.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE MOST SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1, SAID POINT BEING ALSO ON THE MOST NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE; THENCE, EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 820 56'59" 'EAST 65.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. APN: 442-261-17 210-44 EXHIBIT B DEPICTION OF 0.9 ACRE PARCEL t r This Map Is being furnished as a convenience to locate the iidpttibed lend In (elwon to adjoining sU.vm and oterryTne Company does not. guarantee dim—tons' 442-Z1 ers, braiings,uf Sewage hatedllrereon.not Is Ied to Illuarraie legal bullding sites or supersede Cary or y ardlnance a. k e zoning and building codes, etc. l Irdormation concerning the use of"parcel shouldained ?kmaplvt horn local govemment agencies. 20" OR7Vf' 1 — }- PARCEL Nll>!$CRSV r IROAT Sf16 M. Al. f -6d SNC+aN _'N IR` ES „va rr srn TRACT NO tSOFS —u Y.Y. 739-76 ra 41 JA, NARCN I.g76 r }v,.er• `y'� RAO Affil 15176 Y.Y. 737-45 46.0 ,b FARLf1 A&W R.Y. $!-$. 402 PA 26 ' .✓Nsr "Jr 7. A4'iz 210-45 FM Jy-ar 261, �J M.1C+AC 0a. 55 1 w Q6- fyi cf e.� y. ... Qr 01RAC:l`, = 1 11 - W a. r3 Plig R �rr • !� SUR `le r, AO. 7517 }- PARCEL Nll>!$CRSV r IROAT Sf16 M. Al. f -6d SNC+aN _'N IR` ES „va rr srn TRACT NO tSOFS —u Y.Y. 739-76 ra 41 JA, NARCN I.g76 r }v,.er• `y'� RAO Affil 15176 Y.Y. 737-45 46.0 ,b FARLf1 A&W R.Y. $!-$. 402 PA 26 ' .✓Nsr "Jr 7. A4'iz 210-45 Attachment Declaration of Special Land Use Restrictions, Right of First Refusal, Mortgage Lien and Other Remedies 210-46 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: RECGF70100 RFu'=?TF0 V WHEN RECORDED MAIL Ta: THE IRVINE COMPANY c/o Irvine Conunercial Land Sales Company 550 Newport Center Drive, 6th Noor Newport Beach, CA 92660 t - Attention: Jeffrey], Wallace, Fsq, necoroeo in cne county or orange, calarornia Gar L, Granville, Clerk/ftecorc I�ill�llll�ll�lllilllll'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111il11 150.00 1� 19950519961 4.:30P 11/22/95 007 058507 0 21 IB�1 001 005 l72044 44 21.00 0 : 128.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 SPACE ABOYE TM LUM FOR RECORDFR S USE '— ,s DECLARATION OF SPECIAL LAPID USE RESTRICTIONS, RIGHT 1( OF FIRST REFUSAL, MORTGAGE LIEN AND OTHER REMEDIES t F i Article 2, 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2,5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 Article 3. IA 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3-8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3-12 Article 4. Article 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5,5 5.6 5.7 5.8 Anicie 6, Article 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No: GENERA LPOVISIONS . , ''" ' ' I ' I Grantee's Rejresertadons and � .. . . . 1 Statement of Dectarant's General Purposes ...................... 2 Definition .... : ................................... 2 SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS .............. 4 &%gific Fac-glifig : .................... ............ ...... 4 Declarant's Approvals ................................... ! 4 5 Grantees Cos .................................. I . I .. I . • . 6 Fulfillment of Requirements ..... 4 ..................... , . , 6 Compliance with Law ................................... 6 [Intentionally Omitted ................. . . . ................ 7 Bond.......... ...... ...... I ........... 7 Transfers ...... 7 7 ---------- ........ ...... Subordination ------------- I ........ 7 GENERAL RESTRICTIONS ................................. 9 Unapproved Development Or Use .............................. 9 Floor Area Limitation .................. ............ ..... 9 General Maintegance ---- ................................. 9 Restoration - , , - - : * .......... * .................... 9 Drainage ..................................... 9 [Intentionally Omitted.] .................. ...... ...... 9 Signs ...... — 10 mu'n . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . * . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . Prohibited Operations 10 No Subdivision --.­ ----------------------- ........... 11 Zonin . ....... ........................ 11 Assessment Districts and Associations ...... - . , - — .............. I I Indemnity................... I .......................... 12 DECLARANT'S ]PLIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL ..................... 13 REMEDIES_14 DeFault and Ge!Ler�li 14 Inspection..... ...................................... 16 Optio........ ........... ..................... 16 ................ ................ 18 Waiver...... .................................. 18 Costs of Enforcement .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Rights of Lenders .� .............................. I I ......... 18 Advances .......... I ..... — — ........................ !. 19 Intentionglly Omitted ................ ....... ........ .. 19 Intentionally Omitted ................ ........... ........ 19 Kmpm Flarbur An Nl- 10 210-48 i Article S. GENERALPRP—V-ISIONS ........................ ......... 19 8.1 Unavoidable DelaX . 4: ..................................... 19 8.2 Continuous Operations' ..................... ........... 20 8.3 Covenants to Run wlib the ProY., Tern20 8.4 Assignment by Decla.-ant ..... ............. ............... 120 8.5 Amendments ....... ............................ 21 8.6 Rlease........ 21 .......... ­­ .......... ..... 8.7 N 8.8 Governing Law ............ 122 .......... .............. 22 ........................ 8.9 Severability 8.10 Captions ...... 22 8,11 En -fire Agreement ... .......... ....... 4 22 8.12 Gender and Number ., ............................... . 22 8.13 Time of Essence .................. ............ . 22 8.15 Interest .......... ............... ................ .... 22 210-49 EXHIBIT C Fee Property EXHIBIT D Subordination Agreement EXHIBIT E IAC Benefitted Property i i Q- �rw�� Nmpm Flarbar Aa ?A a ... I 210-50 210-50 DrCLARATION OF SPECIAL LAPID USE RESTRICTIONS, RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL, MORTGAGE LIEN AND OTHER REMEDIES 4.177P� THIS DECLARATION OF SPECIAL LAND USE RESTRICTIONS, RIGHT OF FIRST EFUSAL, MORTGAGELIEf� AND OTHER REMEDIES (this "Declaration") is made as �of _, 199 by arO between THE IRVINE COMPANY*a Michigan corporation ("Declarant"), and NGW ORT IIAR60R ART MUSEUM, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation ("Grant �" -jib reference to the following facts: A. Grantee and Debarfint entered into a Donation Agreement and Escrow Instructions (the "Donation Agreement") pursuant to which Grantee is acquiring from Declarant the following described real property (the "Properly") situalt.A in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California: Parcel A: All of that certai.It real property more fully described on EXHIBIT C-1 attached hereto ;tnd by this reference incorporated herein (the "Fee Properly") Parcel B; A permanent nonexclusive easement appurtenant to the Fee Property for access, ingress and egress by vehicles and pedestrians to and from the Fee Property and the adjoining public street over certain real property, all as more fully described in the Declarldop of Easements (as hereinafter defined). Parcel C: A permanent m-nexclusive easement appurtenant to the Fee Property fir surface drainage from :Ile Fee Property over certain real property, all as more fully described in the Declaration of Easements (as hereinafter defined), B_ In connection with such acquisition, Grantee has represented to Declarant that it is acquiring the Property to use the same n accordance with the covenants, conditions, rights, restrictions and limitations as particularly set fordh herein (collectively referred to as the "Restrictions"), and Declarant is donating the Property to Grantee on the basis of Grantee's continuing compliance with such Restrictions. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration orthe foregoing (including the conveyance oftlie Property by Declarant to Grantee), and other goad and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as Billows: Article L GENERAL PRQVJSI I.1 Grantee's Repres IR alio'IS aad Warranties, GRANTEE REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS TO DECLARANT THAT GRANTEE HAS ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY TO USE THE SAME IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS SET r-ORTH HEREIN AND FOR THE PARTICULAR USES AND PURPOSES AUTHORIZED HEREBY, GRANTEE ACKNOWLEDGES, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT: (2) GRANTEE IS EXPERIENCED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THE OPERATION OF ART MUSEUMS AND DECLARANT AND GRANTEE DESIRE TQ PROVIDE A QUALITY MUSEUM FOR LOCAL. CULTURAL ENRICHMENT; (b) DECLARANT HAS DONATED AND GRANTEE HA$ ACCEPTED TITLE TO THE PROPERTY FOR USE BY GRANTEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PARTICULAR tJSF.S PROVIDED FOR IN THIS DECLARATION; (c) DECLARANT AND C7RANTEB DO NOT EXPECT OR INTEND THE ssnP"tsrW.MsrN.—I,., lo, 1495 DW—w6 -impirt tladrr All Mme ll 210-51 E PROPERTY TO BE USED AT ANY TIME FOR ANY PURPOSE NOT OTHERWISE PE. t,MITTED HEREIN; (d) THE LIKELIHOOD THAT ANY BREACH WILL OCCUR AND THAT DE(rLARANT WILL EXERCISE ANY OF ITS RIGHTS AVAILABLE TO REMEDY ANY BREACH OR NONCONFORMITY WITH THE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED HEREIN IS EXTREMELY REMOTE; (e) WITHOUT THE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PURPOINES AND EXPECTATIONS OF DECLARANT AND GRANTEE TO PROVIDE A LOCAL CULTURAL BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY SURROUNDING THE LAND COULD BE DEFEATED; AND (f) BUT FOR DONATION OF THE PROPERTY, GRANTEE MIGHT BE REQUIRED TO PAY SUBSTANTIAL SUMS TO ?URCHASE PROPERTY FOR ITS USES IN COMPETIT16N WITH DEVELOPERS OF COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND/OR RETAIL PROPERTIES. BUT FOR SUCH REPRESENTATIONS BY GRANTEE, AND GRANTEE'S UNIQUE SKILLS, EXPERTISE AND SUITABILITY IN OPERATION OF ART MUSEUM FACILITIES, DECLARANT WOULD NOT HAVE DONATED THE PROPERTY TO GRANTEE, BUT WOULD HAVE RETAINED THE BENEFITS OF OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING FUTURE APPRECIATION OF THE PROPERTY. ON THE BASIS OF SUCH REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, DECLARANT HAS DONATED THE PROPERTY TO GRANTEE, 1.2 State=ht of Declarant's_General Purposes. Declarant is the owner ofalargeand unique landholding, part of which has been developed as a master planned business, recreational, institutional and retail center, described below, in the City of Newport Beach (the "City")_ Amcng the distinguishing characteristics Df this master planned center are the clear delineation of use areas throughout the Center, define below, together with the strict exercise of architectural and occupancy controls over individual construction projects, so as to ensure the harmonious growt) and develcpment of the Center and the maximization of the value of Declarant's developed and undeveloped landholdings as well as the Property itself_ In addition to those general concerns, it is vitally important to Declarant that the in-cnsity of development shall be limited on those parcels of property (including the Property) that Declarant from rme to time elects to convey to third parties. Should the development limitations imposed by Declarant he exceeded, the roadways and the infrastructure improvements servicing the Center and its errvirons could be overutilized, resultng in undesirable traffic congestion and housing andlor commercial imbalances within the Center. Such conditions could in turn adversely affect the ability of Declarant to develop, own, operate, lease or sell its landownings, including without limitation the "Benefitted Property" as defined below. It is to promote these purposes that this Declaration is made, and itis the intention -of the parties that it will be in furtheriatce of said purposes that the Restrictions, and all other declarations supplemental hereto, will be ur-derstood and construed_ I.3 Definir-ons. As used herein, the following terms shall have the meanings given to them below: (a) "Benefitted Property" shall wean all real property in Orange County, California which Declarant cur-dntly owns, including, without limitation the real property descrited on EXHIBLT A attached hereto and which Declarant continues to own at the time of enforcement Df the applicable Restrictions. Declarant shall have the right by a duly recorded amendment 'hereto to unilaterally substitute for or add:to the Benefitted Property described on EX1BIT A any real property in Orange County, California which Declarant owns as of the date of this Declaration and cohtinies to I1 2574"SPtN3,MMS. mbff 10.1M Dn1+ro,p„ 2 RcwTMn 11arIFx hn Alutiiun a 210-52 own through and after the date of such substitution or addition. The Benefitted Property shall be the dominant tenement and the Property shall be the servient tenement for purposes of this ,pec aration. (b) "Center" shall mean the office, hotel, retail, recreationalr apartment and institutional area commonly known as Newport Center (including the shopping center knowr. as Fashion Island) and generally lyirg within the area enclosed by Pacific Coast Highway, MacAr4hur Boulevard, San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree .Road. (z) "Declarant" shall mean The Irvine Company as identified above and its successors, assigns or designees who shall assume the obligation and to whom The Irvine Company shall specifically assign in writing the right to enforce these Restrictions, subject to the provisions of the Section entitled "Assignment by Declarant." (d) "Declaration of Easements" shall mean that certain Declaration of Easements recorded October 31, 1995, as Instrument No. 19950484848 in the Official Record; of Orange County and incorporated herein by this reference. (e) "Drainage Easement" shall mean that certain permanent nonexclusive easement for surface drainage from the Fee Property over certain adjacent real property more fully described in the Declaration of Easements, (t} "Effective Date" of this Declaration shall be the date this Declaration is recorded in the official records of Orange County, California_ (g) "Fee Property" shall mean that portion of the Property conveyed in fee by Declarant to Grantee more fully described on EXHIBIT C attached hereto. (hi "Grantee" shall mean the Grantee identified above and each and every successor, assignee, owner, lessee, licensee or other occupant of the Property, or any portion thereof or interest therein, and each of them, during their ownership or occupancy thereof. However, such term shall not include any person having an interest in all or any portion of the Property merely as security for the performance of an Dbligation. Without Ginifing the generality of the foregoing, if Grantee leases all or any of its interest in the Property, both the lessor and lessee under such lease shall be responsible as principals (and not sureties) for compliance with all the terms and provisions of this Declaration. (ii) "Gross Floor Arra" shall mean the aggregate number of sgt.are feet of floor space on all Floor levels of any building, including mezzanines, measured from the interior face of all exterior walls. No deductions or exclusions shall be made by reason of columns, stairs, elevators, escalators, or other interior construction or equipment. (j) ! 11AC" shall mean Irvine Apartment Communities, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, or its successors or assigns_ (k) "IAC Benefitted Property" shall mean all real property in Orange County, California, which IAC.currently owns, including without limitation the real property described on EXHIBIT E attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and which IAC Continues to own at the time of enforcement of the restriction contained in Section 2.10) (No Apartment Use) below. IAC shall have the right hyla duly recorded document to unilaterally substitute for or add to the IAC 13enefirted Property described on EXHIBIT E any real property in Orange County, California, which IAC II I.MP"ASPLN5.MtSCJ —b" 10, I:X, bccl.niwn 3 x" r lt.r An Marcwa K• 210-53 +1 t owns as of the date bi this Development Declaration and continues to own through and after such substitution or addition. (1) "Joint Access Easements' shall mean that certain permanent nonexclusive easement for access, ingress and egress by vehicles and pedestrians to and from the Fee Property and the o adjoining public street over the Joint Access Easement Area more fully described in the Declaration of Easements. rpt (m) 'Joint Access Easement Area" shall mean that certain real property r Subject to the Joint Access Easement more fully described and depicted in the Declaration of Easements. i v (n) "Rt friction" shall mean each and every covenant, condition, restriction, r reservation, limitation or other provision of this Declaration. Article 2. SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS_ r1 i 2.1 Specific Facilities. (a) Development and Continued Use. Grantee represents and agrees than Grantee shall cause the Fee Property to be developed only with the specific facilities described on EXHIBIT B attached hereto (the "Specific Facilities") and in full accordance with all of the terms of this Declaration, and that Grantee shall cause the Fee Property and the Specific Facilities to be used solely for the use described in EXHIBIT B (and no other use notwithstanding that other uses may be permitted under applicable zoning ordinances), and in full accordance with all of the terms of this Declaration. W portion of the Fee Property, or any :mprOvements thereon, or any portion thereof, shall ba developed. used, operated or maintained with any facilities or for any purpose whatsoever except as set forth above and in EXHIBIT B unless expressly Epproved by Declarant, which approval may be granted or withhelc by Declarant in its sole discretion. (b) Rectuired Improvements. In addition to any such facilities constituting a pan of the Specific Facilities, Grartt;e shall construct and install all driveways, curb cuts, entryways, sidewalks and the like, perimeter walls and fences, irrigation and drainage systems, landscaping, monument, directional or other signs and all like improvements on the Fee Property or between the Fee Property and adjoining sidewalks or t -ie curbs of adjoining streets, as necessary to the use of the Specific Facilities or as required by any governmental authority with jurisdiction, To the extent that such improvements are required to be installed (A) on a portion of the Fee Property adjoining any public street or Sidewalk oI (B) between the Fee Property and adjoining sidewalks or the curbs of adjoining streets, and if the governmental authorities da�not install the same, Grantee shall,'at its sole cost and expense, also construct and install and thereafter repair and maintain the same; provided, however, that in the alternative, Declarant may, at Deciaraw's sole option at any time and from time to time upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Grantee,tonsti�i CM, install, maintain, repair, service, reconstruct, relocate andfor replace any or all such improernents and Grantee shall promptly, reimburse Declarant for the reasonable cost and expenses of such work within thirty (30) days of receipt of Declaram's invoice therefor. (c) Tram nation Corridor Fees. The Major Thoroughfare And Bridge Program For The San Joaquin Transportation Corridor (the "Fee Program") has been adopted by' the County of Orange and the City and the Property is subject to the provisions of such Fee Program. .The Fee Program will result in additional Fees to be paid by Grantee as a condition to obtaining necessary I n.1MPFT75Pta75 MMNa*.n+lrr LO, 1995 B 1brak, 4 No r7 n "arinr nn Ml +- r I k 1� ss=: 210-54 permits to construct Granfee's improv ehtents on the Fee Property. Grantee shall pay to Declarant l ny San Joaquin Transportation Corridor Fees at least ton (10) days prior to the date such Corridor Fees re due. Declarant shall make payment or such Corridor Fees or cause credits to be applied so as to sari fy such Corridor Fees not later than the last to occur of (i) ten (10) business days after receipt of notice t at such Corridor Fees are due or (ii) ten (10) business days after receipt of such Corridor Fees ft m Grantee. Declarant shall indemnity and hold Grantee harmless, against any charges imposed or Declarant's failure to satisfy such Corridor Fees if and to the extent that such Corridor Fees have been timely paid by Grantee to Declarant in accordance herewith. (d) No Aoartment Use. As set forth in the subsection above entitled "Development and Continued Use," the Property, the Specific Facilities, and any other improvements located thereon are to be used solely for the use described in EXHIBIT B and therefore, by way of example only, no portion of the Property or any improvements thereon may be held, developed, constructed, maintained, operated, used, leased or sold for rental apartment purposes at any time. Furthermore, no portion of the Proper} or any improvements thereon may be so developed or used for rental apartment purposes at any time prior to January 1, 2009 notwithstanding any amendment to this Declaration or any other agreement tc that effect between Declarant and Grantee, without the express written consent in each case of LAC, which consent may be granted or withheld by IAC in its sole discretion. Declarant and Grantee hereby acknowledge that EAC is a third party beneficiary of the foregoing special covenant, with full rights to enforce the same as if IAC were a third party to this Declaration, and that such covenant slall run and pass with each and every portion of the Property for the benefit of IAC, its successors and assigns, and the JAC Benefitted Property described on EXHIBIT E attached hereto, it being intended for purposes of rhis paragraph that the dominant tenement shalt be the IAC Benefitted Property and the servient tenement shall be the Property. 2.2 Declarant's AFpiovals_ (a) Approvals Required. Neither the Specific Facilities, nor any other landscaping, grading or other improvements that have not first received the written approval of Declarant or which do not comply with the plans and specifications approved by Declarant shall be made or constructed in, ahout or on the Property_ Declarant shall not unreasonably withhold its approval of any such site plan or plans and specifications so long as the site plan, plans aitd specifications and ileitis described therein (i) are in harmony and conformity with other existing or proposed improvements on or in the vicinity of the Property and with Declarant's master utility, circulation and general aesthetic, and architectural plans and criteria for the Property and the general area in which the Property is located, and (ii) comply with the other requirements of this Declaration. (b) Time f]r Annrovals. Declarant shall approve or disapprove any plans and specifications delivered to Declarani pursuant to this Article within thirty (30) days after receipt of three copies thereof. If approved by Declarant, such approval shall be endorsed on such plan and specifications and one set of such documents bearing Declarant's approval shall be returned to Grantee within such thirty (30) day period. IFDecland"Ices not approve such plans and specifications, Declarant shall within said thirty (30) day perioc notify Grantee of its reasons for not approving such plans and specifications and Grantee shall, within thirty (30) days after receiving notice'of Declarant's disapproval, submit new plans and specifications fof Declarant's approval. Failure of Declarant to approve or disapprove any plans and specifications within said thirty (30) day period and Declarant's continued failure to approve or disapprove for ten (10) days after Grantee's written notice to Declarant that Declarant has failed to approve or disafprove as required herein (which notice shall also state that Failure to respond within ten (10) days of this notice shall be deetned approval of the items submitted) shall be deemed approval thereof_ The approval by Declarant of any plans and specifications pursuant to this ��� III.+,yT�PPAfy7�WS.i.ISRNpv,-,lyK, 10, 1947 �. ts,.l,�i'u, 5 Niil-r m 1111b, An Mu — 61 S iGO p- 210-55 Section shall 6e approval only as to their conformity with the master plan and general architectural plan for the area. Such approval shall not be deenned approval for an engineering design nor a representation or warranty by Declarant as to the adequacy or such plaits and specifications or the grading, landscaping, improvements or construction thereby for any use or purpose. By approving such plans and specifications, Declarar liability or responsibility therefor or for any defect in any grading, landscaping, imp construction made pursuant thereto. and or V of assumes no vements or I (c) As Built Plans. Upon completion of the grading, landscaping and construction of improvements, Grantee shall submit to Declarant two "as built" sepias and a. Certificate of Compliance executed by Grantee's state -licensed consultant (engineer, architect and/or landscape architect). The Certificate of Compliance shall warrant that the completed grading, landscaFing and construction conforms to the pians and specifications therefor approved by Declarant. 2.3 Grantee's Cost_ The Specific Facilities, and all other landscaping, grading and other improvements made or constructed in, about or on the Fee property as contemplated ,herein shall be constructed, installed and completed at the sole cost and expense of Grantee and without any cost, liability or expense to Declarant_ 2.4 Fulfillment of Requirements_ Grantee shall be solely responsible, at its sole cost and expense, to satisfy all requirements (both on-site and off-site requirements) which are attribttable to Grantee's development of the Fee Property or use of the Property, including but not limited to (i) the costs incurred in satisfying conditions or requirements applicable to the Property imposed by applicable governmental agencies, (ii) requirements or conditions relating to traffic or roadway fees or improvements, (iii) affordable housing requirements, (iv) school fees, (v) San Joaquin Transportation Corridor Fees, (vi) public park dedications or fees, (vii) library fees, (viii) capital improvement fees, and (ix) all other fees and charges associated with or attributable to Grantee's development of the Fee Property or use of the Property, Except as provided in this Declaration, Declarant shall not be required to make any improvements, pay any fees or otherwise satisfy any requirements or conditions pertaining to the Property, including without limitation Declarant shall not be Obligated to make any improvements to the Joint Access Easement P.rea. Furthermore, Grantee shall have no right to make any improvements to the Joint Access Easement Area. 2.5 Compliance with Law. (a) Grantee to Comply. The Specific Facilities and all other landscaping, grading and other improvements made or constructed in, about or. on the Fee Property, and the use thereof, shall comply at all tries with all public laws, ordinances and regulations applicable thereto. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Grantee shall obtain, at its sole expense, all governmental approvals and permits which may from time to time be required with respect to the performance contemplated under this Declaration, including, as applicable and without limitation, appropriate zoning, building permits, permits from the California Coastal Commission, operating and business licenses and permits and the like. In obtaining such approvals and permits, Grantee shall prepare as necessary and without lin ilation, all environmental impact reports, engineering studies and the like as necessary. (b) Approvals of Applications. All requests or applications, togethe- with all supporting documentation, for governmental approvals or permits which require discretionary action on the part of a governmental agency, shall be submitted to and coordinated and approved by Declarant prior to filing with the governiiental agency. Declarant shall have a period of thirty (30) days after _ LO MAPrM5F7af5.h*CvK0=trr ifl, i943 �, DnIanwn 6 K—cert FWkW Ah hl—x 5 a 210-56 receipt to disapprove any i-equests or applications so subinilled by Cranlee, and in f lc event of disapproval shall specify the reasons therefor. Failure to disapprove within such thirty (30; day period and Declarant's continued fai' ure to approve or disapprove for ten (10) days after Grantee`s w! itten notice that Declarant has failed to approve or disapprove as required hereunder (which notice Ah 11 a'so state that failure to respond within ten (10) days of this notice shall be deemed approval of the iteni suhmitted) shall be deemed approval thereof. Declarant shall receive copies oral] written communicathtYes between Grantee and the governmental agencies processing such requests or applications. 2.6 rInfer.tionallVOmitted_i 2.7 Bonds.' Before the commencement of any of the work required under this Article 2, Grantee shall furnish to Ecciarant true copies of any and all labor and material bonds and faithful performance bonds, if any, required of Grantee by any governmental agency concerning such work. 2.8 Tram4ers. (a) 'Transfers Prohibited. For a period or not less than sixty (60) years after the Effective Date, Grantee shall not sell, lease, convey, exchange, encumber or otherwise transfer the Property or any portion thereof or interest therein or facilities thereon, whether by agreement for sale or in arty other manner (herein collectively referred to as a "transfer") without first giving Declarant at least sixty (60) days' prior written notice of all terms and conditions of such proposed transfer and the right to (i) approve or disapprove such transfer, (ii) exercise its option to repurchase set forth in Section 5.3 below, or (iii) exercise its right of first refusal set forth in Article 4 below. Declarant in its sole discretion may within such sb4 (60) day period exercise any such right_ If Declarant approves of a transfer, then Declarant shall not exercise its right of first refusal or its option to repuichase. Dec:arant's failure to so act within such sixty (60) day period shall be deemed to constitute approval of the transfer on the terms and conditions proposed by Grantee. The transfer, assignment or hypothecation, directly or indirectly, whether in onte transaction or a series of transactions, of more than twenty -Five percent (25%) of any equity membership. stock, partnership interest or other interest in Grantee shall be deemed a "transfer" within the meaning and provisions of this Section. Any time after the sixtieth (60th) anniversary of the Effective Date, Grantee may transfer dee Property without Declarant's approval under this Section and without regard to Declarant's option to repurchase set forth in Section 5.3 below or DeclaranPs right of first refusal set forth in Article 4 below_ Grantee hereby acknowledges that it would be reasonable and appropriate for Declarant to disapprove a transfer and exercise its option to repurchase and/or right of first refusal if the proposed transferee is not adequately experienced, knowledgeable and financially capable to own and operate an an museum which provides for local cultural enrichment. i. (b) Permitted Transfers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Grantee may consummate (i) encumbrances on the Property as security for an interim or permanent loan or loans made in good faith and for value by an institutional lender, the proceeds of which are used only --or the construction of the Specific Fa'i.lities C refinancing of such a construction loan or for any other museum purposes of Grantee, and (ii) mergers of Grantee with another entity or entities which havea museum operation substantially similar no the museum operation ofGrantee (collectively, "Permitted Transfers"). Prior to entering into a binding agreement to effect any merger permitted pursuant to subsection (ii) hereof, Grantee must notify Declarant of its intent to effect such a merger and to solicit the input of Declarant with respect to such proposed merger; provided, however, (A) Declarant shall keep such information confidential, and (B) Declarant's right to provide input does not include any right to disapprove or prohibit such meri ger. 2.9 Subw6nation. Subject to the following provisions and the provisions of Section halarnim N.—p- 11 r — M— W" a� Z 210-57 5.7 hereof, De,larant will subordinate Veclarant's right of first refusal contained in J'rtic'e 4, the mortgage lien contained in Section 5.1(d), and the option to repurchase contained inn Section 5.3 (collectively, the "Enforcement Rights") to any encumbrance referred to in Section 2.8(b)I imr_tediately above (which Section 2.8(b) shall continue in effect even after Section 2.8 no longer has aft applicatintl to this Declaration, for purposes only of describing the encumbrances to which Declarant ill continue to subordinate certain of its rights as set forth in this Section) provided that the principal aritoum of any such loan secured by an encumbrance upon the Property and/or the improvements construlctec thereon does not, in combination with other encumbrances then placed on the Property and/or the improvements constructed thereon, exceed at any time seventy-five percent (75%) of the fair market ;value of the Property and any improvements thereon, valued taking into acrouht the restrictions cont4ined in this Declaration, and such loan 'is at commercially reasonable interest rates and otherwise contains commercially reasonable ten-rs and conditions. Grantee will provide Declarant with appraisal, information from a reputable IVi_A.1_ appraiser or from an institutional tender reasonably satisfactory to Declarant to verify that the total loan -w -value rate does not exceed seventy-five percent (75%). No foreclosure, trustee's sale or deed in lieu of foreclosure with respect to any such permitted encumbrance shall be deemed an "assignment" for purposes of this Section. Within ten (10) working days after receipt of the following items, provided the foregoing requirements have been satisfied and provided there is no default under any provision of this Deelaration or under any other obligation between Declarant and Grantee relating to the Property, Declarant shall execute, acknowledge and deliver to Grantee an instrument in substantially the form attached, hereto as EXHIBIT D effecting such subordination (i) A true and complete copy of Grantee's executed mortgage or deed of trust and note secured thereby, and all other instruments evidencing or securing the indebtedness evidenced by said note. The mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property must not secure any obligation or indebtedness nDt related to development of the Property, and neither the note nor the mortgage nor deed of trust shall contain any provision making it a default thereunder if the obligor or any other parry defaults in ary obligation not related to the development or use of the Property. (ii) A preliminary tide report dated not earlier than fifteen (15) days prior to submittal showing ao title exceptions other than those in existence at the time Declarant transferred the Property to G-arttee, other utility easements reasonably necessary to serve the Property, and other matters approved by Declarant; (iii) A copy of the executed loan agreement or other agreement pertaining to the disbursemem of funds, which must provide in a rnanner satisfactory to Declarant that the funds disbursed thereunderwill be used only to improve and benefit the Property, or to. refinance a loan made for such purpose (n: an amount not to exceed the amount outstanding under the cons -ruction loan refinanced); and (iv) n copy of a Request for Notice of Default pursuant to Section 2924b of the California Civil Lode prepared for execution and acknowledgment by Declarant which, when recorded at the expense of Crani -e, will entitle Declarant to the notices prescribed by said Section 2924b_ V. The first such recordable instrument requested by Grantee shall be executed by Declarant Free of charge upon the satisfaction of the above conditions. Thereafter Declarant may at its option require a payment by Grantee of One Thousand Dollars (S1,0i10.00) as a condition to the execution of each subsequent recordable instrument. __ _ - --..- -. -11 [.irTpFM5RM15-MSZIHwanhT :D, 1471 � 7eelira[iew� N-3.. If d— h M1tu,cwn Ky 210-58 Article 3, GENERAL RESTRICTIONS. 3,1 Unarmroyed Develonnient or Use, Unless expressly approved by Decgrant, which approval may be withheld by Declarant in its sole discretion, Grantee shall not peril it the construction, maintenance, operation or use of any structure or improvements on the Fee Proper(y, nor the use of the Jomt Access Easement, not in Rill compliance with all requirements of the lav(, this Declaration and any other covenant;, conditions and restrictions from time to time covering the Property. 3.2 Floor Area Limitation. As described in Section 1.2 above, Buyer understands that the development potential of the Benefirted Property and of other lands ovvned by Declarant will depend in part on the intensity of cevelopment and use of the Property. Accordingly, Buyer covenants that without the prior written consent of Declarant, which consent may be withheld by Declarant in As sole discretion, in no event shall the collective Gross Floor Area of the Specific Facilities excekd fie permitted maximum Gross Floor Area specified in EXHIBIT B. 3.3 General Maintgnance. Grantee shall maintain the Fee Property in a clean, sanitary, orderly and attractive condition, free of weeds, debris and pests_ Grantee shall at all timos maintain the Specific Facilities, ari all other improvements from time to time located on the F.e Property, including without limitation the landscaped areas, in first class condition, order and repair. Grantee shall not construct any new improvements on the Fee Property or make any additions, alterations or other modifications ("alteration") of or to the exterior of the Specific Facilities or the visible portions of any other improvements from tame to time located on the Fee Property, without the prior wrinen consent of Declarant. All new construction and all such alterations shall be subject to the provisions :)fArticle 2 hereof. As used in this Section the "exterior" of the Specific Facilities shall mean all roofs, outside walls and facades, strucmra' foundation, entrance doors, windows, outside walkways, ramps and other accessways, and parking facil"ties, and "alterations" to "other improvements" shall include without limitation all additions, removals and replacements of large plantings, 3-4 Restoration. If any building or improvement on the Fee Property, or any part thereof, or any landscaping installed upon the Fee Property, shall be damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, Grantee shall at its cost and expense either (i) repair or restore the same according to the original plans thereof or to such modified plans as shall be previously approved in writing by Declarant as provided above, or (ii) demolish such damaged or destroyed improvements and leave the Fee Proper_y (or applicable portion thereof) in a clean and safe condition_ Such repair,restoration or demolition shall be commenced within one hundred twenty (120) days after the damage or loss occurs and shall be completed with due diligence but not longer than one (1) year after such work is commenced, The time periods specified in this subparagraph entitled "Restoration" shall be extended as provided in the Sectioo of this Declaration entitled "Unavoidable Delay." 3.5 Drainage. Grantee shall not drain or discharge water from the Fee Propery (including but not limited to rain water and: water from landscape sprinkler systems located on the Fee Property) on to adjacent land except as follows: Grantee shall at all time§ cause tine Fee Property to be graded and drained so as to cause (Le discharge of all water from the Fee Property onto the public stre`t adjoining the Fee Property, or into an established drainage facility approved by the City, if any, on or adjacent to the Fee Property, or in a_eordance with the Drainage Easement. Declarant acknowledges that the current drainage from the Fee Property and the existing improvements thereon is acceptable 'o Declarant. 3.6 [lntentionaEy Omitted.] t11,2T5P17.1$YtliS_MSCINrnanbR 10, 1995 -' Yl,tlaniias 9 N-TTMv 1Urbv An M— 210-59 3.7 SigM. Grantee shall not place or use any signs, banners, balloons, displays syr other advertising media in, on, about cr above the Property or on or in any improvements constructed or placed thereon unless it has first obm ned the prior written consent of Declarant as to the number, location, height, illumination, color and design of such signs or other media. Declarant shall ttit as unreasonably withhold such approval so long such signs or other I r media (a) comply with (i) Declarans sign program for the Property, the property surrounding the Property and the Benefitted Property, if an+ . and (ii) the statutes, ordinances or regulations of any governmental entity or agency having jurisdicti(in thereover and (b) are in harmony and conformity with the existing or proposed improvements on or in the vicinity of the Property and with De'aarant's general aesthetic and architectural pians and criteria for the Property and the general area in wt ich the Property is located. Except as provided in this Section, no sign, banner, balloon, display or otter advertising media which is visible from adjacent land or any public or private street shall be maintained in, on, about or above the Property or on or in any improvements constructed or placed thereon_ 3.8 Prohibited Operations and Uses. No use or operation shall be made, conducted or permitted on or with respect to all of any pan of the Property or improvements thereon which is obnoxious to or out of harmony with the residential and/or commercial neighborhood in the vicinity of the Property. Included among the uses or operations which are prohibited and are deemed to conflict with the reasonable standards of appearance and maintenance required hereby, are uses or operations which produce or are accompanied by the following characteristics, which list is not intended to be all inclusive, (a) Any public or private nuisance; (b) Any vibration, noise, sound or disturbance that is objectionable due to intermittence, heat, frequency, shrillness or loudness; (c) Any direct lighting which is not shielded and confined within site boundaries-, (d) Any emission of odors, noxious, caustic or corrosive matter, whether toxic or nontoxic; (e) Any litter; dust, din or ash in excessive quantities; (f) Any use of a structure of a temporary character, trailer, tent, shack, garage, barn or other outbuilding. Ne trailer, camper, bus, automobile, motorcycle, boat, or other vehicle or equipment shalt be permittec to remain upon the Property except when parked on regular paved parking area during normal busin_ss hours and incident to the uses of the Property contemplated by this Declaration; �y (g) Any raising, breeding or keeping of animals, livestock or poultry of any kind; provided, however, that live animals may be permitted within the interior of the Specific Facilities screened from view from the outside if. (i) the presence of such live animals is not prohibited by applicable governmental authorities; (ii) the presence of such live animals is in conjunction with an art exhibition and (iii) no noxious or objectionable smells or sounds shall emamfe from the interior of the Specific Facilities-, (h) Any clotheslines, woodpiles or fuel storage of any type; r 111.3TPrM5PIN5-1tI5C`Jao.d.+ty la, Itip7 ! u neclafaiyxa 10 K -7-t liartnf M MLx Q KP 210-60 (i) An} accumulation of rubbish, trash or garbage. All refuse containers, air conditioning devices, utility areas, storage areas and machinery and equipment shall be prtrhibited upon the Property unless screened from view from all adjoining lots and public and private streets; 0) Any exterior radio antenna, television antenna, "C.8_" antenna, "s,atel ite dish," microwave transmitting or teeeiving antenna or other antenna, transmitting or receiving device of any type unless it is (i) screened frnm view from all adjoining lots and public and private streets, and {ii) approved in writing by Declarant, which approval may be withheld by Declarant in its sole discceticn; (k) Any electro -mechanical or electro -magnetic disturbance or radiation; end (1) Any business that is sexually oriented, such as businesses offering nLde or semi-nude entertainment, massage parlors, Escott services, adult theaters andlor book stores, and similar businesses. Ary screen required under this Section shall consist of permanent landscaping and/or improvements cgmplying in all respects with the provisions of Sections 2.1 and 2.2 above and be approved in writins by Declarant_ The provisions of this Section entitled "Prohibited Operations and Uses" shall not in any way supersede the other Restrictions_ 3.9 No Subdivision. Grantee shall not effect any change or amendment to any map or lot line adjustment covering the Property or record any parcel or final map or lot line adjustment of the Property or any portion thereof or facilities thereon pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or any similar or successor statute he�,:eafter enacted' and/or any similar local ordinances,'or file any tentative maps or applications with respect thereto with any governmental agency, nor shat: Grantee file or record a condominium plan covering the Property -0r any portion thereof or any improvements thereon or any applications with respect thereto, or (b) take any action to cause the Property or anyrtion thereof to be or become a "common interest development" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(c) or any similar or successor statute), unless expressly approved by Declarant, which approval may be withheld by Declarant in its sole discretion. 3.10 ZoninE. Grantee shall not use or develop or attempt to use or develop the Property or any portion thereof for any purpose other than those purposes, expressly allowed (without vie benefit of a zoning variance, exception or other special administrative procedure) under the zoning ordinance or ordinances of the governmental entity having zoning jurisdiction over the Property. Additionally, Grantee shall not at any time change or attempt any change in zoning, or obtain or apply for a conditional use permit, zomn,;'variance or exception, or other similar approval with respect to the use or development of the Property or any portion thereof not expressly allowed under such existing zoning ordinance, unless expressly approved by Declarant, which approval may be withheld in its scle discretion, Notwithstanding the foregompL Declarant shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to Grantee's application for such con3itional use permit as may be required for development of the Fae Property with the Specific Facilities, Grantee shall obtain Declarant's consent prior to submitting asp such application or related documents to any governmental agency and thereafter will submit copies of all such documents to Declarant for Its review and in€ormation. 3.11 A§scssment Districts and Associations. The Property is within Newport Mesa Unified School District Community Facilities District No_ 90-1 andutay be included within such additional future assessment districts,'landseape maintenance districts andlor community facilities districts as may be created from time to time to pay for the installation and maintenance of certain roads, .._ ersections, overpasses, freeway interchanges, Flood control facilities, community or municipal facilitis n 1 257PtatsPIN5 MMN,'—.tu It, 1995 fhsiaaLLn 1 lcupul I larwr M. Niue n �r 210-61 (such as fire or police stadors, schools or public library facilities) and other offsite oil related improvements. The Property may also be included within one or more membership association as may be created from time to time for the purpose of providing for Elie installation and mainte anee of landscape improvements, private 5[rects, monuments, signs and other improvements constructed or io be constructed in connection with tte development of surrounding areas. Grantee shall be fully resi:potuible for the payment of its pro rata s-iare of all assessments imposed with respect to the Property b' reason of any such district(s) or associat on(s). Grantee will cooperate in good faith as the owner of the Property with Declarant in the formation cFany such district(s) or association(s), and hereby covenants to sign and deliver such further documents aab take such further action as may be reasonably required in connection therewith. Grantee Further covenants as the owner of the Property not to oppose, protest or object to the formation of any such district(s) or association(s), regardless of whether or not the same will directly benefit Grantee or the Property- provided that nothing herein shall be construed as (a) a prohibition against a protest by Grantee of the proportion of any assessment which may be allocable to or assessed against the Property or any other property owned by Grantee by any such district(s) or associatibn(s), or (b) a waiver of any rights of Grantee as the owner of any other property to oppose, protest or objet to the formation of any such distric.(s) or association(s). 3.12 indemnity: Declarant and Declarant's divisions, subsidiaries, partners and affiliated companies and its and their past, present and future employees, officers, directors, shareholcers, agents, representatives and professional consultants and its and their respective successors and assigns (collectively, the "Indemnitees") shall not be liable for any loss, damage, injury or claim of any 'kind or character to any person or property arising from or caused by (a) the development, maintenance, use, lease or other conveyance of the Fee Property or improvements thereon or any portion thereof or interest therein, including, without limitation, any loss, damage, injury or claim arising from or caused by or alleged to arise from or be caused by (i) any use of the Fee Property or any part thereof, (ii) any defect in the design, construction of, or rnatertal in any structure or other improvement upon the Fee Property, (iii) any defect in soils or in the preparation of soils or in the design and accomplishment of grai:fing, (iv) the presence or existence of any contaminants or hazardous or toxic substances, materials Or waste in or on the soil or ground water or the improvements on the Fee Property, whether known or unkn3wn and whether resulting from occurrences prior to or after the Effective Date, such as but not limited to asbestos in the building located on the Fee Property, including without limitation liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, the California Environmental Quality Act or any other law, (hr) any act or omission of Grantee or any of its agents, employ. -es, licensees, invitees or contractors, (vi) any accident or casualty on the Fee Property, (vii) any representations by Grantee or any of its agents or employees, (viii) any violation or alleged violation by Grantee, its employees or agents C -f any law now or hereafter enacted, (i[) any slope failure or subsur.'ace geologic or groundwater Condition, (x) any work of design, construction, engineering or other work with respect to the Fee Property provided or performed by or for Declarant either before or after the Effective Date hereof, (xi) the act or omission of any membership association or conmtittee, officer, agent or representative thereof relating to the Fee Property or the improvements' thereon or the occupancy or use thereof, whether or not Declarant or any the other Indemnitees are on the board of directors of such association or are on a committee - hereof or are an officer, agent or representative thereof, (xii) any other cause whatsoever in connection with Grantee's use of the Fee Property, or Grantee's performance urder this Declaration or any other agreement with Declarant relating to the Fee Property, (xiii) the application of the principles of strict liability with respect to any act or omission of Grantee or its agents, employees, licensees, invitees or contractors i -i connection with the ownership, use or occupancy of the Fee Property after the date hereof, or (xiv) the application of the principles of strict liability with respect to Grantee or Declarant or their respective agents, employees, licensees, invitees ar contractors in connection with the grading of the Fee Property, and/or the existence of any contaminants or hazardous materials in or on the soil, (b) the negligence or wilful misconduct of Grantee or its employees or agents; in the Ill.1TnPFi.15f'INS r1sClNwemhrr l0, 199J bnlauLLn i12 Nc�twn Ila.hn A.+ Ft..vm 210-62 W development, construction, grading is other work performed off the Fee Property by Graince puri;uaix to this Declaration or any defect In any such work, (c) the breach by Grantee of any of its obliga�ioni under this Declaration, (d) the use c f the Joint Access Easement by Grantee, its employees, licen; ees. invltces, agents or other users of ti -c Joint Access Easement, including, without limitation, any oss, m daage, injury or claim alleged to anise from or be caused by any use of the Joint Access Easetite�i t or any part thereof, or (e) except as otherwise provided in Section 3.5 hereof, the use of the Draihage Easement by Grantee, including, without limitation, any loss, damage, injury or claim alleged to fi ; sc from or be caused by any use of the Drainage Easement or any part thereof, Funllerniore, as a material part of the consideration of this Deear4tion, Grantee hereby waives oil its behalf all claims and demands against Declarant and the other Indemnitees for any such loss, damage, or injury of Grantee, and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Declarant and its property, and the other indemnitees from all loss, liability, damage, costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees) arising from or related to any such lass; damage, injury or claim, whether incurred or made by Grantee, Declarant, the Indemnitees or any other person(s). The foregoing waiver and indemnity shall apply to a claim or action brought by a private party or by a governmental agency or entity under any statute or common law now or lie reina iter in effect, and shall apply to losses, damages, injuries or claims incurred directly by Declarant or any other Indemnitee_ With respect to design, construction methods, materials, locations and other matters for which Declarant has given or will give its approval, recommendation or other direction, the foregoing waiver, indernnity and agreement shz-l[ apply irrespective of Declarant's approval, reconiniendadon or other direction. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above, nothing contained in this Section shall operate to (a) relieve any Indemnitee from any loss, damage, injury or claim ultimately established by a court of competent jurisdiction to have been caused solely by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee, or (b) relieve any prior owner of the Property from any loss, damage, injury or claim for any contaminants or hazardous or toxic substances, materials or waste in or on the soil or ground water or the improvements on the Fee Property arising from the use of the Fee Property by such prior owner. Grantee's covenants in this Section arising from or related to acts or occurrences during the time of Grantee's ownership shall survive the lease or other conveyance of all or any part of the Property or improvements thereon and shall be binding on Grantee (as well as its successors to the Property) until the last to occur of such date as action against the Indemnitees is absolutely barred by an applicable statute of limitations or such date as all claims and actions for which indemnification may be claimed are fully and Finally resolved and, if applicable, all compromises thereof and judgments and awards thereon are paid in full and the Indemnitees, and each of them, are reimbursed for all amounts paid by them in the compromises thereof and upon the judgments and awards thereon and in defense of such actions and claims, including actual attorneys' fee's. If any action or proceeding shall be brought against an Indemnitee for which Grantee is to provide indemnification. Grantee, upon notice from the Indemnitee, shall defend the same at its expense b} counsel approved in writing by such Indemnitee, Payment shall not be a Condition precedent to recovery under any indemnification in this Declaration. Article 4. DECLARANTS RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL Except with regard we "Permitted Transfers" described in the Section above entitled "Transfers," if at any time prior to the sixtieth (60th) anniversary of the Effective Date Grantee shall determine to sell all or any part of the Propeny or the improvements thereon or any interest therein ("Interest"), Grantee shall notify Declarant of the price and the terms on which Grantee will be willing to sell and all relevant information which would reasonably be relied upon in evaluating whether to acquire the Property (including but not limited to a recent preliminary title report, a list of known litigation, notices, citations and other material matters affecting the Property, and the most recent Environmental Site Assessments obtair_ed by or in the possession of Grantee concerning the Property.) If Declarant, within sixty (60) days afi;t receipt of Grantee's notice, indicates in writing its agreement to purchase said Interest for rite price and on the terms stated in Grantee's notice, Grantee shall sell and III.:s71Pt�15Y11:j.�.ISRMmm�R 10, Iws 13 N -T— Ilnhur nn M—I- .i r 210-63 convey the Interest to Declarant far the price and on the terms Stated in such notice. If Declara it does not indicate its agreement within such sixty (60) day period, Grantee thereafter shall have the right to sell and convey the Interest to a third party, but only for a price not less than the price offered to Declarant and on terms not more favorable Clan those stated in the notice. If Grantee does not so sell andomey the Interest within one hundred Eighty (180) days after Grantee's notice, any further trans coons (including a transaction on the sarre' price and terms previously submitted to Declarant) shall be deemed a new determination by Grantee to sell and convey said Interest, and the provisions of this Article shall again be applicable. The obligatiDns of this Paragraph shall survive any sale of the Property 4nd be binding upon Grantee and its 5u�c=ors and assigns, Article 5. REMEDIES. 5.1 Default and Genefal Remedies. In the event of any breach, violation or failure to perform or satisfy any of the Restrictions which has not been cured within the applicable cure peri7d as set forth below, Declarant at Vs sole option and discretion may enforce any one or more of the following remedies or any other riots or remedies to which Declarant may be entitled by law or equity, whether or not set forth herein_ Unless a cure period is otherwise specifically designated, Such cure period shall commence when written notice is given to Grantee of a violation hereunder and shall end ten (10) days thereafter in the case of a monetary default and thirty (30) days thereafter in the case of a non - monetary default; provided that if a non -monetary default is not reasonably susceptible of cure promptly within the thirty (30) day period, 'hen Grantee shall have a reasonable time to cure same so long 3s Grantee has commenced such cure promptly within the thirty (30) day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes the cure to completion. To the maximum extent allowable by law, all remedies provided herein or by law or equity shall be 'cumulative and not exclusive; provided, however, that except as provided in the following sentence ai the event Declarant elects to exercise any remedy pWvided for n Section 5.3 hereof based upon a panicular violation of the Restrictions, such remedy shall be Declarant's sole and exclusive remedy for such violation of the Restrictions, although such remedy may be sought in the alternative with other available remedies in any legal action. Notwithstanding the foregoing. Declarant's remedies for a violation or breach of Section 3.12 (Indemnity) shall be cumulative with and in addition to its remedies for other violations or breaches under this Declaration, (a) Damages_ Declarant may bring a suit for damages for any compensable breach of or noncompliance with any of the Restrictions, or declaratory relief to determine the enforceability of any of the Remriciwns. (b) Eauity, It is recognized that a particular or ongoing violation by Granter of one or more of the foregoing Restrictions may cause Declarant to suffer, material injury or damage nct compensable in money (including, but not limited to irreparable effects on the type and quality of development on and use of the Benefitted Property or portions thereon), and that Declarant shall be entitled to bring an action in equity ox ;otherwise for specific performance to enforce compliance with the Restrictions or an injunction to en}oai the c6 inuance of any such breach or violation thereof, whether or not Declarant exercises any other remedy set forth herein. (c) Abatement. Any such breach or violation of these Restrictions of any provision hereof is hereby declared to be a nuisance, and Declarant shall be entitled to enter the Property and summarily abate and remove, wi:hout further legal process to the maximum extent permitted by law. any structure, thing or condition that may exist in violation of any of these Restrictions, or to prosecute any remedy allowed by law or equity for the abatement of such nuisance against any person or entity acting or failing to act in violation ad these Restrictions, all at the sole cost and expense of Grantee or any person having possession under Grantee. Any costs or eKpenses paid or incurred by Declarant it.. I n.zsnrrxtsrtsts MSOR—k- 10, 19" 14 •rr i osiaa N..T­ trait- An M.— 210-64 �a abating such nuisance or prosecuting any such remedy (including all. reasonable ,atturneys' �ees and costs of collection),-ogether with interest thereon at the maximum contract rate then permitted by aw, shall be a charge against the Property, shall be a continuing lien thereon until paid, and shall also be the personal obligation of Grantee or other person who was owner of the Property when such chrges became due and who committed such breach or violation. (d) Mortgage Lien. All costs, expenses, interest, fees ant ot:ier sums required to be paid by Grantee to Declarant hereunder shall be secured by this Declaration and Grantee hereby mortgages the Property and all improvements thereon to Declarant with power of safe in accordance with Sections 2420 et seq, of the California Civil Code,and ail other applicable statutes, for the purpose of securing all said sums. Foreclosure of such mortgage lien, by judicial foreclosure or under power of sale, to recover any such amount owed shall not extinguish the lien or any prevision of this Declaration, but shall only extinguish the mortgage lien created herein as it applies to or secures amounts due hereunder as of the date of foreclosure and the mortgage lien created herein shall continue to exist for the purpose of securing any further amounts required to be paid hereunder by Grantee's successor (whether a successor by any such foreclosure sale or otherwise) to Declarant under this Declaration_ Foreclosure of such mortgage lien shall not extinguish a lien which arises from a violation of any provision of this Declaration after such foreclosure even if such violation is a continuing violation which also existed prior to ue Foreclosure_ (i) Power of Sale. to the event Grantee fails to pay all or any portion of the indebtedness secured hereby within the applicable cure period therefor, then Declarant may immediately cause a written 'notice of default and election to sell the Property (herein, "Notice of Default") to he prepared and filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of Orange County. After three months or such shorter time as may be allowed by law shall have elapsed from the recordation of such Notice of Default, and after a notice of sale has been given to the extent required by the then applicable law, Declarant, Mthout further legal action or demand on Grantee, may cause the Property to be sold at such time and plate as may be fixed in said notice of sale or at such time and place :o which the sale may be postponed as hereinafter provided without additional notice, either as a whole or in separate parcels, and in such order as Declarant alone may determine, at public auction to the highest bidder for cash in lawful money of the United States at the time of sale, or upon such other terms as Declarant may consider advisable. Grantee shall have no right to direct or determine whether the Property shall be sold as a whole or in separate parcels, or the order of sale of separate parcels or the portion of the Property to be sold if only a portion is sold. Declarant may postpone the sale of the Properly by public announcement thereof at the time and place of sale and from time to time thereafter by public announcement at the time and place of the preceding postponement. in conducting or postponing any such sale, Declarant may act through its agents, officers or employees or any other person designated by Declarant, wt -ether or not such party shall be a licensed auctioneer. At such sale, Declarant shall cause to be delivered to the buyer or buyers one or more duly executed deeds conveying the property so sold, subjeck to all the provisions of this Declaration, but without any covenant or warranty, either express or implied. The recitals in such deed or deeds with regard to any matters of fact shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof against the buyer at such sale, its successors and assigns, and all other persons. Any Terson, including Declarant, may bid in or purchase at su;h sale. Grantee hereby agrees to surrender, immediately and without demand, possession of said property to the buyer at such sale. No such sale shall release or extinguish any rights, remedies or provisions contained in this Declaration in the event of any further violation of any Restriction set forth herein - (i i) erein_ (ii) Application of Proceeds, such sale in the following manner and order: 111 17TTFINSPLN5. At5(?SAnm I- IU, 045 15 tit Declarant shall apply the proc_eds of 4cara��m tQev.�urt klnrkw ?n M1lu,euen 0 210-65 (A) Expenses of such sale and all costs, fees, expenses Of Declarant, including costs of evidence of title and reasonable attorneys' fees, (B) All sutras secured hereby; and ane (C) The remainder, if any, to the person or persons le ally entitled thereto. (iii) Foreclosure by Court Action. In addition to the foregoing, Declarant may foreclose the lien erea:ed hereby by court action in the manner provided by the laws then applicable to this indenture, in which case Grantee agrees to pay all costs and expenses thereof, including reasonable attorneys' fees as the courtmay determine. (iv) Waiver of Statute of Limitations. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Grantee expressly waives the benefit of and the right to plead and in any way take advantage of any and all statutes of I mitation, both as to the indebtedness secured hereby or any other provision hereof, and Grantee will upon request of Declarant execute and acknowledge (if necessary) further written extensions or waivers of the applicable statutes of limitations with respect to payment of any indebtedness secured hereby and interest thereon. (v) Notice of Sale_ Grantee hereby requests that copies of the Notice of Default and any notice of sale here.tnder be mailed to it at the address set forth below in Section 8.7. Grantee agrees that any such notice or demand shall be deemed fully given to Grantee if mailed to it by registered mail at such address, or anymore recent address delivered to Declarant as provided below. 5.2 Inspection. E-eclarant or its authorized representatives may from time to. time, at any reasonable hours, enter upon and inspect the Property, site or any portion thereof or improvements thereon to ascertain compliance with the Restrictions, but without obligation to do so or liability therefor. 5.3 Oxon. Upon any proposed, attempted or actual "transfer" in violation of the provisions of Section 2.8 above and upon any violation of the Restrictions itemized in Section 2.1(a) above (Development and Continued Ise), Declarant, in its sole option and discretion, shall be entitled to repurchase the Property as provided below_ (a) Grant ofQption. Grantee hereby grants to Declarant an exclusive option to repurchase the Property subject only to: (i) Current taxes not yet delinquent, (ii) Matters affecting title existing at the Effective Date of this Declaration, excluding any mortgage, deed of trust or similar instrument to which Declarant has subordinated the Enforcement Rights Fulsuanita Section 2.9 above; (iii) Matters affecting tide which are created, made, assumed, consented to or requested by Declarant. Sts successors or assigns, excluding any mortgage, deed of trust or similar instrument to which Declarant has subordinated the Enforcement Rights pursuant to Section 2.9 above; (iv) Matters shown as printed exceptions in the standard form California Land Tide Association owner's policy of title insurance; and - III 2MPrMSPIl1S MSC\N—&, 10. 19" �M 1 16 17aclara(am Hc�va I IarMr An Mwcwn �J �r Is 210-66 (v; Noninterfering easements for utilities used in connection improvements constructed on the Property, nhe (b) Exercise of Option. Declarant may exercise its option to repurch se the Property by giving written notice to Grantee of Declarant's election to repurchase within (i) sixiy (60) days after receipt of Grantee's notice ofproposed "transfer" as provided in Section 2.8 (Transfers) �bove, (ii) within ninety (90) days after D'cbarartt receives actual notice of any transfer or attempted transfer in violation of any provision in Section 2-8, or (iii) within ninety (90) days after Declarant receives',actual notice of Grantee's violations of Section 2.l(a). For purposes of this Section 5,3, Declarant's actual notice shall mean the actual noticr, to the corporate officer or project manager of Declarant having the responsibility of administering sales! of properties adjacent to and including the Property or the person to whom notice may be addressed under Section $-7 of this Declaration, and no other persons. No tails re of Declarant to exercise its option Qi the event of any proposed, attempted or actual "transfer" (whether approved by Declarant or not) in violation of Section 2.8 above shall constitute a waiver of Decigram's rights to exercise the option upon any such transfer subject to Section 2.8 which might be proposed, attempted or consummated at a lata time. No failure of Declarant to exercise its option in the event of Grantee's violation of Section 2.1(a) shall constitute a waiver of its right to exercise the option upon a subsequent or continuing violation of Section 2.1(a). (c) Restoration; Grantee's Improvements_ Within ninety (90) days aft_r notice by Declarant of exercise of its option, Grantee at its sole cost and expense (i) may remove from the Fee Property all structures, buildings, pavings, landscaping and other improvements (collectively, the "Grantee's Improvements") and all materials of whatever nature deposited by Grantee at any time hereafter upon the Fee Property, ar.d (ii) shall restore the Fee Property to at least as good condition as existed at the Effective Date hereof. All of such work shall be accomplished to the sale but reasonab e satisfaction of Declarant_ If the Fee Property is not so restored, then Declarant may accomplish such restoration and shall be entitled to a reimbursement in an amount equal to the cost of accomplishing such restoration within ten (10) days of a demand therefor. Any Grantee's improvements not so removed by Grantee within such ninety (90) day period shall automatically become the property of Declarant without the payment of further consideratior. and without the necessity of any further conveyance or bill of sale. (d) Exp:rationand Quitclaim. Unless exercised by Declarant, this optionsha't . expire upon thl: Sixtieth (6t)th) anniversary of die Effective Date. Aitgt enpiration avid upon written request therefor by Grantee, shall exccuce and dcliYer to Grantee a quitclaim deed satisfactory to Declarant relinquishing all of B rights under the option to repurchase Portion of this Declaration, (e) Price, The purchase price upon exercise of [lie option shall be-- (1) e_ (i) All costs lncurred by Grantee pursuant to the Donation Agreement which were paid through escrow in connection with the acquisition of the Property: ess (ii) All costs, expenses, interest, fees, advances and other sums a - required to be paid by Grantee to Declarant ereunder, to the extent not reimbursed to Declarant by Grantee, shall reduce the amount of the purchase price to be paid by Declarant under the terms of this repurchase option. (t) Repurchase Escrow Terms. Within rive (5) days after Declarant's exercise of the option as provided above or as soon thereafter as possible, an escrow shall be created at First American Title Insurance Company or another escrow company selected by Declarant tc consummate the purchase as specified herein, which escrow shall have a time limit of thirty (30) days. _ prior: r�"tsru+s nts�r+a,� ria, non nRi,,��n 17 N-pw pram. An I 1;J 210-67 1;J 210-67 Said escrow shall be subject only to approval by Declarant of a then current preliminary title repo'��tt. Any exceptions shown thereon created on or after the Effective Date hereof, and disapproved by tvrilte'h notice to Grantee through escrow, shall be removed by Grantee at its sole expense at or prior to clq`sing of escrow. In the event that the Prcperty or any portion thereof is encumbered by a mortgage or deed of trust, Declarant may unilaterally instruct the escrow agent to satisfy the indebtedness secured thereby out of the proceeds payable to Grantee, through the foregoing escrow, Any additional amount necessary to satisfy such indebtedness and release such mortgage or deed of trust at the close of escrow shall be paid by Grantee. Grantee and Declarant shall each pay one-half of the escrow fees. Declarant shall 'pay for documentary tax stamps, for rec<rding the deed, acid for a California Land Tide Association standard form owner's coverage policy of aide insurance in the amount of the purchase price showing title to the Property vested in Declarant or its assigns free and clear of all liens, encumbrances or other title exceptions other than those set forth in this Declaration. Any other costs or expenses shall be allocated between the parties in the manner customary in Orange County, California. (g) Irrevocability_ The option created hereby shall be irrevocable by Grantee, and shall be binding upon the representatives, successors and assigns of Grantee. (h) Warranties_ Plans and Specifications_ In the event Declarant reacquires all or any portion of the Property of the Specific Facilities under this Section 5.3, Grantee shall assign and transfer to Declarant for no acditional consideration all warranties, plans and specifications relating to the Grantee's improvements not removed by Grantee and any other improvements transferred by Grantee to Declarant hereunder_ 5.4 [Intentionally Omitted] Al 5.5 Waiver. Wo waiver by Declarant. of a breach of any of the Restrictions by Grantee and no delay or failure to 'enforce any of the Restrictions shall be construed or held to be a waiver of any succeeding or preceding breach of the same or any other of the Restrictions. No waiver of any breach or defaulr of Grantee hereunder shall be implied from any omission by Declarant to take any action on account of such breavh or default if such breach or default persists or is repeated, and no express waiver shall affect a breach or default other than as specified in said waiver. The consent or approval by Declarant to or of any act by Grantee requiring Declarant's consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary Declarant's consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar acts by Grantee_ 5.6 Costs of EnforcemetL. In the event any legal or. equitable action or proceeding shall be instituted between Declarant and Grantee in connection with this Declaration or the Property to enforce any provision of this Declaration, the party prevailing in such action shall be entitled to recover from the losing party all of its cosli, including court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. 5.7 Rights of Lenders., ,No breach or violation of the Restrictions shall defeat or render invalid the lien of any mortgage, deed of trust or similar instrumetlt securing a loan made in good faith and for value with respect to rte development or permanent financing of the Property or any portion thereof; provided, however, that tLis Declaration and all provisions hereof shall be binding upon ar-d effective against any subsequent owner or other occupant of the Property or portion thereof whose tide is acquired by foreclosure, trustee'ssale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise, but (a) such subsequelt owner shall have a reasonable time after acquiring title in which to cure any violations or correct and change any facts giving rise to Declarant's rights under this Declaration occurring prior to such transfer of title or occupancy and which are reasonably capable of being cured or changed provided that. such subsequent owner diligently acts to effect such cure or change (and in the event of such diligegt and IILSTPFMSPLNS.MMH.t,d- 0.1" ? D.Jg 6n i 18 Ncwpn llzrtm An hluYv n 210-68 timely cure, such subsee; •.rnt owner shall have no further liability in connection with such prior violai ion or the continued existence of such violation until such cure is completed), and (b) Sections 5.(a) I (Damages), 5.1(c) (Abatement) and 5.3 (Option) shall not be applicable as to such subsequent owner r lth regard to any noncurable default occurring prior to the time such subsequent owner acquired ttle. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any Stich subsequent owner shall be required to use the Property in accordance with the restrictions set forth in Section 2.1(a) and diligently complete construction of tiny Specific Facilities which are incomplete on the date such subsequent owner acquires title, all subject to the requirements contained in this Declaration. For purposes of this Section, the construction or installation of any improvement in violation of the requirements of this Declaration shall be deemed "curable" so long as reconstruction, repair or replacement in a manner consistent with the requirements of this Declaration is physically and legally possible (without respect to cost). 5.8 Advances. Declarant shall be entitled to advance any sums Declarant in its sole disci'etion deems necessary to protec_ and preserve the security for its rights and interest under this Declaration (including but not limited to sums for completion of construction of the Specific Facilities or any offsite improvements, any property taxes or assessments, insurance premiums, or amounts secured or represented by encumbrances or lieris or other charges on any portion of the Property which appear to be prior to Declarant's rights and it[erest under this Declaration), all of which advances together with interest at the maximum contract rate then permitted by law shall be paid to Declarant upon demand and shall be secured by the lien of this Declaration described in Section 5.1(d) above. 5.9 Waiver oflury Trial. Declarant and Grantee each acknowledges that it is aware of and has had the advice of counsel of its choice with respect to its rights to trial by jury, and each party does hereby expressly and knowingly waive and release all such rights to trial by jury in any action, proceeding or counterclaim brought by either party hereto against the other (andlor against its officers, directors, employees, agents, or subsidiary or affiliated entities) on or with regard to any natters whatsoever arising out of or in any way connected with this Declaration, Grantee's use or occupancy of the Property, and/or any claim of injury or damage. Article 6. [Intentionally Omitted,] Article 7. 1[_ntentionally Omitted.] Article 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 8.1 Unavoidable Delay. Any prevention, delay or stoppage in the work of building the Specific Facilities and any other related improvements or other work as provided for in this Declaration caused by strikes, lockouts, actions or inaction of governmental bodies or public utility companies, acts of God, war, riots, civil insurrection, court injunction, inclement weather or other force of elements, inability to obtain labor or materials or reasonable substitutes therefor, or other similar matters or causes (excluding financial inability) beyond the reasonable control of Grantee, shall extend the time within which this Declaration required certain acts to be perforated for a period or periods equal to any period of such prevention, delay or stoppage; provided, however, that nothing in this Section shall excuse the prompt payment of any and all amounts due from Grantee to Declarant as required herein or the performance of any act rendered difficult solely because of the financial condition of Grantee_ Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in no event shall Grantee's inability to obtaiin construction or permanent financing 1167 development of the Property, or a portion thereof, constitute an unavoidable delay pursuant to this Section. Furthermore, in no event shall any extension of any period of time be deemed to have occurred unless Grantee shall have given written notice to Declarant within fifteen (15) days following any such delay, setting forth the facts giving rise to such extension-, and -- _ -lI 1.1v�nt5PL1+5.1.t5RNwodcr k4, 1995 Rv�araCian 19 Ncntmn nuhor An Atuu'v,n 210-69 _. provided further that the period of time. for exercise of Declarant's rights shall be extended. 8.2 Continuous Operations. Grantee shall proceed continuously and diligently accordance with the terns and conditioas of this Declaration. In the event Grantee does not proct continuously and diligently, such failure to so proceed may, at the option of Declarant, be considered event of default herein, except as such failure is excused by reason of any unavoidable delay as set fo in the Section hereof entitled "UnavoidaAc Delay." 8.3 Covenants to Run with the Property: Term. (a) Covenans to Run With the . Property. The Property shall be held, developed, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, rented, used and occupied subject to thL Restrictions set forth in this Declaration. The Restrictions are for the benefit of the Benefitted Property and are intended and shall be conslrue3 as covenants and conditions running with and binding the Property and equitable servitudes upon the Property and every part thereof. Furthermore, all and each of the Restrictions shall be binding upon and burden all persons having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of the Benefitted Property and the owners of the Benefitted Property, their successors and assigns, and shall be enforceable by Declarant and its successors and assigns, all upon the terms, provisions and conditions set forth herein. Every person or entity who now or hereafter owns or acquires any right, title or interest in the Properly is and shall b_ conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to every Restriction contained herein, whether cr. not any reference to this Declaration is contained in the instrument by which such person or entity acquired an interest in the Property. a (b) Term. All of the terms and provisions set forth in this Declaration shall continue in full force and effect in perpetuity, except that Declarants "Enforcement Rights" (as described in Section 2.9 above) shall terltinate sixth (60) years from the Effective Date hereof. 8.4 Assignment_by Declarant_ Declarant may assign any of its rights and powers under this Declaration to any fee owner of any portion of the Benefitted Property, so long as such person or entity in writing agrees to assume the dlties of Declarant pertaining to the particular rights and powers assigned. Upon the recordation of such writing accepting such assignment and assuming such duties, such person or entity shall, to the extent of such assignment, have the same rights and powers and be subject to the same obligations and duties as are given to and assumed by Declarant herein_ Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Declarant may make such assignment as to the entire Property or to any portion thereof. Unless specifically assigned in writing as stated in this paragraph, the Restrictions shall cease to benefit that portion of the Benefitted Property conveyed by Declarant to a third party and Declarant alone shall have the r ght to enforce the Restrictions and the' other provisions of this Declaration or to recover damages or other amounts for violation of the Restrictions or breach of m Grantee's duties hereunder. For purposes of Eh%imediately preceding sentence, "Declarant" shall include a party affiliated with or related io The Irvine Company which satisfies both of the following requirements: (a) such party is (i) a person or entity which acquires twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the assets of The Irvine Company, (q) a division or subsidiary, of The Irvine Company, (iii) or partnership of which The Irvine Company has at least twenty-five percent (25`ic) interest in the profits' and distributions of such partnership, (iv) a real estate investment or other entity formed by or through the efforts of The Irvine Company and regarding which The Irvine Company owns not less than twenty- five percent (25%) of the stock or other ownership interest, (v) an entity resulting from a merger With or an acquisition by or of The Irvine Company, or (vi) a person or entity owning the majority of stock I1t.7 PTNISPLNs-MMN—k, 19, t99S [laUiown I. 20 N—Wn 11.h r An Mus - 210 -70 or other ownership inte-est in either The Irvine Company or any entity described in (i) through (v) and (b) such party acquires all or sDme part of the Beneflued Property. 8.5 Amendmen,_s_ Except as provided in this Declaration concerning (a) substitution of other real property as the Benefitted Property, (b) release of any portion or all of the Property from this Declaration, (c) reacquisition cf the Property by Declarant and (d) assignment by Declarant 'of its rights under this Declaration, this Dmlaration may be terminated, extended or amended only by al Iritirg executed by Declarant and Grantee and recorded against the Property. 8.6 Release. (a) Release by Declarant. Declarant may release any portion of the Property from this Declaration at anv time and for any reason without the approval of Grantee. Decliararrt shall also, upon written request from Grantee, release any portion of the Property dedicated or otherwise conveyed to and accepted by a publicentity or public utility. (b) Not Applicable to Declarant_ Notwithstanding anything herein contained to the contrary, if Declarant reacquires title to the Property or any portion thereof at any time after the date hereof and record(s) a notice of termination of these Restrictions in the Office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California, these Restrictions shall cease and terminate and be of no. further force or effect as to Declarant and such property, effective as of the date of such recordation. 8.7 Notices. Xl notices, consents, requests, demands and other communication provided for herein shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if and when personally served or forty-eight (48) hours after being sent by United States certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to the other party at the following respective ado.resses: DECLARANT: THE IRVIN- COMPANY clo Irvine Commercial Land Sales Company 550 Newport Center Drive P.O. Box I Newport Beach, California 92658-8904 Attention: Vice President, Sales and Marketing with a copy eo; THE IRVINE COMPANY c/o Irvine Ccntmercial Land Sales Company 550 Newport Center Drive P.O. Box I r y Newport Bea=h, California 92658-8904 Attention: General Counsel, Commercial Land Sales Ic d 210-71 �J GRANTEE: NEWPORT HARBOR ART MUSEUM 850 Szn Clemente Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attention: Director or at such other address as Declarant or Grantee may designate to the other in writing in accordance with the provisions of this Section. 8.8 Governing Uw. This Declaration shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California_' In the event of any dispute hereunder, it is agreed that the sole and exclusive venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in Orange County, California, and Grantee and Declarant agree to submit to the jurisdiction of such court. 8.9 Severability. In the event that any portion of this Declaration shall b_come illegal, null or void or against public policy, for any reason, or shall be held by any court of corrpetent jurisdiction to be illegal, null or void or against public policy, the remaining portions of this Declaration shall, not be affected thereby ar.d shall remain in force and effect to the full extent permitted by law, 8.10 Cantiots. The captions used herein are for convenience only and are not a part of this Declaration and do not '.n any way limit or amplify the terms and provisions hereof. 8.11 Entire Agreement_ This Declaration, including Exhibits attached hereto which are incorporated herein by this reference, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties aereto pertaining to the subject matte[ hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreemen45, representations, negotiations and understanding, of the panics hereto, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. The foregoing sentence shall in no way affect the validity of [he Donation Agreement pursuant to which Grantee acquired the-roperty or any instruments executed in connection therewith. 8,12 Gender and Number_ In this Declaration (unless the context requires othervise), the masculine, feminine and nester genders and the singular and the plural include one another. 8.13 Time o- Essence. Time is of the essence of each provision of this Declaration in which time is an element. 8.14 No Waiver by Indemnitees_ No failure or delay on the part of any Indemnitee to exercise any power, right or privilege under this Declaration shall impair any such power, right or privilege, or be construed to be a waiver of any default or any acquiescence therein, nor shall any Single or partial exercise of such power, right or privilege preclude other of funher exercise thereof or of any other right, power or privilege. No provision of this Declaration may be changed, waived, discharged or terminated except by an instrument i) writing signed by the pany against whom enforcement of the change, waiver, discharge or territination is sought. 8.15 Interest Amounts due hereunder from Dectarant or Grantee to the other, if not paid when due, shall bear interest at ten percent (10%) per annum from the date due until paid. 1merest which is not paid shall amtually be added to the principal amount due and shall thereafter itself bear interest as such rate. ._ ktl_+.sTP IS,geeS M1ISCIli�vnlsr 10. IT+3 13,61" 22 Nevtiyon naltul An Rl� 210-72 i i K.„ II u 210-72 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Declaration as of the date Ifirst written above. "DECLAI4ANT" "GRANTEE" THE IRVINE COMPANY, NEWPORT HARBOR ART MUSEUM, a Michig rporation a California nonproFt pubs is benefit corporat Ion By: ' By: Richard G. Sim dame /�iW iJ Executive Vice President Title: II �_ �\' P 90 By: 'T';- 7 m By. John C.Tsu Name: Vice President-Finance Titte: Investment Properties Group i l ' Itf.25TPFA[51'tS15.N5C1flwemher 10.1995 - Dedan4 _ _ ---- 23 NeWn nada An M� i �r • i • f _ 210-73 STATE OF CAI iFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On November 22, 1995, before me, Cynthia M. Ptak, a Notary Public, personally appeared Richard G. Sim, Executive Vice President and John C. Tsu, Vice President, personably Down to me (or proved to me on the bases of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the sane in their authorized capacity and that by their signature on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WrIWESS my hand and official seal. I CYAITHIA Jtit. PTAtC . •�: _ � ����,C-.. � '� r+o�rwrPueuc1071180 � GWFp�rF' C O�'VJGE COE,INiy N � .. — _ — Comrtissiorr Expires OeC. 9.1997 � 210-74 i 210-74 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) COUNTY OF `y e ) On lyotSGw�EIa(f S before me, _pD(4t��r2 e -.]�Q/ a notary public in and For the said state, personally appearedSe { y� [Insert name(s) and dtle(s)] personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s, whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshe/they ezecued the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon l:ehalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. j n _�-� OE90RA1+LORE C. SECARD Signature: _ �I�' LQ✓�(' COt�uA.rl�al *My apPJAC - CgrrgntpMy Commission Expires: Ca n. E»m JUL Y, 1490 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) //jj COUNTY OF [Ji�6t -tom } On NUW^✓j7e/a14 0 before me,[ dx,,;.k rSre- e•S a notary public in and for the said state, personally appeared 4-(A Ay -e-- _eA [Insert name(s) and tide(s)] personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) islare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. N CESORM-LOPE C. SWAo COMM. 4I05o30t Signature: (Li/f � "v ''� Notary P4AC-ccofaNa .Z A 4� nq qANGE catnv My Commission Expires: tNy Comm.CEmtra JR 7, Iti9p ::LMPFMSPM-M5CVVo be 10, 1945 y 25 F i K.� Nmp m Flan- An K1— 210-75 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF BENEFITTED PROPERTY Parcel A (Harbor View 5hoVpinT g C. weF): Parcels 2, 3 and 4, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map filed in Book 35 Page 1 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. i A non-exclusive easement for ingrc-;s and egress purposes over the northwesterly 10.00 feet of Parcel No. 1, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as per map filed is Book 35, Page 1 of Parcel Maps, rewords of said Orange County. (Harbor View Shopping Center) Paitel B (Fashion Island) Parcel B-1: Parcels 1 through 9, inclusive, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State or California, as shown on Parcel Map No. 86-399 as per Map filed in Book 221, pages 30 through 36, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Parcel B-2: Parcels 13 through 17, inclusive, and Lots Q, R, S, U, R-1, R-2 and R-3 of Tract No, 6015, in the. City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as per Map recorded in Boot- 239, pages 28 through 41, inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of�,the County Recorder of said County. Parcel B -3 - Parcel 1, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 67, pages 2 and 3, of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County_ Parcel Bim: Parcel 1, in the City of NeW70rt Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 75, page 48, of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. rri.s'nrr-x+svws.Mscw4. w, r9vs rr EXHIBIT A to ❑eclaration of Special Restrictions Page I of 6 Nc%Tm Harbor An Nfi--ii 210-76 Parcel R-5; Parcel 4 of Parcel Maps, as shcwn on a Map filed in Book 67, rages 2 and 3, of Parcel Map and Lot W of Tract No- 6015, a-, per Map recorded in Book 239, pages 28 through 41, inclusive of Miscellaneous Maps, all in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, lying within the land described as Parcels I and 2 of that certain Lot Line Adjustment N_11 L.L.A. 87-3, recorded November t3, 1987, ais Instrument No. 87-640346, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Parcel C (Pelican Hill Golf Courses) ` Parcel C-1: Parcel 1 of that certain Lot Line Adjustment No. LL -94-030, recorded April 28, 1995 as Instrument No, 95-0130640, Official Records of said County. Parcel C-2; Lots 2, 5, 6 and 7 of Tr -et No- 14131, in the County of Orange, State of California, as; shown on a Map filed ir_ Book 662, Pages 42 to 46, inclusive of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange Coutry, California. arcel C-3: Parcel 4 of that certain Lot Line Adjustment No. 94-008 recorded April 28, 1995 as Instrument No, 95-018OE4, Official Records of said Countv. Parcel C-5: Parcel 1 of that certain Lot Line Adjustment LL 92-017, recorded on May 22, 1992 as Instrument No. 92-343565 of Official Records of said County. i Parcel Cfi; Easements over those portions of Lot 59 and that portion of Lot A of Tract 14063, per Map filed in Book 670, Pages 23 through 29 inclusive of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, California, as set forth in Article 11, Subparagraph 2.3(c) entitled "Access Over Common Area for Golf Course" in that certain declaration entitled Declaration of Special Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Establishment of Easements for Golf Coune Property and Pelican Point, recorded May 23, 1991 as. Instrument No. 91-254012, Official Records. EXHIBIT A to Declaration of Special Restrictions Page 2 of 6 ]11.7JRrt'MSPINS.MSt�Nmem6er l(1, 1995 - occi�-.ua, N—p." n-bm Art M-1 i rte. 210-77 Parce F-. A forty (40) foot wide easement for access tunnel purposes under and through a porion of that parcel of land described within the "Irrevocable'Offer to Convey Easement Pelican Hill Road Right -of -Way" (now known. as "Newport Coast Drive-) recorded Dece6lber 20, 1988 as InstrumertNo. 88-663375, Official Records in the Unincorporated Terriliory of the County of Orange, State of California, and shown on the map of Tract No, 1413t, Filed in Book 662, Pages 42 through 46, inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. said easement being more particularly described as follows: Commencing on the northwesterly terminus of that certain course describe] as "North 55' 53' 00" west, 457,71'", to which a radial line bears north 34° 43' O 41" west and being the intersection of the northeasterly line of Lot 4 of said tract with the south3rly line of said irrevocable offer, said southerly line being a curve concave southerly, having a radius of 1129,50 feet; thence, westerly, 97,70 feet along said curye, through a central angle of 04' 57' 21" to the True Point of Beginning, a radial line through said point bears north 39' 41' 02" west; thence continuing along said curve 44,50 feet through a central angle of 02" 15' 26" to which a radial line bears north 41° 56' 28" west, thence, crossing said irrevocable offer, north 14' 56' 28" west; thence crossing said irrevocable offer, north 14' 50' 09' west, 151.77 feet to the northerly line of said irrevocable offer and a point in a Curve concave southerly having a radius of 1266.50 feet, a radial line through said point bears north 38' 48' 40" west; thence, easterly, 43.45 feet, along said curve, through a central angle of 01" 57' 57", to which a radial line bears north 36',50' 43" west; thence, crossing said irrevocable offer; south 14' 50' 43" west; thence, crossing said irrevocable offer, south 14' 50' 00" east, 149.26 feet to the Point of Beginning_ r The herein described easement is centered upon a cylinder twenty-five (25) feet in diameter. The tinishei floor elevation at the northerly end is 129.50 feet M.S,L.; the finished floor elevation at the southerly end is 120. I0 feet M.S.L. Parcel C-7; A fifty (50) foot wide ? ernent for access tunnel proposes tinder and through a portion of that parcel of land being a 100 foot wide right of ways known as "Pacific Coast Highway" in the unincorporated territory of Orange County, as shown on the Map of Tract No. 14131, filed in Book 662, Pages 42 through 46, inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, said easement being more particularly described Ls' follows; EX iBl A to Declaration of Special Restrictions i Page 3 of 6 ----.. -- 1 n.=MINFLNS MKANwankr 10, 1995 i` N -,T m naAwr An Murcwn .o. Ila I �r Ir r _s 210-78 Commencing on the northwesterly terminus of that certain course escribed as "(nosh 49' 29' 55" west, 5241.12')' and being the most westerly c(I rne. of Lot 3 of said tract and being in the easterly line of said Pacific Coast H'.ghway; thence,' along said easterly line of Pacific Coast Highway, south 49' 29' 55" east, 205.69 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence, continuitii,�S with said easterly line, south 49' 29' 55" east, 50.00 feet; thence, crossing §aid Pacific Coast Highway, south 40' 30' 05" west, 100.00 feet to a point in tie Westerly line of said Pacific Coast Highway; thence, along said westerly line, north 49' 29' 55" west, 50.00 feet; thence, crossing said Pacific Coast Highway, north 40' 30' 03", east, 1.00.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. The herein described easement is centered upon a cylinder twenty-five (25) feet in dia-deter_ The finished floor elevation at the northeasterly end is 113.I0 feet M.S_L.'r the finished floor elevation at the southwesterly end is 112.60 feet M.S.L.' Parcel C-8: Parcel 1 of that certain Lot Line Adjustment No. LL -94-031, recorded April 28, 1995 as Instrument No. 95.0180642, Official Records of said County. Parcel C-9: Those certain Easements Rights over Lots 40, 41 and 42 of Tract No. 13703, as set forth in Article 2 of that certain Declaration of Reciprocal Easements by The Irvine Company recorded March 4, 1994 as Instrument No. 94.0157793 of Official Records_ Parcel C-10: Easements over Lots A, B and K of Tract I4063, as per Map filed in Book 670, Pages 23 through 29 inclusive of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County, California, for pedestrian, golf can and other vehicular means for maintenance purposes, use and enjoyment of the adjacent golf course, as contained in that certain Declaration of Reciprocal Easements :)y The Irvine Company recorded March 4, 1994 as Instrument No, 94-0157793, Official Records. Parcel C - tis A non-exclusive easerient and right of vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress over that portion of Lot 1 of Tract No. 13859, in the unincorporated territory of the County of Grange, State of California, as shown on the Map Filed in Book 671„ Pages 12 and 13 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: ri' r lal.MP]- SPLN3.Ft5CVimnn4.r 10, iWi EXHIBIT A to Declaration of Special Restrictions Page 4 of 6 �SdnYm N—P. 1hit., As Af"+ . i 210-79 Beginning at the intersection of the northwesterly line of said Lot I wit� the south�.5terly line -of Pelican Hill Road South as described in an Irrevocable Of er of Dedication to the County of Orange, Recorded October 4, 1990 as Instrument Ml . 90- 530548 of Official 4ecords of said County; said intersection also being the beginning of a curve ccncave northeasterly, having a radius of 5140.00 feet, a radial line through sa d beginning bears south 33' 46' 57" west; thence, traversing t16 interior of said Lot t, the following three (3) courses-. (1) Southeasterly, 89.01 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 00' 59' 32" to a non -tangent line and to which a radial line bears south 32° 47' 25" west; (2) South 27' 12' 19" west, 201.25 feet to the beginning of a curve concave northwesterly, having a radius of 84.00 feet; and (3) Southwesterly, 103.00 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 700 15' 21" to said -northwesterly line of Lot 1 and to which a radial line bears south 07, ° 27' 40" west; thence, along said northwesterly line of Lot 1, north 201 44' 00" east, 291.0 feet to the Point of Beginning. Parcel D (500 and 550 Newport Canter Drive Beginning at the easterly terminus of that certain course in the northerly right of way line o f San Nicolas Drive shown as south 80 degrees, 14 minutes, 38 seconds east 91.45 feet on Map of Tract 6015 filed :n Book 239, pages 28 through 41 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of said County Recorder; thence along the right of way lines of said San Nicolas Drive, Newport Center Drive East and Santa Rosa Drive as shown on said Map. The following courses and distances, north 80 degrees, 14 minutes, 38 seconds west 91.45 feet to the beginning of a curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 25.00 feet, northwesterly 38.16 feet along said :urve through an angle of 87 degrees,, 26 minutes, 49 seconds to the beginning of a reverse curve concav westerly having a 425 radius of 1670A0 feet; northerly 472.13 feet along said curve through an angle of 16 degrees, I1 minutes, 54 seconds to the beginning of a reverse curve concave southeasterly havin€ a radius of 25.00 feet; northeasterly 38,16 feet along said curve through an angle of 87 degrees, 26 minutes, 49 seconds, north 78 degrees,. 27 minutes, 06 seconds 69.97 feet to the beginning of a curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 825.50 feet, northeasterly 195.27 feet along said curve through an angle of 13 degrees, 33 minutes, I 1 seconds to a point of a non - tangent curve concave southwesterl_y having a radius of 25.00 feet, a radial to said point bears north 35 degrees, 38 minutes, 46 seconds east; thence easterly 4.81 feet along said curve through an angle of 11 degrees, 01 minutes, 42 seconds to t1e beginning of a reverse curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 161.00 feet-, thence southeasterly 91.20 feet along said curve through an angle of 32 degrees, 27 minutes, 16 seconds to the beginning of a reverse curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 25.C-0 feet; thence southerly 32.67 feet along said urve through an angle of 74 degrees, 53 minutes, 01 seconds; thence south 0 degrees, 53 minutes, 46 seconds east 25.50 feet to the beginning of a reverse EXHIBIT A to Declaration of Special Restrictions Page 5 of 6 111.25'V7115PL`75.M5tlNmwT1bcr 10. tm t7al�ra�yt Ncuru 11.ft. An hlnxui, i 1 210-80 curve concave nor'—westerly having a radius of 2.00 feel; thence southwesterly 3.14 feet along Laid r.urve through an angle of 90 degrees, 00 minutes, 00 seconds to the beginning of a reverse curvi' concave southeasterly having a radius of 2.00 feet; thence southwesterly 3.14 feet along said curve through an angle of 90 degrees, 00 minutes, 00 seconds; thence south 0 degrees, 53 minutes, 46 seconds east 179.75 feet to the beginning of a curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 10.00 feet; thence southwesterly 6.59 feet along said curve thrcugh an angle of 37 degrees, 45 minutes, 40 seconds; thence south 36 degrees, 51 minutes, 54 seconds west 9.49 feet to the beginning of a curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 10.00 feet; thence southerly 6.59 feet along said curve through an angle of 37 degrees, 45 minutes, 40 seconds; thence south 0 degrees, 53 minutes, 46 seconds east 31.50 feet to Point A" hereinafter referred to; thence continuing south 0 degrees, 53 minutes, 46 seconds ease 31.50 to the beginning of a curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 10.00 feet; thence southeasterly 6.53 feet along said curve through an angle of 37 degrees, 45 minutes, 40 seconds; thence south 38 degrees, 39 minutes, 26 seconds east 9.49 feet to the beginning of a curve concave southwesterly having a'radius of " 10.00 feet; thence southerly 6.59 feet along said curve through an angle of 37 degrees, 45 minutes, 40 seconds; thence south 0 degrees, 53 minutes, 46 seconds east 212.75 feet to the beginning of a :urve concave northwesterly having a radius of 25.00 feet; thence southwesterly 24.40 feet along said curve through an angle of 55 degrees, 55 minutes, 53 seconds to the beginning of a reverse concave southeasterly having a radius of 147.00 feet; thence southwesterly 66.40 feet along said curve through an angle of 25 degrees, 52 minuoei, 43 seconds to the beginning of a reverse curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 25.00 feet; thence southwesterly 9.78 feet along said curve through an angle :)f 22 degrees, 24 minutes, 25 seconds to a point on a non -tangent curve concave southerly having a rad us of 950.50 feet and northerly right of way line of said San Nicolas (hive, a radial to said point bears nonh 22 degrees, 12 minutes, 47 secands east; thence westerly 206.65 feet along said curve through an angle of 12 degrees, 27 minutes, 25 seconds to the point of beginning. Parcel E (610 Newport Center Drive That portion of Lot 22 of Tract No. 6015, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a Map recorded in Book 239, pages 28 through 41, inclusive, of Miscellameous Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder ofsaid County; lying southeasterly of the boundary of a Map filed in Book 25, page 14 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Parcel F (690 Newport Center Drive) Parcels 2 and 3 of Parcel Map No. 83-715, in the City of Newport Reach, County of Orange, StEte of California, as shown on a Map fled in Book 196, pages 13 through 16, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder cf said County. Parcel G All other property owned by Declarant in the County of orange, California, as of the date of recordation of this instrument. DCClarant snail have the fight froM litne to time and at any time, by duly recorded amendment tc this instrument executed only by Decl�rant, to unilaterally provide further description of all or portions of the Benefitted Properry described above. EXHIBIT A to Declaration of Special Restrictions Page 6 of 6 --- —� -111.27RPk�A1SP11d5.I�iSQkmon6a IO.lvus ,C} ore anion N� lia,bIF Ars 14- 210-81 5 ti REQUIREMENTS FOUR SPECIFIC FACILITIES Description of S ecific Facilities. A first class art museum with related landscaping and hardscaping improvements. Maximum -No. of Buildints: 1* Maximum Gross Floor Area: 32,500 square feet** Permitted Use An art museum and ancillary facilites in support thereof which may include commercial and ietaa activities that cater to and serve primarily museum visitors (such as an auditorium, gift shop and a restaurant). .l� * Any connecting structure between the building located on the Fee Property and any improvements on the adjacent properly currently awned by Grantee will not be deemed to be a separate building for the purpose of determining the number of buildings on the Fee Property. ** By setting forth any required tttaxL-num gross floor area above, Declarant does not thereby represent or warrant [hat Grantee shall be able to develop the Fee Property for such density. r.. M EXHIBFT B to Beclaration of Special Restrictions [11.2MPRISPLMASCN—bc, A 193 tkUantir Newport Hub., A,(Ma 210-82 210-83 ps 210-83 THE IRVINE COMPANY c/o Irvine Land Management 550 Newport Center Drive, 7th Flooc Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attention: Lee Million SPACE AHO VE THIS LL%K SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT RESULTS IN YOUR RIGHTS AND INTERESTS AND YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY RECOM' IPTG SUBJECT TO AND OF LOWER PRIORITY THAN THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY INSTRUMENT_ I. PARTIES AND DATE. This Subordination Agreement ("Agreement") is made this day of 19—by NEWPORT HARBOR ART, MUSEUM, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation ("Owner"), owner of the "Property" (as defined below) and THE IRVINE COMPANY, a Michigan corporation ("lrvinC"), declarant unde- the Declaration (defined below). IL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, Owner has executed a Declaration of Special Land Use Restrictions, Right of First Refusal, Mortgage Lien and Other Remedies (tf_e "Declaration") dated , 19_, and recorded on as Instrument No_ in the Official Records of Orange County, California as an encumbrance on the title of the real property (the "Property") in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of Cal--fornia described as follows: Parcel A: All of that certain real property more fully described on EXHIBIT A attached hereto hnd by this reference incorporated herein (the "Fee Property"). Parcel B: A permanent neri.excldile easement appurtenant to the Fee Property for access, ingress and egress by vehicles and pedestrians to and from the Fee Properly and the adjoining public street over certain real property, all as more fully described in that cenain Declaration of Easements recorded on October 31, 1995, as I _ I EXHIBIT D to Declaration of Special Restrictions _ _ 111-1lT5PF�ISPi NS.M,VLIIY'dcr '_7, 19�s nril�nivp 210-84 Parcel C: Instrument No. 19950484848 in the Official Records of Orange "Declaration of Easements"). A pe. manent nonexclusive easement appurtenant to the Fee Proper drainage from the Fce Property over certain real property, all z described in the Declaration of Easements (the for surface mcre fully Owner has executed, or is about to execute, certain loan documents ("Loan Documt�rits') dated With or in favor of ("Lowder") to obtain and evidence a loan (the "Loan") from Lend& in the amount of � The Loan Documents have all been delivered to Irvine and include, without limitation, a Dived of Trust (the "Deed of Trust") to be recorded concurrently with this Agreement as security for the. obligations evidenced by the Loan Documents. Lender is incurring its obligations in connection with the 'Loan in good faith and for value pursuant to an agreement with Owner, on which Irvine is relying and which is memorialized in the Loan Documents, that the proceeds of the Loan will be expended solely for fttattcing or refinancing of construction of certain improvements on the Property, the plans and specifications for which have been, or will, prior to the commencement of construction, be approved by Irvine, all in accordance with the provisior-s of rhe Loan Documents, and for no Other purpose unless apprcved by Irvine in writing in its sole disci retion. A condition precedent to Lender's agreement to make the Loan is that the Deed of Trust shall be and remain at all times a list or charge upon the Property prior and superior to certain enfor_ement rights and remedies of Irvine under the Declaration. Irvine and Owner agree that it is to their mutual benefit that Lender make the Loan to Owner. This Agreement is made in co-isideration of the mutual benefits to Irvine and Owner resulting frim the Loan and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and suffiiciency.of which is acknowledged b) Irvine and Owner, III, SUBORDINATION. A_ Superioritv of Deed of Trust. The Deed of Trust and any renewals or extensions thereof shall be and remain at al: times a lien or charge on the Property prior and superior to Declarant's right of first refusal contained in Article 4 of the Declaration, the mortgage Gen contained in Section 5.1(d) of the Declaration, and the opt ion to repurchase contained in SecdoA 5.3 of the Declaration (collectively, the "Enforcement Bights"), provided, however, that (i) the Declaration (including the Enforcement Rights) shall be binding upon and effective against any subsequent owner or other occupant of the Property or any portion thereof whose title is acquired by foreclosure. trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise, as provided in Section 5.7 of the Declaration, and (2) any such subsequent owner shall have the cure rights as provided in said Section 5-7. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, Lender's foreclosure or similar or related proceeding under the Deed of Trust shall not extinguish Irvine's Enforcement Rights, all of which shall survive such proceeding and shall be binding upon any subsequent owner acquiring tide from Lender as stated above_ ,i. STYFMST[ NSMSC,Okmter 2s, 19" EXHIBIT D o Declaration of Special Restrictions 2 L III l , � ❑rSareiim N -T. Fhlyd r An %1—i 210-85 B. Ownc.'s Consent Owner agrees that Irvine shall be entitled to advance any sums Irvine in lis S7le discretion deems necessary to protect and preserve the security for its rights and interest ul&r :he Declaration (including but not limited to any property taxes or assessments, insurance premiums, ai4nounts secured by Lender's Deed of Trust, or encumbrances or liens or other charges on any portion, of :he Property which appear to be prio_ io Irvine's rights and interest under the Declaration), all of' which advances (together with interest at the maximunt rate permitted by law) shall be secured by the mortgEge lien contained in Section 5.1(d) of the Declaration, and shall be subject to the power of site provisions in the Declaration if Owner fails to reimburse Irvine for such advances within ten (10) days after demand from Irvine, and all such advances ;plus interest thereon at the maximum rate then permitted by law) shall reduce the amount of any repurchase price to be paid by Irvine under the terrns of the option to repurchase contained in the Declaration. IV, MISCELLANEOUS. A. Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be the whole and only agreement between Irvine and Owner with regard to the subordination of Irvine's enforcement rights and remedies under the Declaration to the lien or charge of the Deed of Trust. B_ Attorneys' Fees_ The prevailing party in any litigation respecting this Agreement shall be entitled to reimbursement of attorneys' fees and costs, whether or not taxable, incurred in the Iitiga:ion, lIII1VIIYEIr "t�wi11�'Il" _ THE IRVINE COMPANY, NEWPORT HARBOR ART MUSEUM, a Michigan corporation a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: By Richard G. Sim Executive Vice President John C. Tsu Vice President -Finance F Investment Propertlzs Group lii.Z25APRISPVS MS00whL 75, 1947 By: Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: EXHIBIT D to declaration of Special Restrictions r ' 3 flcclara�im Nc%pw Harhe A.M— R.' o i • r c flcclara�im Nc%pw Harhe A.M— R.' o i • t STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) ) ss. COUNTY OF f�:' ) On , before me, a nptary public in and for the said state, perianally appeared [Insert name(s) and tittle(s)) personally known to we {or"p rived to me on the basis of satisractory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they execited the Same in his/herltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the itts[runent the person(s), or the entity upon 3ehalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature: My Commission Expires_ I STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On ; before me, a notary public in and for the said state, personally appeared [Insert name(s) and title(s)) personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) islare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature; My Cortunission Expires: (Seal) EXHIBIT D to Declaration of Special Restrictions k1715TP7 +tls.T�snocmncr 25. 1777 Yc�m 4 N..p- iia r nn Mu— r 210-87 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ss. On before me, a no�ary public in and for the said state, personally appeared [Inert name(s) and title(s)] personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons) whose name(s) islare subscribed to th. within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshelthey executed the same in his/her/their authorized capaciry(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instillment the �,a person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official. seal. Signature: My Commission Expires_ STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) ss_ • COUNTY OF " ) On before me, a notary public in and for the said state, personally appeared (Insert name(s) and title(s)] personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) Whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshelthey executed the same in hisfherltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by histherltheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature: My Commission Expires: (Seal) EXHIBIT D io Declaration of Special Restrictions In 257WMSPLDi5.MSCbo.6�r 3, 19" - D.T— n, NHmTM 16,6W .5n ate, 210-88 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE PROPERTY tiff ii i I THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNT OF ORANGE, CITY OF, NEWPORT BEACH, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT B OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 95.3 RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 1995, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19950483821 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. c c. CJ+ b i FXHIBIT A to Subordination Agreement L"T:FMSP[NS.MSC10,kA= 75. [995 1?slarsrrt N—p— harbor A� M- 210 -89 "(Y 1 210-89 b LEGAL D 1. Bayport: 2 3 PARCEL A: PARCEL I IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 35, PAGE 1 CF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY_ PARCEL B.- 2 : EASEMEMTS FOR PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR ACCESS, INGRESS AND EGRESS, AND FOR UTILITY FACILITIES, OVER, ACROSS AND T7.4ROUGH THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTHEASTERLY 10.00 FEET OF PARCEL 2, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED 1N BOOK 35, PAGE I OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF ACCESS EASEMENTS DATED AS OF JUNE 15, 1993, AND RECORDED JUNE 15, 1993, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 93-0401502 OFFICIAL RECORDS Bayview: PARCEL 1 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A PARCEL MAP FILED IN BOOK 35, PAGE 2 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. Baywood; PARCEL$ i mD 2 iN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF O -RANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. $4-705 FILED IN BOOK 199, PAGES 6 THROUGH 16 INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDRIZ OP SAID COUNTY. .I It,73 mMsvLY3 MSCZQ%tdtr 27, 19% EXHIBIT E to Declaration of Special Restrictions V. r I i 4. m bcc�rxim K -pm Aarb A,1 M� 210-90 EXHIBIT E SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES 1. Park Dedication Fee: $26,125 per new residential unit as established by City Council Resolution No. 2007-30. 2. Fair Share Traffic Fee: $203.29/trip as specified in the June 21, 2016 Traffic Engineer Memorandum to the Planning Department. 210-91 Attachment H Draft Resolution for Denial 211 RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2015- 001, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. PC2015-001, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. SD2016- 001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2016-001, TRAFFIC STUDY TS2015-004 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2016-001, FOR A 100 -UNIT MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC (Applicant) with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; WHEREAS, the project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 -unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The Applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 212 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 2 of • Development Agreement — To voluntarily enter into a Development Agreement to provide surety and consistency in the future development of the Applicant's project. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional); WHEREAS, the subject property is not located within the coastal zone; WHEREAS, a study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to update the status of the project to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the Draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2033 by a unanimous vote of 7-0 recommending approval of the proposed project to the City Council; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 29, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach 213 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 3 of Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code are legislative acts and neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments; WHEREAS, the future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments is not consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; WHEREAS, a site development review is required for the construction of five or more residential units processed in conjunction with a tentative tract map. The site development review analyzes the project as a whole for compatibility with the site and surrounding land uses. The City Council may approve a site development review only after making each of the required findings set forth in NBMC Section 20.52.080(F) (Site Development Reviews). In this case, the City Council was unable to make the required findings based upon the following: 1. The City Council determined, in this case, that the proposed Site Development Review for 100 residential condominium units is not consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the NBMC. The proposed project may prove detrimental to the community. 2. The City Council determined, in this case, that the proposed Site Development Review for 100 residential condominium units is not consistent with the General Plan policies due to the incompatible land use, architectural style, fagade treatments, and height of the proposed project. 3. The City Council determined, in this case, the design, height, location, size, and characteristics of the proposed project are not compatible with the residential and commercial uses in the vicinity. The project may result in negative impacts to residents and businesses in the vicinity and is not compatible with the enjoyment of the nearby residential properties; and WHEREAS, a tentative tract map is requested for residential condominium purposes, to create 100 condominium units. The City Council may approve a tentative tract map only after making each of the required findings set forth in NBMC Section 214 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 4 of _ 19.12.070(A) (Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps). In this case, the City Council is unable to make the required findings based upon the following: 1. The City Council determined, in this case, that the proposed map for 100 residential condominium units and associated improvements of the subdivision are inconsistent with the General Plan and the legislative intent of Title 19 of the NBMC. The proposed project may prove detrimental to the community because of its scale, location, and density. 2. The City Council determined, in this case, the site is not physically suitable for the type and density of development. 3. The City Council determined, in this case, the design, location, size, and characteristics of the proposed subdivision are not compatible with the surrounding development pattern in the vicinity. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission and disagrees with this recommendation; a referral back to the Planning Commission for additional consideration and recommendation is not required. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies without prejudice General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001, Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001, Site Development Review No. SD2016-001, Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001, Traffic Study No. TS2015-004, and Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 for a 100 -unit multi -family residential development located at 850 San Clemente Drive. Use Permit No. UP2004-017 and Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 are not revoked and remain valid. Section 3: The recitals and findings provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each 215 Resolution No. 2016 - Page 5 of section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 29thth day of November, 2016. Diane B. Dixon Mayor ATTEST: Leilani f. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY EY'S OFFICE Aaron C. Harp City Attorney 216 Attachment J Parking Management and Valet Plan 223 r RELATED MUSEUM HOUSE PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN RESIDENT AND GUEST PARKING The Museum House's residential and guest parking will be fully valet operated. Residents and guests will enter the fully secured valet motor court from San Clemente Drive through their respected entrance lanes. Residents will have wireless fobs that will automatically open the entrance gate. Guests will be checked in by the security guard located at the vehicular gate house which will be manned 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The valet reception kiosk will be situated immediately in front of the building's lobby entrance. Residents and guests will pick up and drop off their cars at this location. Valet operators will in turn park the resident or guest's cars either in the two level subterranean garage, within the secondary garage located on at the podium level, or within the parking spaces and open areas around the motor court as needed. This circulation path of travel is depicted within Exhibit A. VALET OPERATIONS AND STACKING Museum House has been designed with 250 physical parking stalls per the City of Newport Beach parking requirements (200 resident spaces, 50 guest spaces). With the advent of a valet operated garage, however, the valet operators are able to over park the garage and podium levels by an additional 54 cars. The garage and valet operation is capable of accommodating a total of 104 guest vehicles, and a total resident and guest capacity of 304 vehicles. Museum House has sufficient parking capacity to accommodate all residential and guest parking demands in order to prevent any need spill over parking demand onto neighboring streets. All parking can be accommodated on site via the garage and the on-site valet operations. A layout of how the valet operator would propose to over park the garage by over parking is showing in Exhibit B. The staffing levels necessary to manage the valet operations for Museum House is estimated to consist of approximately 8 attendants and 2 managers. The projected shifts and staffing levels are show on Exhibit C. 224 ENTRY TO SUBTERRANEAN PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR GATE HOUSE MANNED 2417 EXHIBIT A RESIDENTIAL AND GUEST VEHICULAR CIRCULATION DIAGRAM FASHION ISLAND I/ SOUTHERLY ACCESS DRIVE 1y7r21'58"E 17531 PL_ _ — ---- — —.- —s— = W— -I = -----_-------------------------------i �I - �I I 1 7 GARDEN TERRACE I AMENITY DECK ( !, I I •I I ,I- I I i I �I ��� �'� I _ •� I' 1= 1 I II IK 1 \� VALET DROP-OFF I -------------- MOTOR COURT I L---------�---I-----� ir--------------------- 1�- - - -�-''� 1 I - -'- - - - - - -- - - T MINiMU0.195's€T9ACc 1 rTU�iRBtT--s----s-a.i-------- -` —I _— — •S SITE EGRES(i ,t f j'j j� 0� DCMA RA" polw850 San Clemente Drive } P A R T N E R S 1, L A A -h. i 1 KNP.l��:! I I Lc. f Nou+Bmn eager"• CA SANTA MARIA � DRINK: SITE INGRESS �l (RESIDENT VEHICULAR ACCESS) SITE INGRESS (GUEST VEHICULAR ACCESS) SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE er u PRIVATE GARAGE ACCESS PIMCO PARKING STRUCTURE SITE PLAN DIAGRAM - RESIDENTIAL VEWCULAR CIRCULATION �1 EXHIBIT -2C WRELATE© 225 11 EXHIBIT B VALET OVERPARKING PLANS PODIUM LEVEL • � • � • � • � � � • � � i • � s � • 79'2 15�2.5.94 PL+•-� � � •© " • � • • � PATH MAINTENANCE • � • � • � ■ � • � • _ 5 M IMUM S SETBACK m • I I' .� -_-:' _ - -- - POTENTIAL REMOVAL E. HATCH — HATCH FOR COOLING • I I —�- - - TOWERS I A; - . =T - - I • I' I - 7 GARDEN TERRACE...I ' I 865 SF � MECH I�AIR� (SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS) • I I _ T I � PRE�U .TION I Imo/ D,N,NG II s45 5F MECH LIBRARY I • 11'-k71B" %� TERRACE I ROOD , -. 4785F5 LOUNGE I l — 820 SF TR 'T I E. RACC E j. • I I 1 0 � 2975E � l ear LIBRARY840 SF TM L J i I I zas sF I ° LEVEL Pi GARAGE FOOTPRINT • TRELLIS ;SEE LANDSCAPE I• REQUIRED FIRE TI I UNDERNEATH P01 LEVEL P1 (SEE LEVEL PI PL •I Ein u I I I II I I'� I MECH COME LO GIA � p ,r`� �' �2 sya CONSERVATOR 392$F - - -- - I • I l BLDG SETBACK , l -- -'- - • ' I - 24'iT�� , BPA I I • I I MAIN GARAGE EMRY'E%I � 3105E - -- _ - - • Il 0e1 • i I Ill i. , ` / 1 I � 1 1T -�". i I MANAGER . MANAGERR...ICE! 34'111,, - I.'. PL I I • BOH II _ �� -- —T 11__ - C1 I I• II -. "I 4! Ili XET DROP-OFF i � V co� ti, � � n` � I� P B B819IKE SF 8785E \', it ! 8 PI KvUP �:> 4 I • .187 v � � 1 �� MOTORCOURT g GI S, g k- VALET ACC ADA PATH N BLDG SETBACK , l STAIR LOCATIC _ - • w -o, tow. 4-5b 0e1 • i I Ill i. , ` / 1 I � 1 1T -�". i I �9 � I I • w • • I l' I� �I \ ~�__�� �� 4 aoa a al © ( I i 1 �� MOTORCOURT I 1 ,, 1 w : (SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWING`L- w �_ co � • - 1 1 �.., 71' �a VALET I• I i ♦ A ( 4 g PAR45INQ rq oos ,(-,� I • • VEHICULAR GATEI N` B 6', re,o08� I • I I CCNTROL POINT I \ I I_-- iS-0hl - r I 012 � I aor • •II I 1 I - I I F I NdPARKiw ---- I • -EN NGE •• a I � � l l I� I� � i I II_------- —I -------------- . •—� —I «I - — - — -— -- aa_; MINIMUM I5'SETEACK N • C i I � r • m I I I I I I �,,.�• •�•_•_ i_L •_� •�•_•_• m •_•_�_• •_•_• •_•�•_•� 1 �7A°22'0? 23;.92' PL LEVEL 1 MONUMENT SIGNAGE I 1'11" (SEE LANDSCAPE ORAWINGSy J I — = �� - A --- A MONUMENT SIGNAGE - SITE EGRESS SITE INGRESS ADA COMPLIANT PEDESTRIAN SITE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS} I ACCESS DOG RUN (SEE LANDSCAPE Total ■ 250 parking stalls ■ 54 over -parked cars. ■ Total capacity of 301 cars. Podium Level ■ 12 parking stalls ■ 21 over -parked cars. ■ Podium total of 33 cars. Parking Garage Level 1 ■ 124 parking stalls. ■ 15 over -parked cars. ■ Level 1 total of 139 cars. Parking Garage Level 2 ■ 114 parking stalls ■ 18 over -parked cars ■ Level 2 total of 129 cars. 226 EXHIBIT B VALET STACKING PLANS GARAGE LEVEL 1 iia -1, iK 265'•11 IT 23111ir J_ S79.21WE273.94' PL d Y ■ ■ of of of aha ■ afa•f a■afa■!fa■a ■ fa - ■------------------ .------------------------- 1YfK�IN HG PARKHG Zo 10 `i -1 I ■/ m Kil LEI fII U�o , STORhGE �I RESIDk7 1TA1 an ara MEC 7. RWC. I f 51599 j I I I I � 4N 4zs • I I GU4EL?�S�r ` ""'GE� IPJ T' - 613SF'T - b' k Rs I a STORAGE I 526SF ,ESI • I r' _fAOA S AGE I - a 5.0' MAR�LTERARCE ■ ■a�a�a�a ■afaf �■s, b -------------- +186.5 '''``` -- E GEN T nRM. . _ I I I I fl4p� 233 sF a�e7 I GREASE k I I RCEPTRM P I r I WSF f 'ti 1w" ..SER�ICE+EW CORRIDOR I �5 MECkfELEC. _ _ f TRASHSIF 321SF I ae 'I tU 9617 0 a FFR 33'-0' to % L-- - WSF o �.C.t7RtF'IDQR SFIRE 'J GAS R .2•� � peT "` 4 a >\ .. { ; ' PwP RM. METERS 19-0 it} _ 20%9,{ 9' I f 4T 6l- P 141?I' 6- 94r .0 p "� .,r `•.� 50 SF 1IL 3133F r ' m PL ''I IN. / p5p 4ss % T,IiR#A'PPA6AX -- " -� PL. W,-017 f I� ____ ____ ____ ____ _ __ ____ ____ _____ � ��,,� ,,` / �`>a+ STORAGE 2959 SF I 6 I I � � 4zr (] El ELI�oaa Fowl (] w, oaa� I I _ I ■ I vAi I g . ,•. - -- .. &DG SETT CK f I 05P 46t FOSS] a69 p7a E N SpA! + O � �i ® � � ; A ^ 116 1F2 126 i C I '.i � I I,�•�• ry�„a, `-,�■ ® ':® 472 aTs 99x4 ® ® a9z ® 9is ,PT 129 435 ,z9 ,93 IS•10' z ' 1 16 -6S' - P•q' 6{P 6� 9' ` =9-0' 6#f 9'-0" 9•U' 8� y' � r I I I 1T k4' -6 _ A'-0' y 9•GP 9 I � .� I � ' � I '" I- _I --- - ,.,_'lT-0' § rrryr --T-0' .1 - d Tr.¢- - — - -- +i-- - -- —'m I 7r 9•g 9•P �s s•v y' aF 6.6' 'f -T a C 11 IL l I �I L— - --- -T -� 0..6 a52 pP6 pip UA pi6 pH + ® F-7 ® ® ,0., ,p5 9pJ Ip9 919 ST I'4 I f ,INTI NhN.E 4 (] Hil Fag 1 ms m9 9a1 IaEll 4s©s Q 1p9 9W ipe np +1z TH J i- I P I � ■ I I I I I r ------- - - - - -- _J r I MINIL+UM15'SET9ACtit iQ w IM iQ I ■ z, m 14 r f a■ a.. a. a. a. a■ a. a. a. a. a f a.. a. a* a. i. a f a a f t■, a P N79`22L7TN'231.f2 PL IIYNII I + TRANSFORMER REQUIRED €IRE TURN40UT UNDERNEATH PDDILIM AT LEVEL P, MEASUREMENTS FROM MEAN SEA LEVELMLI. MEASUREMENTS FROM GROUND LEVEL FINISH GRADE PLANE IFGP). Total ■ 250 parking stalls ■ 54 over -parked cars. ■ Total capacity of 301 cars. Podium Level ■ 12 parking stalls ' ,19 119 /23, ,2T E�] 135 Parking Garage Level 1 ■ I ■ 15 over -parked cars. r Level 1 total of 139 cars. 1l6 12p t24 v26 132 ` I% 3i6 i- I P I � ■ I I I I I r ------- - - - - -- _J r I MINIL+UM15'SET9ACtit iQ w IM iQ I ■ z, m 14 r f a■ a.. a. a. a. a■ a. a. a. a. a f a.. a. a* a. i. a f a a f t■, a P N79`22L7TN'231.f2 PL IIYNII I + TRANSFORMER REQUIRED €IRE TURN40UT UNDERNEATH PDDILIM AT LEVEL P, MEASUREMENTS FROM MEAN SEA LEVELMLI. MEASUREMENTS FROM GROUND LEVEL FINISH GRADE PLANE IFGP). Total ■ 250 parking stalls ■ 54 over -parked cars. ■ Total capacity of 301 cars. Podium Level ■ 12 parking stalls ■ 21 over -parked cars. ■ Podium total of 33 cars. Parking Garage Level 1 ■ 124 parking stalls. ■ 15 over -parked cars. ■ Level 1 total of 139 cars. Parking Garage Level 2 ■ 114 parking stalls ■ 18 over -parked cars ■ Level 2 total of 129 cars. 227 EXHIBIT VALET STACKING PLANS GARAGE LEVEL 2 II S! �ETBACK Idk 142 GM STORAGE STORAGE STORAGE $17 169$F 254 SF 258SF FM Am "n"I'l 7f� 3M SF STORAGE LEE 6F FIRE WATER j TANK 1 WR M3 sm" CORRIDOR IRS Es LEI DIM GETWK STORAGE 4571 SF IT 7,71 WI 41 STORAGE N79'22`97Y 31 9z PL Total 0 I50parking stalls M 54over-parked cars. 0 Total capacity of 304 cars. Podium Level � l2parking stalls � Z1over-parked cars. � Podium total of33cars. Parking Garage Level 1 0 124parking stalls. 0 15over-parked cars. 0 Level 1tnta| of139cars. Parkinn Garage Level 2 0 114parking stalls 0 1Oover-parked cars 0 Level 2total of129cars. 228 EXHIBIT C PRELIMINARY VALET STAFFING SCHEDULE Position I Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday + Attendant 1 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 6a - 2:30p 56.0 Attendant 2 6:30a - 3p 6:30a - 3p 6:30a - 3p 6:30a - 3p 6:30a - 3p + 40.0 Attendant 3 7a - 3:3Op 7a - 3:30p 7a - 3:30p 7a - 3:30p 7a - 3:30p7a - 3:30p 7a - 3:30p 56.0 Attendant 4 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 11a - 7:30p 56.0 Attendant Si2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 2p - 10:30p 56.0 Attendant 6 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 3p - 11:30p 56.0 Attendant 7 3:30p - 12a 3:30p - 12a 3:30p - 12a 3:30p - 12a 3:30p - 12a • 40.0 Attendant 8 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 10:30p - 6:30a 56.0 Sub -Total 416.0 Sub -Total 112.0 Total 528.0 229 Attachment K Fire and Delivery Truck Access Plan 230 r RELATED MUSEUM HOUSE FIRE TRUCK, MOVING TRUCK AND DELIVERY TRUCK CIRCULATION --- -tet• — ..,�.... - � : - - FIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION �r In the case of an emergency, the Newport Beach Fire Department's trucks will access the site either through the motor court, or through the fire and delivery truck access lane located along the east edge of the property (the "Fire and Delivery Access Lane"). When entering the site through the motor court entrance, fire trucks can exit by turning around the water fountain at the center of the motor court and exiting through the main exist gates. When entering the site via the Fire and Delivery Access Lane, fire trucks have two options for how to exit. In the first option, the fire truck can pull into the Fire and Delivery Access Lane for a depth of up to 200 feet and then reverse back out of the lane and onto San Clemente Drive. Alternative, the fire truck can drive all the way to the end of the Fire and Delivery Access Lane and turn around at the circular turnaround. Exhibit A attached provides a diagram of the fire truck circulation paths. Exhibit A-1 attached provide a turning radius analysis for the fire truck at the motor court on dimensioned plans. Exhibit A-2 attached provides the dimensioned plans for the Fire and Delivery Access Lane. MOVING TRUCK AND DELIVERY TRUCK CIRCULATION Moving trucks and delivery trucks will access the site through the Fire and Delivery Access Lane. The moving and delivery trucks can turn around at the circular turn around at the northern end of the Fire and Delivery Access Lane. Thee moving trucks and delivery trucks can also stage at this turn around. Exhibit B attached provides an image of these truck circulations paths. Exhibit A-2 provides the dimensioned plans for the Fire and Delivery Access Lane. 231 EXHIBIT A FIRE DEPARTMENT TRUCK CIRCULATION PLANS FASHION ISLAND SOUTHERLY ACCESS DRIVE SF9'215TE21111 p, FI----------------------------------- II I 1 � I ►I i i I GARDEN TERRACE AMENITY DECK `F _ I a I � I ��R VALET`S J i ( I DROP-OFF �dl - • � I t e I --------------JI MOTOR COURT II I'I --------- --- ----------------------- _. �- • MIWML • - . _ . _ - — . _ . _ . SITE EGRESS SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE SITE INGRESC (RESIDENT VEHICULAR ACCESS) I I I I I I \I/ I I LEVEL P9 LOADING I SERVICE ZONE & CONVENIENCE FIRE TRUCK TURNABOUT EXTENT OF REQUIRED 200' FIRE ACCESS ROAD W SITE INr.RES& (FIRE ACCESS ROUTE 2) (SERVICE ACCESS ROAD) PIMCO PARKING STRUCTURE ...................... i . _ . SHARED TURNABOUT FOR FIRE TRUCK & SERVICE TRUCKS. NOTE: CONVENIENCE FIRE TRUCK TURNABOUT PERMITTED STAGING AREA FOR SERVICE VEHICLE CIRCULATION EXTENT OF REQUIRED 200' FIRE ACCESS ROAD UTILITY - SANTA MARIA-- DRIVE u — wUTILITY ) I ut 1 i • UTILITY Y �I LOADING i MOVE -IN 1 0 �" TRASH RM. CLEC'] I BUILDING RM• I i I CORE FIRE — _ COMMAND FIRE PUMP GAS I _ RM. METER - ------- I ! I � �• �I I I I I I • L ----------i.--.-1I �I �i i �I II ...................... i . _ . SHARED TURNABOUT FOR FIRE TRUCK & SERVICE TRUCKS. NOTE: CONVENIENCE FIRE TRUCK TURNABOUT PERMITTED STAGING AREA FOR SERVICE VEHICLE CIRCULATION EXTENT OF REQUIRED 200' FIRE ACCESS ROAD 232 - SANTA MARIA-- DRIVE ----------- ) I SITE INGRESS (FIRE ACCESS ROUTE 2) ISERVICEACCESS ROAD) ovcnnu are rlaN- emcue.nTON aaaorrun cNvnaco �wc� r 1- oentnee uneuunoN olnannrn EXHIBIT -2A R1 t.1 V SA M%1E OCMA 850 San Clemente Drive W°AMf1O•I Aa.rli, ca 51 i 1: ULAN DfAGRAIVI — FIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION W R E LATE D ROBERT&M.STERN ARCHITECTS } P A R T N E R S 232 EXHIBIT A-1 FIRE DEPARTMENT TRUCK TURNING RADIUS ANALYSIS 215-17 1:&" MAINTENANCE L_ ASETEACK MUM 5 l i - � � 1 A0TEN714 REMOVAL 4 • __ I � u ,A E ENTRY • I I ,i ,. PLI .I II - -k' • I I ��II! '_ I •" I 6 11, S T4_ - •III- Iii r J; I II p;1OT h� SEE_AMOS I � � • I II. I 1 h •' I� EHI U ARCATE CONTROL PONT VIII—^�------ —I -r- ,I I I 11 •I I - I � LEVEL 1 NIQNUNIENTSIGNAGE (SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS} L � - SITE €GREGS I 626 F PINING 645 SF L OU 20 SFE 82�A.W�Me o O "°'/ \% GARDEN TERRACE (SEE SANOSCAPE pRAYJINGSS)) CONSERVATOR 392 - ---- DOG y 310 SE — 1 — I I. �f �A31I • ,/ I I • • I I• I• I II I • I x 11 I � u ,A E ENTRY • I I ,i ,. PLI .I II - -k' • I I ��II! '_ I •" I 6 11, S T4_ - •III- Iii r J; I II p;1OT h� SEE_AMOS I � � • I II. I 1 h •' I� EHI U ARCATE CONTROL PONT VIII—^�------ —I -r- ,I I I 11 •I I - I � LEVEL 1 NIQNUNIENTSIGNAGE (SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS} L � - SITE €GREGS I 626 F PINING 645 SF L OU 20 SFE 82�A.W�Me o O "°'/ \% GARDEN TERRACE (SEE SANOSCAPE pRAYJINGSS)) CONSERVATOR 392 - ---- DOG y 310 SE — 1 — I I. �f �A31I • ,/ I I • • I I• I• I II I • I A" MANAGE OFFII___ I I 8F - -- -1--- IPL 71 `r I� • � S � s I-. ET BIKE RM. 4 819 SF 7 \\ \ _ r :'ALETACd '/. ADA PATH STAIR LOCATI - - 1 t048 W -7i 1 _ 049 -3 a cwJRT E GRAW ING VAm I I .., PARKING �5 1i jj I I 5995 SF _ .12 i -- I 55 � I I o1ao, s 407 Nb PARKING _ I I I r —I— — — — — — — — ---_= - --- ---- 4 HINIMUM It SF -BACK - - - - I i i Ial I N79`22'07' 231.92' PL I -L MONUMENT SIGNAGE SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGSI - SIT€IN+3RESS ADA COMPLWNT PEDESTRIAN _ - j' ACCESS CARA LANDSCAF FIRED FIRE RNEATH P LPI LEVEL P1 f POG RUN ISEE LANDSCAI 233 EXHIBIT A-2 FIRE AND DELIVERY ACCESS LANE DIMENSIONED PLANS Js•11 W �Lu K, V SW21'S8E 225.94' PL -�' 1 - • ! . ! i ! ■ ! i ! i ! i ! i ! i i i ! • i ! ! i i ! ! ■ ! iii i i . ! i ! l ! • ! i ! i � ■ ! i MINIMUM S SETBACX %"'. TRANSF'3R€Ft -- ---- --- --- f-: ---------------- rI r---NOPARfSR16-- - V4 IT �= 41693 I tull I +1BBs flsr-?1rs� I GER3E�TOR i 2H: • -F 9-0" $- p ', 1 - - - I if •_J_ _._. I r X MIN. �- cwt m I b,5 ,uta 416 it p.d V?, REQUIRU FIRE T4'RNAWklT 4f--I _ - - - UNDERNEATH PODIUM AT LEVEL P, ! V 3 STORAGE { �L rm azs MECH.IE-LEC. 2855E --- I _163.5, REs [ikMTIA� RM r AfDA SPACE 3154 SF 1 ,-mt4 nan GREASE ■ �,,—T n RCEPTO�i GU237 RRMM Y RAGEi SPACE 13-0' 3i25F \ T • LOADING 613 SIF am SIF - - - - - - - , MEASURE4ENTS FROM MEAN SFA �m \`y� 7 � --�--- I�.. ��•' -�clf l f � � LE4Ei jMS�l �' ' 1• _ ti `? . `` r.�� " �L� _SERIUIC,`EE.1dT CORRIDOR yf I MEASURENEh'TS FROM GR4UNp LE+1EL ` TRASHi 1 �. _ MECHRtELEC. i FINISH GRADE PLAN `FGP}. Sm SF••, •- sE ,SF 327 SF � NT AIk7 r f tr4r 1 u �ADA$$1ACE FlRIE 33.1 t,. - - - y 7114., ` - Rf I'AMM AREA 4454$1 �� wa rr� 173 - - --- — a — - — - J FIRE GAS I1 �,'C•fT 'wv - �'- PUMP RM. METERS S•R' 6.8" 94 g$ g3 ff ffA' S$ 5Ji �* �' a5s�`�' I Ka SF 313 5E g 1 a - MIN. .- ---y ?��, ti-.4__�_- _-_-..,_.• JT' it PL� -- - "z. i� s�nn., >n aao \ - #3FMRi-F446S4GEiti'A'l=�.. I. -. _ PL 1- r■ la�l asa oan w;ev j n ose Fm FA2:1 _ MECH. Na1 ill I � z'•. •a, S2��E azr ® KI In) Ell a,e wIk - - - VALET 155 a , msl Ell ass IFF9 w l `[Es ma ussIE Eml f assho ® mcB.; an a,h ®, ® ® Imre ® 4 ,m - 24' EllEllKIIzs ,zs t3fl ,5 Y7• I � �' � i rl i 41 I I I - r 16 1'-4• ?_v 99' s•4•.I W. V-7 8-$ i 4'•PI ,k•4' -Q' T-r I yr BF 24 a-e @` --j— i1- ------ T --- ----—+I—�i�----m-s---ici•' O j i I -T v-r ow cs 9f 9'4' Ir$ Ja ; g-0' Im-, q4r g4Y 8!-F gA" g-T 9-P 74r s$ e-r '�a g 7rr "it t ° ;fo o a o p o IE o o Q o 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0� an8 . L 2 arF+ ' "J+9 IIYa mta OB2 msR m, m.a 496 Am lmn ,oi Vam It � lY liT Ian i BEST I k 11 i I HT:NAN.E f asm ® ast arl pi]9 ur., FFE ® ® a61 oas q[p ® F,ut ,m ,mB Eulm 'IB +sm 124 ,m , L I tl 1 I1 i L-el 1 c„e: t-1 �I LRvel1 .,Guek MINIMUM 95' SE98ACK t +Pt Guel P1 Gue: Pt Ravi > PI i. !!■!i. i!■!■!�! !■!■!!!■!!!1 !!!!i!i!!!iili!!i!#�! Rm A74'221771Y23l.9P PL. P1 Resi. Pt Rem. 234 EXHIBIT B MOVING AND DELIVERY TRUCK CIRCULATION DIAGRAM FASHION ISLAND SOUTIIERLY ACCESS DRIVE rFr--w�y�i Fie-•-� w ._-w---f-s • i� - - =11w . (s . � !w r ------- -IMUM�S�Bd-------- t SII I lig j I II _ I I I I GARDEN TERRACE! �y AMENkTY DECK j I I I �- lYl I. I VALET DROP-OFF`�� i IM I I C ' f ,III 4G I MOTOR COURT i I I j I III I II I •II I I i I `II i w --------------------------------------gym - - - - - 71NihIU%7SET9ACR L—.—.—.—..—.—.—.i-"!!t7�'14T9idi............. I --- — SITE EGRESS SA14 CLEMENTE DRIVE SANTA MARIA DRIVE I OVERALL SITE PLAN - CIRCULATIUN DIAGRAM PAMSA OCMA 859 San Clemente Drive IiOBE RT AM. STE RN ARCHITECTS '+ P A fl T N E R 5 LEVEL P1 LOADING I SERVICE ZONE & CONVENIENCE FIRE TRUCK TURNABOUT PIMCO PARKING STRUCTURE 1 [� 1 y _J (FIRE ACCESS ROUTE 2) (SERVICE ACCESS ROAD) �1 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.--7 y UTILITY G ¢ UTILITY w N UTILITY r II LOADING! O ' MOVE'. TRASH ELEC. RM. BUILDING RM. i CORE COMMAND —�,y II, FIRE PUMP GAS RM. METERS ... ...... - - - - - - ------------- I IIII I SII I II I aI I �I i III I I I I i I Iii i II i I I I II I ISI I II I I II i I II 2 ENLRNUEUL VUFT-`3 WVI,. CIRCULAI ION UTAOKNA SITE PLAN DIAGRAM - SERVICE TRUCK CIRCULATION CNAQFTI TI It]Ntl nI IT NOTE: CONVENIENCE FIRE TRUCK TURNABOUT PERMITTED STAG NG AREA FOR SERVICE VEHICLE CIRCULATION NO PARKING ZONE I I ----------------- •� I I (FIRE ACCESS ROUTE 2) (SERVICE ACCESS ROAD! irile VYiiN EXHIBIT -2B WRELATED 235 Attachment I Fiscal Analysis 217 MEMO TO: Brenda Wisneski, AICP, Deputy Community Development Director City of Newport Beach FROM: Doug Svensson, AICP DATE: August 23, 2016 SUBJECT: Fiscal Analysis for the Museum House Project INTRODUCTION The fiscal analysis uses the Newport Beach Fiscal Impact Model to help calculate revenue and cost impacts of the proposed project. This model was initially developed in support of the General Plan Update, which was adopted in 2006.1 The model has been updated to reflect Fiscal Year 2015-2016 costs and revenues from the Newport Beach City Budget. The fiscal impact model calculates public service impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees. The fiscal impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in approximately the same way that existing development does. The model nets out certain costs that are unlikely to change with expansion of City government, such as the number of City Department Directors and Division managers, as well as the City Council and City Clerk expenditures, but otherwise assumes that City administrative support and overhead tends to increase as City government activities grow to provide services to an expanding population and employment base. Over the long term, this is clearly the dynamic that local governments experience. In the short term, development projects may have lower or higher cost impacts depending on the existing capacity of City services to accommodate more 'A technical description of the fiscal impact model may be found in: Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis and Model, Newport Beach General Plan Update, January 2004. 255 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ■ Tel 925.934.8712 99 Pacific Street, #200 J, Monterey, CA 93940 ■ 831.324.4896 www.adeusa.com development, and the level of expenditure needed to expand services incrementally if existing capacity is not available. PROJECT DESCRIPTION THE PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project would replace the existing Orange County Museum of Art building with a 26 - story 100 unit residential condominium tower with two levels of subterranean parking. The residential units are proposed to consist of 54 2 bedroom/3 bath units and 46 3 bedroom/4 bath units ranging in size from 1,750 to 4,950 sq. ft. The site is located at 850 San Clemente Drive in Newport Center and is approximately two acres in size. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The fiscal analysis analyzes the same project alternatives as the DEIR. The alternatives include the existing museum use on the site, an expanded museum as allowed under the existing General Plan, and a reduced density residential project including 90 units. No Project: Existing Use. The existing use is the 23,632 sq. ft. Orange County Art Museum. General Plan Alternative. This alternative would continue the institutional use permitted under the General Plan, but would assume that the existing museum would expand to the maximum building footprint allowed under current zoning (calculated at 31,538 sq. ft. Reduced Dwelling Units Alternative. This alternative reduces the height of the building by 24 feet and removes ten units from the proposed project. This development would have 90 units, which ADE has assumed would be similar to the two and three bedroom units in the proposed project. SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS In order to calculate the fiscal effects of the proposed changes, it is necessary to estimate certain socio-economic characteristics of the land uses, including population, assessed value, and household spending on taxable retail goods in Newport Beach. The DEIR for the project indicates that the average household size in Newport Beach is 2.24 persons, and calculates a projected population for the proposed project of 224 persons. The assessed value for the proposed project has been derived from projected sales values based on recent real estate transactions in Newport Beach. A review of recent new home construction in Newport Beach identifies a number of units priced above $1,000 per sq. ft. The total residential assessed value in the project is estimated at $364.1 million, for an average of $3.64 million per unit (Table 2). The analysis uses similar factors for the two residential alternatives, also shown in Table 2. The outcome of the fiscal analysis is highly affected by the assessed values of the units, which generate Applied Development Economics I Page 2 219 property taxes for the City. The alternatives may feature units with lower average values, but for sake of consistency ADE has assumed all of the residential alternatives would serve the same high end market levels as the proposed project. ASSESSED VALUES FOR THE TABLE RESIDENTIAL HOUSEESTIMATED UNITS IN THE MUSEUM • UNIT TYPE AVERAGE UNIT SIZE NO. OF UNITS AV/SQ.FT. ASSESSED VALUE PER UNIT TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE Proposed Project 660 2 bedroom/3 bath 2,850 54 $1,100 $3,135,000 $169,290,000 3 bedroom/4 bath 3,850 46 $1,100 $4,235,000 $194,810,000 Total 100 $364,100,000 Source: ADE, Inc., based on the project description in the DEIR and data collected from CoreLogic. The analysis uses the residential unit values to estimate household income and taxable retail spending, as shown in Table 3. For units in this price range, it is difficult to know the financial circumstances of the buyers. Frequently high wealth individuals will pay a higher amount in down payment and the remaining mortgage payments may be well below their financial capacity in terms of their annual income levels. However, for purposes of the analysis, ADE assumed buyers would put 30 percent down on the purchase. Assuming the rest of the purchase price is financed for 30 years at 4 percent per year, the monthly payments are shown in the third column of Table 3. We assume that monthly housing cost comprises 30 percent of household income, resulting in household incomes ranging from $419,000 to $566,100 per year. ADE has analyzed consumer expenditure surveys published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and at these income levels, households typically spend less than 20 percent of their income on retail goods. Of those expenditures, about 87 percent are taxable items (non-food). We have assumed for purposes of these calculations that households would spend two-thirds of their annual retail budget in Newport Beach, and the remaining one-third would be spent at retail centers in other cities or on out-of-town trips. The City receives sales tax at the rate of one percent of taxable sales. The resulting sales tax figures are shown with the other revenues and costs in Table 4 below. TABLE 3: ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND RETAIL TALEs TAX UNIT TYPE MONTHLY MORTGAGE UNIT VALUE PAYMENT ANNUAL INCOME @30% SALES TAX PER UNIT 2 bedroom/3 bath $3,135,000 $10,477 $419,075 $489 3 bedroom/4 bath $4,235,000 $14,153 $566,119 660 Source: ADE, Inc. Applied Development Economics I Page 3 220 FISCAL IMPACTS The analysis, summarized in Table 4 below, estimates the current fiscal impact of the proposed project and each of the alternatives. For the residential project and alternative, the primary revenue source generated for the City is the property tax. The City receives about 20 percent of the base property tax that property owners pay, but in addition the City gets a share of property tax from the state in lieu of vehicle license fees, which adds about ten percent to the total property tax revenues for Newport Beach. Source: AVE, Inc. Note: t otals may not add due to rounding. The proposed project and the residential alternative have a much higher fiscal benefit than the non- residential alternatives. In terms of City costs, the DEIR indicates that the proposed project would not Applied Development Economics I Page 4 221 TABLE 4: PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF ••• . PROJECT NEWPORT Annual Revenues/Costs Proposed No Expanded Reduced Budget Category Project Project Museum Density REVENUES GENERALFUND Property Tax $728,200 $0 $0 $655,380 Property Tax in lieu of Vehicle License Fees $72,173 $0 $0 $64,956 Sales Tax $56,741 $2,363 $3,154 $50,999 Transient Occupancy Tax $104 $0 $0 $93 Franchise Fees $4,109 $748 $998 $3,698 Business Licenses $1,604 $0 $0 $1,444 Other Intergovernmental $2,045 $0 $0 $1,840 Charges for Service $17,376 $1,833 $2,446 $15,638 Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures $4,641 $490 $653 $4,177 Licenses and Permits $797 $84 $112 $717 Use of Property $4,641 $490 $653 $4,177 Other Revenue $470 $0 $0 $423 Interest Income $2,496 $17 $22 $2,247 SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND $895,398 $6,024 $8,040 $805,789 GAS TAX $4,762 $0 $0 $4,286 MEASURE M $8,673 361 482 $7,796 SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS $13,436 361 482 $12,082 TOTAL REVENUE $908 833 $6,386 $8,522 $817,871 EXPENDITURES GENERALFUND General Government $25,208 $1,292 $1,724 $22,687 Police $59,120 $4,691 $6,260 $53,208 Fire $115,938 $4,388 $5,856 $104,344 Public Works $42,956 $4,532 $6,048 $38,661 Community Development $2,669 $282 $376 $2,402 Community Services $50,421 $0 $0 $45,379 CIP Streets $2,356 $495 $660 $2,121 Other CIP Projects $800 $84 $113 $720 SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND $299,468 $15,763 $21,037 $269,521 GAS TAX $1,257 $264 $352 $1,131 MEASURE M $2,013 423 $564 $1,812 SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS $3,270 687 916 $2,943 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $302,738 $16,450 $21,953 $272,464 NET COST /REVENUE $606,095 ($10,064) ($13,431) $545,406 Source: AVE, Inc. Note: t otals may not add due to rounding. The proposed project and the residential alternative have a much higher fiscal benefit than the non- residential alternatives. In terms of City costs, the DEIR indicates that the proposed project would not Applied Development Economics I Page 4 221 have a significant impact on police, fire or other City services. The project site is in an intensely developed urban area of the City and existing service capacities are sufficient to provide services to the proposed uses on the site. However, with the more intensive residential uses, it may be expected that there would be some additional calls for service, particularly for public safety and perhaps traffic related incidents, compared to the existing use on the site. The fiscal model, therefore, shows some incremental cost for City services, but the annual expenditure amounts are all well below the amount needed to support an additional full staff person, meaning that the service impacts would be an incremental increase of service activity for existing personnel. In addition, the project would pay approximately $102,800 in excise tax to the City which would be available to pay for public improvements and facilities for fire services, parks or libraries. The proposed project would generate the most revenue for the City and would have a proportionally higher net fiscal benefit, of about $606,100 per year, compared to $545,400 for the 90 -unit Reduced Dwelling Unit and Height alternative. The existing museum use and the potential expanded museum, do not generate much tax or fee revenue for the City. As an institutional use, it is exempt from property taxes. There is some sales tax generated in the store at the museum and possibly additional sales taxes if museum patrons frequent local restaurants in connection with their visits. While the museum is not subject to many of the taxes and fees that other businesses would be, the activity at the museum does have some potential to generate costs for City services. The museum attracts traffic and patrons and there could be related emergency medical and police protection calls, although it is likely such incidents are rare. The City Fire Department does provide fire protection services to the facility, if needed. Overall, institutional uses generally do not generate positive net fiscal revenues for the City, but instead have other benefits for the community and its residents. CONCLUSION The proposed residential use of the site would generate a positive fiscal benefit for the City due to the building intensity and high value of the proposed development. The smaller residential alternative would also produce positive fiscal impacts provided it is developed for the same socioeconomic level as the proposed project. The 2006 General Plan designated the site for non-residential use, consistent with the existing museum use. These institutional alternatives would also have a slightly negative, or at least neutral, fiscal benefit. Overall, the General Plan increased development potential for commercial and lodging uses substantially, in addition to the new residential units it would permit. The net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7 million per year.Z Due to the high market level targeted by the proposed project, it would exceed the fiscal benefit from the institutional use of the site under the existing General Plan. 2 Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis Land Use Element Amendment, April 4, 2014. p. 3 Applied Development Economics I Page 5 222 Attachment L Current Statistical Area L1 Section 423 Table 236 City of Newport Beach Charter Section 423 Tracking Table Statistical Area Ll (Newport Center) Post 2006 General Plan Amendments Approved Land Use Element July 1, 2015 (Updated April 15, 2016) Project Name Address Date Approved Project/GPA Number Amendment Description Square Footage Change Dwelling Unit Change AM Peak Hour Trip Change PM Peak Hour Trip Change Civic Center and Park Site' 11/25/2008 PA2008-152 GP2008-005 Open Space (OS) to Public Facilities (PF) N/A 0 N/A N/A Newport Beach Country Club (Clubhouse) 1/24/2012 PA2008-152 GP2008-005 Parks and recreation (PR) - No Change 21,000 0 N/A N/A 100% Totals 21,000 0 0 0 80% Totals 16,800 0 0 0 Remaining Capacity Without Vote 23,200 100 100 100 GPA—General Plan Amendment CLUP —Coastal Land Use Plan 100% Totals — Cumulative increases resulting from approved GPA's. Decreases are not included. 80% Totals - Charter Section 423 requires that 80% of square footage, dwelling unit and peak hour trip increases of "Prior Amendments" be tracked for a period of 10 years and added to proposed general plan amendments located within the same Statistical Area to determine if the 423 GPA Thresholds are exceeded and a vote of the electorate required. Decreases in any category are not tracked. Charter Section 423 Thresholds: 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, 100 dwelling units, 100 AM or PM Peak Hour trips ' City Council resolution No 2008-097 includes the following finding: The proposed amendment is not subject to Charter Section 423 because any increase in vehicle trips or intensity from the City Hall facility will not result from the proposed amendment. Rather, these increases in traffic and intensity will result from and have been mandated by the voter approval of Measure 8 and the resulting addition of Charter Section 425. 237 Attachment M Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation 238 H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limit Areas n 0 0.5 O Miles Name: H1_High_Rise_and_Shoreline_Height_Limitation_Areas/ October 26, 2010 239 Attachment N Newport Center Building Height Exhibits 240 . •x21.9 ft's ` 25 ft RelM, e e` 6165 . t 24# 5 ft< 16.8 ,• r ,fir" tiF 61 ft 36.5 ft roof 561' ft 51.5 elevator 14.5 ft . 246`" Project Range Site x� ' 12 ft a M �4.'. ; 217 ft �..� ►. 80ift ► ► i % }a 12v2 ft: 4 8, ft • Building Heights - North Portion of Newport Center 0 250 500 Feet d W 4r(�RA City of Newport Beach GIS Division October 12, 2016 241 MUSEUM HOUSE DRAFT EIR CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Figure 5.1-2 - High -Rise Buildings in Project Area 5. Environmental Analysis NOT TO SCALE — — — Project Boundary Base Map Source: Google Earth Pro, 2016 Placeilork.r 242 Zn G7 N HEIGHT DATUM OF PROPOSED BUILDING 187 -0° PROJECT SITE: 850 SAN CLEMENTE DR. Fashion Island Skyline HIGHEST DATUM OF NEWPORT CENTER ti ---------------------------------�----------- ---�?--------------C7- — - — - — - — - — ---- ---------- - — - — CI7 aSi 220'-0" 216"Y 1 e OFFICE BUILDING ISLAND HOTEL 660 NEWPORT CENTER DR. 690 NEWPORT CENTER DR 230'-0" 225'-0" OFFICE BUILDING OFFICE BUILDING 630 NEWPORT CENTER DR. 620 NEWPORT CENTER DR Museum House will appear significantly shorter than other buildings in the Fashion Island skyline: ■ -58 feet shorter than 520 Newport Center Drive (TIC). ■ -42 feet shorter than 630 Newport Center Drive (PIMCO). ■ -10 feet shorter than 610 Newport Center Drive. ■ About as tall as 620 and 660 Newport Center Drive. Museum House is 295 feet tall to the top of the rooftop mechanical enclosure. ■ 520 Newport Center Drive is 315 feet tall - 20 feet taller than Museum House. ■ 630 Newport Center Drive is 294 feet tall - approximately the same height as Museum House. 220`-5" OFFICE BUILDING 610 NEWPORT CENTER DR 221'-11" OFFICE BUILDING 520 NEWPORT CENTER DR. WRELATED Museum House I Newport Beach 243 9 N N O N 220'-0" 216"Y 1 e OFFICE BUILDING ISLAND HOTEL 660 NEWPORT CENTER DR. 690 NEWPORT CENTER DR 230'-0" 225'-0" OFFICE BUILDING OFFICE BUILDING 630 NEWPORT CENTER DR. 620 NEWPORT CENTER DR Museum House will appear significantly shorter than other buildings in the Fashion Island skyline: ■ -58 feet shorter than 520 Newport Center Drive (TIC). ■ -42 feet shorter than 630 Newport Center Drive (PIMCO). ■ -10 feet shorter than 610 Newport Center Drive. ■ About as tall as 620 and 660 Newport Center Drive. Museum House is 295 feet tall to the top of the rooftop mechanical enclosure. ■ 520 Newport Center Drive is 315 feet tall - 20 feet taller than Museum House. ■ 630 Newport Center Drive is 294 feet tall - approximately the same height as Museum House. 220`-5" OFFICE BUILDING 610 NEWPORT CENTER DR 221'-11" OFFICE BUILDING 520 NEWPORT CENTER DR. WRELATED Museum House I Newport Beach 243 rt t" 4. •�/lT RRELATED Fashion Island Skyline Y � , - .•a � dr � ,fir � �, ,.i y q [ 4� r,i:...N _� �•1' ¢ 741:" i,. Mir Ale , , fti—r' _ } - Z a 5 . k-Olme � ! t A11111110" -v* • .,f � � ',j•.k .spa p e y _I� i5i s �_,yr ,r• � _ . ff4 44 ,. _ . � � • - .. � "P� .... P - - - '� yk' yin �9L je o ..r•} .73 kL y$mL a� 0 to ��-cu'f'f t�, 4'y�— �• a • �5��`9`c jM... _ <.:sY - =i_� ,. �' �• . �.. � � ' t Museum House Newport Beach 244 Attachment O Planning Commission Resolution 245 l0*181111111ED] r[►[91'41X0cj A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. ER2016-002 AND APPROVE THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2015-001, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. PC2015-001, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. SD2016-001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2016-001, TRAFFIC STUDY TS2015-004 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2016-001, FOR A 100 - UNIT MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND REVOKE USE PERMIT NO. UP2005-017 AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. MD2004-059 LOCATED AT 850 SAN CLEMENTE DRIVE (PA2015-152) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS, 1. An application was filed by Related California Urban Housing, LLC with respect to property located at 850 San Clemente Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 of the Parcel Map, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange (County), State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 81, Pages 8 and 9 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. 2. The project includes demolition of an existing 23,632 -square -foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building to accommodate the development of a 25 -story, 100 - unit residential condominium building with two levels of subterranean parking. The applicant requests the following approvals from the City of Newport Beach (City): • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,575 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Tentative Vesting Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. • Site Development Review — To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and 246 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 2 of 42 regulations pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Development Agreement —To comply with NBMC Section 15.45.020 because the requested GPA includes 50 or more units. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit - To revoke Use Permit No. UP2005-017 (PA2005-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC. 3. The property is located within the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is PI (Private Institutional). 4. The property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. A study session was held on April 7, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach to introduce the project to the Planning Commission. No action was taken at the study session. 6. A study session was held on September 1, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California to provide a project update to the Planning Commission and review the conclusions of the draft EIR. No action was taken at the study session. 7. A public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. Pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq., the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K-3, it was determined that the project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an EIR. 2. On February 5, 2016, the City, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR and mailed that NOP to responsible and trustee public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed project, including any persons who had previously requested notice in writing. 03-03-2015 247 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 3 of 42 3. On February 22, 2016, the City held a public scoping meeting to present the project and to solicit input from interested individuals, organizations, and responsible and trustee public agencies regarding environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR. 4. A draft EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) (DEIR) was prepared in compliance with the CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. 5. The draft EIR was circulated for a 45 -day comment period beginning on August 17, 2016 and ending on September 30, 2016. The draft EIR, comments, and responses to the comments were considered by the Planning Commission in its review of the project. 6. The Final EIR, consisting of the NOP, Initial Study, Draft EIR, Responses to Comments, Revisions to the Draft EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached as Exhibits A and B, and incorporated herein by reference, were considered by the Planning Commission in its review of the proposed project. 7. The Final EIR identifies significant impacts to the environment which are unavoidable in the areas of Noise and Vibration and more specifically short-term construction - related noise impacts. 8. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the project, with mitigation measures, will have a less than significant impact upon the environment and there are no known substantial adverse effects on the environment that would be caused by the project with the exception of short-term construction -related noise impacts. Additionally, there are no long-term environmental goals that would be compromised by the project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in connection with the project. The mitigation measures identified and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit B), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are feasible and will reduce the potential environmental impacts, with the exception of short-term construction related noise, to a less than significant level. 9. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. 03-03-2015 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 4 of 42 SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. Amendments 1. Amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code (Planed Community Development Plan) are legislative acts and neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. 2. The requested GPA and resulting land use change are compatible with the surrounding existing uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan because the project would introduce additional residential land uses in Newport Center which contains a mix of commercial and residential uses. The Newport Center area has a demand for additional residential development and additional residential units would support the existing retail, service, and office uses within Newport Center and Fashion Island area. 3. The requested GPA from PI to RM does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the site's size, location, and surrounding uses. Numerous PI designated properties are located throughout the City that could accommodate cultural institutions. Additionally, cultural institutions are allowed by right in eleven commercial and mixed-use zoning districts. 4. The requested GPA and resulting land use change is consistent with other applicable land use policies of the General Plan. Consistent with General Plan Goal LU6.14 for Newport Center, the project site is located in an area of Newport Center where multi- family uses are encouraged to produce opportunities to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation. The project site is also located in the northerly section of Newport Center making the proposed height consistent with Land Use Policy LU6.14.4, which directs development with the greatest building mass and height to be located in the northeasterly section of Newport Center along San Joaquin Hills Road. The size, density and character of the proposed dwelling units complement the existing land uses in the project area and include design elements consistent with Land Use Element Policy 5.1.9 (Character and Quality of Multi -Family Residential) that require multi -family dwellings to be designed to convey a high quality architectural character. 5. City Council Policy A-18 requires that proposed CPAs be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required pursuant to Section 423 of the City Charter. If a GPA (separately or cumulatively with other CPA's within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required if the City Council approves the GPA. 6. This is the third GPA that affects Statistical Area L1 since the General Plan update in 2006. The amendment results in 100 additional dwelling units and there is no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. The 100 additional units result in a 03-03-2015 249 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 5 of 42 net increase of 30 a.m. and 33 p.m. peak hour trips based on the Trip Generation Study prepared by DKS Associates for the existing museum use and the High Rise Condominium use trip rates included in City Council Policy A-18. Including 80 percent of prior General Plan amendments, the proposed GPA results in a total increase of 16,800 square feet of nonresidential floor area, 30 a.m. peak hour trips, 33 p.m. peak hour trips, and 100 residential dwelling units for Statistical Area L1. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve GPA No. GP2015-001. 7. The proposed amendment to the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning District meets the intent and purpose for a PC as specified in NBMC Section 20.56.010 (Planned Community District Procedures, Purpose). The property is located in the Newport Center area which includes a mixture of shopping, hotels, commercial support uses, professional offices, and residential developments. The development plan and standards are consistent with the surrounding development including the standards and allowed uses of the adjoining North Newport Center Planned Community. 8. The proposed amendment to the PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Zoning would apply appropriate site and project specific setbacks, density, and height limits to the project site given the site's urban location and all required parking is provided onsite. The site is fully developed and does not support any natural resources and all potential environmental impacts associated with the project are appropriately addressed through standard building permit procedures and the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. 9. The future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed San Joaquin Plaza (PC) Zoning District of the NBMC. 10. A development agreement is requested by the applicant as the project would add 100 new residential dwelling units within Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center). The development agreement includes all the mandatory elements for consideration and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. 11. The public benefit in the proposed development agreement includes the payment of a public benefit fee in the amount of $71,100 per dwelling unit and the donation of the adjacent 0.9 -acre property located at 856 San Clemente Drive from the OCMA to the City. 03-03-2015 250 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 6 of 42 Height Increase NBMC Section 20.30.060(C)(3) (Height Limits and Exceptions, Required Findings) requires findings to be made to adopt a Planned Community District with an increase in the height of the structure above the previous base height limit: Finding: A. The project applicant is providing additional project amenities beyond those that are otherwise required. Examples of project amenities include, but are not limited to: i. Additional landscaped open space,- ii. pace;ii. Increased setback and open areas; iii. Enhancement and protection of public views. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The building design provides a high level of design with open space, landscape, residential amenities, and building setbacks that are similar or greater than those required on adjoining properties. The main building provides lot coverage of approximately 30 percent. The remaining portion of the site includes the service/emergency access drive, the motor court and a variety of open and useable plazas, landscaped/hardscape areas, planters, and a dog run. 2. The site design provides 32,261 square feet of outdoor common open space, much of it landscaped area (not including the motor court) where a total of 7,500 square feet are required (75 square feet/dwelling unit) under the RM development standards of the NBMC. 3. The main residential tower is set back a minimum of 36 feet from the front property line (San Clemente Drive), 34 feet from the right property line (adjacent to the office parking structure), 10 feet to the left property line (adjacent to the OCMA administration building site) and 42 feet to the rear property line (adjacent to the Villas at Fashion Island apartments). Parking level basement setbacks occur largely below grade and are not immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. They maintain a minimum 10 -foot setback except on the right side where the access road caisson wall in located along the property line adjacent to the office parking structure. 4. The property abuts properties located in the North Newport Center Planned Community to the north and east. The North Newport Center PC includes setbacks from streets, which are typically 15 feet. No interior setbacks standards are included and the placement of buildings and structures is reviewed during the Plan Review process for new structures. 5. The adjoining property developed with the OCMA administration building is in the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community, which does not include required setbacks. 03-03-2015 251 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 7 of 42 Building location and design is reviewed during the site development review process. The existing building is set back approximately 30 feet from the side property line. 6. The project does not affect existing public views from designated viewpoints or view corridors as shown in the view simulations and discussed in Chapter 5-01 (Aesthetics) of the Final EIR and does not detract from the character of the area. The overall project height is generally consistent with the height limit and existing building heights in the northerly section of Newport Center. 7. The subject property is located in the 300 -foot High Rise Height Area as depicted on Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation of the NBMC. Although this height limit is applicable to nonresidential buildings, the type and design of a structure, and not only the use, are important in determining if its bulk and scale are appropriate for a particular location. In this case the residential highrise is well designed and is consistent with the 300 -foot high rise height limit and meets the intent of Land Use Element Policy LU 6.14.4 (Development Scale), which suggests, but does not limit that the greatest building mass and height should be concentrated in the northeastern section of Newport Center along San Joaquin Hills Road. Finding: B. The architectural design of the project provides visual interest through the use of light and shadow, recessed planes, vertical elements, and varied roof planes; Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The exterior is comprised predominantly of stone and masonry with metal work details and glass windows. Massing offsets, variations of roofline, varied textures, recesses, articulation, and design accents on the elevations are integrated to enhance the building's architectural style. 2. The building fagade is designed to be compatible with surrounding retail, office and residential development in Newport Center. The architectural design provides a significant amount of articulation to fit with the context of surrounding buildings in the Newport Center area. Large scale features such as variation in floor size, multistory bay windows, balconies and terraces help to reduce the scale of the structure and to provide visual interest and variety. Mechanical equipment and elevator overrides are screened from view. Finding: C. The increased height will not result in undesirable or abrupt scale changes or relationships being created between the proposed structure(s) and existing adjacent developments or public spaces. Where appropriate, the proposed structure(s) provides a gradual transition to taller or shorter structures on abutting properties; and 03-03-2015 252 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 8 of 42 Fact in Support of Finding: Although the building is taller than the structures in the immediate vicinity it is not out of character with the structures in the northerly section of Newport Center which includes a mix of building types and heights. There are six existing buildings in the northern section of Newport Center that are greater than 200 feet in height. Finding: D. The structure will have no more floor area than could have been achieved without the approval of the height increase. Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed floor area for the project would conform to the dwelling unit and gross floor area limit established through the amended PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan). Site Development Review A site development review is required for the construction of five or more residential units processed in conjunction with a tentative tract map. The site development review analyzes the project as a whole for compatibility with the site and surrounding land uses. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.52.080(F) (Site Development Review), the following findings and facts in support of a site development review are set forth: Finding: A. Allowed within the subject Zoning district; Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed Site Development Review for a 100 -unit condominium project is consistent with the proposed amendment to the San Joaquin Plaza Planned) Community Development Plan that allows 100 residential units. Finding: B. In compliance with all of the applicable criteria in [NBMC Subsection 24.52. g80(C)(2) (c)]. - a. Compliance with this Section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any applicable specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the use or structure; b. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent development; and whether the relationship is based on standards of good design; 18XIIINIVOIN 253 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 9 of 42 C. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the site and adjacent developments and public areas; d. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces; e. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use of water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and f. The protection of significant views from public right(s)-of-way and compliance with [NBMC] Section 20.30. 100 (Public View Protections); and Facts in SuDDort of Findina: 1. Refer to facts under Amendments, above that discuss the project's consistency with the proposed Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) General Plan land use designation and the proposed amendment to PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan) Zoning District. 2. The project has been designed as 100 units with interior amenities and shared spaces within a 25 -story building that provides effective open space, light, and air for each unit. The project is integrated as a unified development through the use of similar architectural style and design elements, on-site parking, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian access to the site. 3. The building, including the relatively small footprint, is designed to be compatible with surrounding residential, office and office development in Newport Center and Fashion Island. The building architecture provides a stone and masonry exterior with large window openings, a textured stone base, masonry frames and detailed metalwork. Massing offsets, multi -story bay windows, balconies, varied textures, recesses, articulation, and design accents on all building elevations are integrated to enhance the overall architectural style of the building. 4. The height, bulk, and scale of the residential building are comparable to height limits on surrounding properties and existing building heights throughout the northern half of Newport Center. The building is designed to provide variation and modulation between visual interest, especially at higher floors. The front fagades include both vertical and horizontal offsets and utilize a variation of building materials to provide enhanced visual relief. The project's orientation toward Newport Center Drive and San Clemente Drive creates a cohesive and visual connection to the interior of Newport Center. 5. Mechanical equipment for the residential units have been located within enclosures at the roof level to reduce noise impacts and the enclosures will provide effective screening below the roof parapet level to minimize aesthetic impacts. 6. The project has been designed to avoid long term conflicts among uses, such as noise, vibration, lighting, odors, and similar impacts. The podium wall provides a buffer between a portion of the top floor parking garage units and the adjacent commercial development to the east and west and the residential development to the north. 03-03-2015 254 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 10 of 42 7. Walkways and egress are sufficient throughout the site as reviewed by the Building Division and the City Traffic Engineer. 8. Pursuant to the Zoning Code, the project provides the required 200 residential parking spaces, and 50 guest parking spaces, which are provided entirely on-site. Additionally, the use of valet and the parking management increases the number of parking spaces. 9. Access to the site, on-site circulation, and parking areas are designed to provide standard -sized parking spaces, adequate drive aisles, and the minimum vehicle turning radius to provide safe access for residents and guests, emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. 10. The project's primary access would be at a new curb cut across from the intersection of San Clemente Drive and Santa Maria Road, and would include two main entry lanes and a guard station that would be setback from San Clemente Drive by approximately 60 feet. An exit lane would be adjacent to the entry lanes, though separated by a landscaped median and the guard station. The entry lanes would lead into a motor court that will be used for drop-off/pick-up of residents and guests, short-term parking, and pedestrian access to the building lobby. 11. Operationally, the project will provide 24-hour valet service to residents and guests. The use of valet will optimize the area available for parking and ensure all residents and guests can park on-site. The final valet/parking management plan is subject to the review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 12. The project does not change any street parking configurations as no parking is allowed on San Clemente Drive. The site design provides three curb cuts, one each for ingress and egress and one for emergency and delivery vehicle access. The project provides adequate sight distance at each driveway, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. 13. Landscaping is provided throughout the site in areas that are not utilized by the existing units or areas for parking circulation. The project's perimeter and street landscaping will complement the street tree pattern, enhance the pedestrian experience, and soften the view of the building fagade. The majority of setback areas are landscaped. A variation of ornamental groundcover, vines, shrubs, and trees are utilized to help soften and buffer the massing of the building and podium at ground level. 14. New street trees will be provided along San Clemente Drive. 15. The existing pedestrian sidewalk and bicycle lanes along the San Clemente Drive frontage are maintained and will connect future residents to Fashion Island and Newport Center's other commercial and entertainment opportunities. To further facilitate vehicle independence and pedestrian use of nearby resources, the project 03-03-2015 255 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 11 of 42 includes storage for resident bicycles (two bicycles per unit) to take advantage of existing bicycle infrastructure within the City. 16. The project is subject to the City's Water -Efficient Landscape requirements (NBMC Chapter 14.17) and compliance will be confirmed at plan check prior to issuing building permits. 17. The proposed residential development provides a series of common outdoor living areas that includes pools, a dog run, open plazas, and landscaped seating. Half of the units provide private outdoor living space in the form of balconies or decks. 18. The site is visible from several coastal view roads including Avocado Avenue, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Center Drive as identified by the General Plan. These roads have been designated as Coastal View Roads because portions of them offer views of the coast. In this case, although the project may be seen from portions of these designated coastal view roads; it will not block or obstruct views of the coast. As shown in in the view simulations and discussed in the analysis of the Aesthetics chapter of the DEIR, the project does not affect existing public views does not detract from the character of the area. The overall project height is consistent with the height limit on properties in the northern area of Newport Center and existing building heights on nearby blocks. Finding: C. The proposed development is not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The residential project has been designed to ensure that potential conflicts with surrounding land uses are minimized to the extent possible to maintain a healthy environment for both businesses and residents by providing an architecturally pleasing project with articulation and building modulations to enhance the urban environment consistent with development in Newport Center. 2. The proposed building has been designed to accommodate and provide safe access for emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. Emergency, refuse and delivery trucks will utilize the service entry drive that leads to parking level 1 at the easterly side of the property. The final size, design, location, and screening of the refuse enclosures will comply with the requirements of NBMC Section 20.30.120 (Solid Waste & Recyclable Materials Storage), ensuring compatibility with the on-site and adjacent uses. 03-03-2015 256 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 12 of 42 3. The project, which would introduce approximately 224 new residents, would not impact the ability of public service providers, including police, fire protection, and emergency services, to meet standard levels or jeopardize the ability to meet existing response times. 4. The project redevelops an existing lot and introduces new residents into an area of Newport Beach with the intent of providing opportunities for residents to live in a pedestrian -friendly environment close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation. 5. While the project would generate new sources of light, the project site is located in the highly developed, urban Newport Center area that consists of substantial sources of light. Also, all exterior project lighting is required to comply with NBMC Section 20.30.070, which requires all outdoor lighting fixtures to be designed, aimed, located, and maintained to shield adjacent properties from light spillage. 6. The City has sufficient water supply to serve the project, which was accounted for in the City's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) water demand projections. Also, the project includes the installation of water -efficient fixtures in each unit to reduce water use and landscape irrigation systems designed with weather sensors, timers, and low -flow irrigation devices. 7. The project is within the notification area of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the project is below the maximum transitional imagery surface heights, and thus the project is within the building height limits of the AELUP. The project site also falls outside the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level contour line established by the AELUP and would, therefore, not conflict with any land use compatibility issues related to noise. Finally, the project site does not fall within any of the AELUP Safety Zones, in which certain land uses have been identified as incompatible and restricted. 8. The project does not involve the use or manufacture of any hazardous substances that could impact nearby development. Moreover, project construction would comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing application and disposal of any hazardous materials discovered during construction. 9. Roof -top mechanical equipment for each unit is fully enclosed within an equipment screen and is not visible from the public right-of-way. 10. The new construction complies with all Building, Public Works, Fire Codes, City ordinances, and all conditions of approval. 03-03-2015 257 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 13 of 42 Tentative Tract Map A tentative tract map is requested for residential condominium purposes, to create 100 condominium units. In accordance with NBMC Section 19.12.070 (Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps), the following findings and facts in support of a tentative tract map are set forth: Finding: D. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with the applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City Subdivision Code. Facts in Support of Finding 1. Refer to facts under Amendments, above, that discuss the project's consistency with the proposed Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) General Plan land use designation. 2. The Tentative Tract Map provides for the development of residential condominium project located in a mixed-use area developed with residential, office and service/retail Uses. 3. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and found it consistent with the NBMC Title 19 (Subdivisions) and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 4. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance with NBMC Title 19 (Subdivisions). Finding: E. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. Facts in Support of Finding 1. The site has a gentle sloping condition from the front (San Clemente Drive) towards the rear. The building design accommodates this slope by with a podium wall at the westerly and northerly sides that maintain 10 -foot setbacks. A caisson retaining wall along the easterly property line adjacent to the parking structure and a portion of the adjoining apartment development accommodates the design of the emergency/service access road. The site is safe and suitable for development. The site is not located in a flood zone. The geotechnical feasibility study and geotechnical report provides additional recommendations for construction of the project. Additional analysis of the structural design will be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. 18XIIINIVZOIN 258 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 14 of 42 2. The approximate two acre site is large enough to accommodate 100 units while providing sufficient landscape, setback and useable open space areas as well as vehicle access and guest parking areas that meet applicable standards. The existing developed site is devoid of natural resources, and it is located in an area that provides adequate access to roadways and utilities. 3. The General Plan designates the properties to north as mixed-use and an apartment community is currently under construction. Other multi -family residential uses are been developed in the Newport Center area and have proven suitable for the area. Finding: F. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision-making body may nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Under existing conditions, the project site and surrounding land areas are fully developed with urban uses and do not contain sensitive biological resources. The on-site vegetation is ornamental in nature, including trees and shrubs, groundcover, and vines growing on the existing building's facades and screen walls. Compliance with standard construction practices including avoiding removal of trees and vegetation during nesting season will ensure protection of any indigenous or migratory nesting birds during the construction. 2. No natural drainages traverse the property and no potential jurisdictional waters or wetlands areas are present on or immediately adjacent to the site. 3. An EIR (SCH No. 2016021023) was prepared for the proposed project. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment, with the exception of temporary construction noise, with the incorporation of mitigation measures for air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils. The mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures are applicable to the project through the MMRP (Exhibit B). Finding: G. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 03-03-2015 259 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 15 of 42 Facts in Support of Finding: 1. At full build -out, air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with construction of the project will be less than significant, as documented in the Final EIR. 2. Mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR reduce potential impacts associated with air quality, cultural resources and geology and soils to a level of less than significant. 3. Although a significant unavoidable impact related to construction noise has been identified, mitigation measures have been included to reduce the impact as much as feasibly possible. The impact is short term and no long term or permanent impacts related to noise have been identified. 4. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the subdivision pattern will generate any serious public health problems. 5. All construction for the project complies with Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes. Public improvements will be required of the developer per NBMC Section 19.28.010 and Section 66410 et seq. of the Subdivision Map Act. This project shall comply with all ordinances of the City and all conditions of approval. Finding: H. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision-making body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within a subdivision. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Public improvements, consisting of the reconstruction of the curb, gutter, and sidewalks, three curb cuts along the San Clemente Drive frontage, and street trees along San Clemente Drive will be required of the applicant per the NBMC and the Subdivision Map Act. Sewer and water connections will be provided for the project as approved by the Public Works Department. 2. The existing sewer easement is no longer necessary and will be abandoned. The existing water easement will be abandoned and a new water easement, integrated into the design of the project, will be established. 03-03-2015 260 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 16 of 42 Finding: 1. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land. Fact in Support of Finding: The project site does not contain prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance and no portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act contract. Finding: J. That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included within the land project; and (b) the decision-making body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. Fact in Support of Finding: California Business and Professions Code Section 11000.5 has been repealed by the Legislature. However, this project site is not considered a "land project" as previously defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code because the project site does not contain 50 or more parcels of land nor is it located within the boundaries of a specific pian. Finding: K That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act. Fact in Support of Finding: The proposed Tentative Tract Map and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Building Code that requires new construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location and climate. The Community Development Department enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process. Finding: 18XIIINIVZOIN 261 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 17 of 42 L. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. Fact in Support of Finding: There are no existing dwelling units on the project site. Rather, the proposed project includes the construction of 100 new condominium units to contribute to the City's population needs, and 100 units above what is included in the General Plan. The applicant will be responsible for the payment of appropriate traffic fair share, San Joaquin Transportation Corridor, park, and development agreement public benefit fees for the development of these new dwelling units as conditions of approval. Finding: M. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for the proposed construction activities. A permit is required for all construction activities that include clearing, grading, and/or excavation that disturb at least one acre of total land area. Additionally, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared, pursuant to the requirements of the NPDES permit. 2. Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction -related activities, which would specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the project would be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that all potential pollutants of concern (including sediment) are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged from the subject property. 3. Sewer connections have been conditioned to be installed per City Standards, the applicable provisions of NBMC Chapter 14.24 (Sewer Connection, Permits), and the latest revision of the Uniform Plumbing Code. 4. The sewer analysis determined that a 12 -inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) sewer line would be needed to replace the existing 8 -inch VCP in the downstream reach in Santa Barbara Drive. Thus, the project would install a 12 -inch VCP sewer pipe at this location to connect with the Orange County Sanitization District sewer system. With 03-03-2015 262 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 18 of 42 this improvement, there will be adequate sewer system capacity to serve the requirements of the project. Finding: N. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act. Fact in Support of Finding: The project site is not located within the Coastal Zone. Traffic Study In accordance with NBIVIC Section 15.40.030(A) Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter [15.40] and Appendix A. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. A traffic study, titled "Traffic Impact Analysis, ©CMA — Residential Project, City of Newport Beach" dated April 29, 2016, was prepared by DKS Associates under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer. The analysis included a project trip generation study to establish existing trip generation for the museum. A supplemental traffic analysis dated July 15, 2015, was also prepared that studied five additional intersections. Both studies were prepared and reviewed for compliance with NBMC Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance). 2. Based on the proposed project description, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 418 average daily trips where the existing museum use generates 108 average daily trips. Since the net increase exceeds 300, a TPO study has been completed. No significant impacts related to traffic have been identified. Finding= G That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made: 18XIDNIVOI 7 263 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 19 of 42 Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Construction of the project is anticipated to be completed in 2020. If the project is not completed within 60 months of receiving, preparation of a new traffic study is required. The traffic study included fifteen study intersections plus five additional intersections in the supplemental traffic analysis were analyzed for potential impacts based on the City's Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology. Intersections under the jurisdiction of Caltrans were analyzed for potential impacts using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. Utilizing these methodologies, the traffic study determined that the 18 intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the TPQ. Finding: H. That the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection. Fact in Support of Finding No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. Rpune minx Revocation of Use Permit No. 2005-017 is requested by the applicant. Use Permit No. 2015- 017 allowed beer and wine sales at the museum. Revocation of Modification Permit No, MD2004-059 which allowed additional flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC is also requested by the applicant. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.68.050(B)(4)(a) (Review Authority's Action), the following finding and fact in support of the revocation are set forth: Finding: The permit or approval Was issued in error or circumstances under which the permit or approval Was granted have been modified to an extent that one or more of the findings that justified the original approval can no longer be made and the public health, safety, and welfare require the revocation or modifications. Fact in Support of Finding: The property is subject to changed circumstances (General Plan amendment to RM) under which the site will no longer be improved with the infrastructure and occupied by a use contemplated by UP2005-017 and MD2004-059. [iicII1191NOW 264 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 20 of 42 SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Newport Beach certify Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002 (SCH No. 2016021023) as depicted in Exhibit "A" , which consists of the notice of preparation, initial study, environmental analysis, alternatives analysis, appendices, responses to comments, and revisions to the draft EIR. 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Newport Beach approve the Mitigation Monitoring Report Program as depicted in Exhibit "B" of this resolution. 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Newport Beach approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2015- 001 as depicted in Exhibit "C," To remove the property from Anomaly No. 49 (Table LU2 and associated figures), change the land use category from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units and reduce the allowed in Anomaly No 49 to 21,576 square feet. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council approval of Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. 2015-001 (Zoning) as depicted in Exhibit "D" to change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi - Unit Residential and revise the development standards to accommodate the proposed residential development. 5. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council approval of Development Agreement No. DA2016-001, as set forth in Exhibit "E." 6. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council approval of Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 and Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001, as set forth in Exhibit "F", subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "G." 7. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council approval of Traffic Study No. TS2015-004. 8. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council revocation of Use Permit No. UP2005-017 and Modification Permit No. MD2004-059, with each revocation effective upon the issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit. 03-03-2015 265 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033 Page 21 of 42 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016. AYES: Dunlap, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Zak, 'Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None W ;IICII1Ic1platI r7 266 Attachment P Planning Commission Minutes, October 20, 2016 267 ABSENT: None Commissioner Weigand said he would abstain on the main motion because this was an important project and good for the community. Vote on the motion: AYES: Kramer, Koetting, Zak, Hillgren, Lawler NOES: Dunlap ABSTAIN: Weigand ABSENT: None ITEM NO.3 THE VILLAGE INN OUTDOOR DINING USE PERMIT (PA2015-016) Site Location: 123 and 127 Marine Avenue Chair Kramer announced this item had been continued. ITEM NO.4 MUSEUM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT (PA2015-152) Site Location: 850 San Clemente Drive Commissioner Lawler disclosed that as a private developer he had pursued development of the site, but was not selected. He had no legal or financial interest in the project. He had no bias regarding the project and would vote based on information presented during the meeting. Senior Planner Gregg Ramirez reported the site was the existing home of the Orange County Museum of Art. The proposed project was a condominium tower with 100 for -sale units. Gross floor area was approximately 392,000 square feet plus two levels of garage parking. The proposed building would be 25 stories high or 295 feet. The applicant proposed 250 parking spaces within the garage as well as surface parking. A proposed valet and parking management plan would add 38 parking spaces. The final parking management plan would be subject to review by the City Traffic Engineer. The project also proposed shared open -space amenities for residents. The applicant proposed one pool, on the terrace. The applicant designed the building to achieve LEED Silver certification. He reviewed the proposed document amendments, adjacent properties, the site plan, and the main land use -related goal from the General Plan. If the proposed project was approved, Anomaly Area 49 would shrink and only include the adjacent site at 856 San Clement Drive. Residential developments were located on the northerly and westerly sides of Newport Center. General Plan policy indicates reinforcing the design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass off San Joaquin Hills Road and then scaling down toward Coast Highway. Height limits for Blocks 500 and 600 were 295 feet. An exception for the North Newport Center Planned Community allowed an additional 20 feet of height for mechanical appurtenances. Map H-1 from the zoning code shows areas in the City where nonresidential buildings could reach 300 feet in height, including the subject property. Therefore the site was contemplated for a high-rise building. The Zoning Code exempted Planned Communities from height limits specified in the height limit section. However, the required findings had to be made to exceed base height limits. Setbacks of the main building are 35 feet from San Clemente Drive and 42 feet from the rear. The podium level would not be visible from the front. The parking areas maintained a 10 -foot setback from the left side and rear property lines. A materials board was available, and included in the project plans. The City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required for the project. Staff received many comments from a public scoping meeting held in February and considered those comments in preparing the EIR. The public comment period for the Draft EIR expired September 30th. Staff prepared responses to comments regarding the Draft EIR. The EIR included four alternatives. The Draft EIR concluded the project would have no long-term specific or cumulative impacts to traffic, public views, delivery of water or utilities or any other section studied in the EIR. The Draft EIR found the project was consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan. Mitigation measures were developed for five areas related to short-term impacts, construction and the structural design of the tower. Construction noise was deemed to be a significant and unavoidable impact due to the project's proximity to residential uses. The Final EIR included responses to all comments, an updated transit map, additional mitigations for the construction traffic management plan, and donation of the parcel at 856 San Clemente Drive to the City. There was no need to re -circulate the EIR. The existing Art Museum generated 108 average daily trips based on an actual traffic count. The proposed tower would generate 418 average daily trips for an increase of 310 average daily trips. He provided average daily trips for surrounding buildings and reviewed terms of the proposed Development Agreement including a per unit public benefit fee and the donation of the 5of14 268 land and building at 856 San Clemente Drive to the City. The project would be presented to the Airport Land Use Commission on November 17th. Director Kim Brandt advised that two revocations were associated with the Museum building, a use permit and a modification permit. Those use permits would expire at the time demolition permits were issued for the structure. Senior Planner Ramirez indicated the Statement of Facts contained in the draft Resolution did not include the first study session held in April and requested the Commission include that if it took action on the project. Bill Witte, Related Companies, related the Art Museum's efforts and goals in selling the property. The vision for the project was guided by residential land use in the area; the availability of 100 residential units for development in Fashion Island; local demand for luxury condominium living; and a desire for world-class, iconic architecture. Because of its siting, views of the proposed tower would be blocked by existing high-rises. The project would not block any ocean view corridors and have no shadow impact on the adjacent property. Over 60 percent of the site was open space. The proposed project emphasized smart growth, a walkable community and a mix of uses. He listed proposed luxury amenities. Gino Canori, Related Companies, reported the project would not generate long-term, significant impacts; was consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan; would promote smart growth principles; would reinforce regional design; would complement the existing skyline for Newport Center; would not create any significant impacts to existing traffic patterns; and could be served by the existing water supply. Height and mass were concentrated in the northern part of Newport Center. He explain that because of site topography, Museum House would appear 58 feet shorter than 520 Newport Center Drive, 42 feet shorter than 650 Newport Center, and 11 feet shorter than 610 Newport Center. He reviewed traffic trips as noted in the traffic study. The EIR studied water usage and concluded the City's water system had sufficient capacity for the proposed project. Museum House's water usage was projected to be 118 gallons per capita per day. Museum House would not impact existing water conservation measures. Museum House would likely be the most energy efficient residential building in the area. He reviewed traffic circulation for residents, visitors, move -ins, deliveries, emergency services, and trash pickup. The project was designed with 250 parking stalls. Valet operations would allow the stacking of an additional 54 vehicles. Construction would take approximately 28 months, and construction hours would comply with the Municipal Code. The applicant would develop and implement a construction mitigation plan prior to the start of construction. Mr. Witte noted the applicant would pay $5.9 million in permit and impact fees and $7.1 million as a community benefit contribution. The proposed Museum House Development Agreement includes the donation of the property located at 856 San Clemente Drive to the City. The project received formal support from associations representing police officers and firemen of Newport Beach. The applicant would work with a local firm to prepare construction documents. Dan Lobitz, Robert A. M. Stern Architects, stated his firm looked carefully at architectural character, local traditions, and local ways of building in designing any project. He expected to provide a top quality building. His firm had designed a number of civic and institutional buildings and high-end single-family homes in Southern California. The proposed building had been designed to fit into the skyline and character of Newport Center. A taller building allowed more garden space at lower levels. He shared floor plans for each section of the building and reviewed materials, architectural details and landscape plans. Mr. Witte added that they held more than 60 meetings with members of the community. Chair Kramer disclosed that he met several times with the applicant and its consultants. They discussed project details. Vice Chair Koetting reported he met approximately six weeks ago with the applicant and its consultants. He saw a slide presentation and listened to their proposal without commenting. Secretary Zak indicated he met several times with the applicant to review the design. Commissioner Dunlap advised that he met with the applicant approximately six weeks ago Commissioner Lawler disclosed he met with the applicant and its consultant. 6of14 269 Commissioner Weigand reported he met with the applicant twice Commissioner Hillgren indicated he met with the applicant and consultants twice. In response to Secretary Zak's question, Senior Planner Ramirez agreed that the Commission was approving an amendment to the Planned Community to allow an increase in the height of a residential development. He noted that planned communities are not limited to the heights specified in the zoning code. In response to Secretary Zak's question related to the Newport Country Club general plan amendment, Director Brandt explained that traffic for a golf course was based on the number of golf course holes rather than the size of the ancillary clubhouse. It was determined that the traffic rates used in the analysis were correct. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's inquiry, Senior Planner Ramirez reported the statement that the proposed building fit the area meant the proposed tower was just as suitable to the site as would be a conventional office tower. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, Director Brandt reported the additional square footage allocated to Newport Center, specifically the North Newport Center Planned Community, was discussed and adopted subsequent to the 2006 General Plan adoption. The adoption included the allocation of additional square footage in Newport Center that permitted development of the two office towers located at 520 and 650 Newport Center Drive. The Planned Community regulations and development agreement were structured such that approval of the actual locations of the buildings was granted at an administrative level. No public hearings for 520 Newport Center Drive and 650 Newport Center Drive were held. Approval was based on the work and public hearings that occurred in 2008. Senior Planner Ramirez added that some buildings were demolished to accommodate those office buildings, including the approximately 250,000 square feet that previously existed on the Villas at Fashion Island apartment site. That square footage was subsequently transferred to Blocks 500 and 600. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, Senior Planner Ramirez advised that the average daily trip information from the ITE calculations were accurate. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's inquiry, Director Brandt explained that Newport Center was within the area of influence for the Airport Land Use Commission. Any amendment to the General Plan or zoning documents must be referred to the Airport Land Use Commission for review and a determination of whether it was consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. Staff anticipated the Airport Land Use Commission would review the project in November. Staff felt that in terms of general aviation flights, the Newport Center environment was much different from that of the Uptown residential project. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, Senior Planner Ramirez indicated the grade of the top deck area would be similar to the grade of San Clemente Drive; therefore, the grade would be raised. In response to Commissioner Lawler's question, Senior Planner Ramirez explained that height limit regulations in the Zoning Code allowed applicants in Planned Community areas to propose any height. Planned Communities were essentially exempt from the height limits in that subsection of the Code; however, the Planning Commission still must make the findings to increase the height limit beyond the base height limit. In response to Commissioner Lawler's question, Director Brandt advised that SPON's letter referred to the transfer of unbuilt hotel rooms at the Marriott Hotel to the North Newport Center Planned Community area that occurred in 2012. That was not a General Plan Amendment but a transfer and conversion of unbuilt development potential. Therefore, Charter Section 423 did not apply to that Council action. In response to Commissioner Hillgren's inquiry, Senior Planner Ramirez reported the Life Safety Division reviewed the plans and met with the applicant's designers to ensure that public safety was addressed and adequate access for first responders was provided. Commissioner Hillgren noted the City had approved a height of 200 feet for a residential project across the street. 7of14 270 In response to Commissioner Dunlap's questions, Senior Planner Ramirez stated that Land Use Policy 5.1.2 applied to projects citywide and could be interpreted in different ways. In this case, staff reviewed the body of Newport Center policies and surrounding height limits and the height limit map. The height issue was a question for the Planning Commission to determine. Staff referenced the northeast quadrant as Blocks 500 and 600, posed the question whether concentrating the "greatest" mass meant anywhere else in Newport Center would not be allowed The Height Limit Map and Zoning Code suggested a height of 300 feet could be appropriate in this northern area of Newport Center. Under Policy 5.6.1, one had to consider the environment of the project. In this case, the property would be separated from the residential use to the north and open toward Santa Maria Road, which provided a straight shot to the community in general. That policy related to the geography and the location. Mr. Canori reported the FAA recently issued a determination of no hazard for all four corners of the building. Staff did not anticipate any problems with the Airport Land Use Commission's review of the project. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Kacey Taormina was excited about the project. There was demand for this type of luxury product. She appreciated the applicant's integration of community and Planning Commission feedback. Robert Stern was one the world's most prominent architects. Larry Tucker indicated he had focused on impacts that the project could cause. People who opposed the project generally contended that impacts would be traffic, water use and views. The Draft EIR concluded there would be no traffic impacts. Multifamily residential uses did not generate many trips. Residents of Museum House likely would not be traveling during peak hours. People who objected to the project based on water usage opposed the project in general. This project would not block any views. The main issue was whether Museum House fit the design scheme of Newport Center generally and the location specifically. He found no legitimate basis to oppose the project. A high-quality project would add more residential to Newport Center, and those residents would support restaurants and retailers. In response to Chair Kramer's request, Mr. Tucker explained that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) limited the Planning Commission to considering substantial, factual evidence contained in the record. He read CEQA Guidelines related to substantial evidence. The Planning Commission should disregard opinions not supported by facts, i.e., technical studies. This project could increase traffic very little. Elaine Linhoff remarked that the General Plan never contained a goal for Newport Beach to be a metropolis of skyscrapers. Developers wanted more and bigger buildings. The City, staff, Planning Commission and City Council yielded too often to pressure to amend the General Plan. This project was an indefensible example of spot zoning and should not be allowed. She hoped the Planning Commission would deny the amendment. Marko Popovich presented a petition requesting the Planning Commission to vote no on the project. In five days, more than 1,000 people signed the petition. Reasons for denying the project were spot zoning; the number of housing units allowed by the General Plan; and increased traffic and congestion. Christine Sabarras opposed the Museum House. This project is located too close to flight paths and to the liquefaction zone. Most people are concerned about the height of the building. From Jamboree, the building would appear two stories taller. Anita Mishook stated the building would be a striking, positive addition to the architecture of Newport Beach. It would have elements of sustainability and appears to have minimal environmental impacts. Teri Kennady supported the project. The project was fresh, remarkable and would be a major landmark. Steve Sergi shared market feedback relative to demand for smaller and high-quality housing. There is a shortage of this type of housing. Museum House would provide the type of homes that are in demand. Jim Place felt the denial of the Banning Ranch development was a clear signal that citizens did not want growth. His concerns are building height, increased traffic, water usage and noise. The building does not belong in Newport Beach. 8of14 271 Scott Richter supported the project as a wonderful addition to the skyline. The Newport Beach Police Officers' Association and the Newport Beach Firefighters' Association supported the project. Both organizations found the project exceptional from all aspects. The project would not significantly impact traffic patterns or water supply. It would not adversely affect police or fire services in any substantial way. The Draft EIR concluded the project was consistent with the General Plan. Shannon Stewart questioned standards for water use and the date of water standards used in the analysis. She did not understand why developers were allowed to build more residential units when homeowners were required to conserve water. She also questioned the estimates used in traffic usage studies. She asked if Commissioners had met privately with members of the public. Chair Kramer stated Commissioners had met with members of the public. Vice Chair Koetting advised that the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan was used in the analysis. Ms. Stewart inquired whether the traffic study used estimates or real counts. Gordon Glass related the history of mid -rise development in Newport Beach. Six stories was the tallest residential development constructed in some time. In the past, the City administration realized that residents did not want high-rise residential units. This project would establish a frightening and dangerous precedent. Rick Stafford indicated Museum House would sit lower because of the topography of the land. The view would be appealing for people crossing the bay on Pacific Coast Highway. The project would harmonize with the aesthetics envisioned in the plan. Tom Frederick stated Museum House was a 25 -story, 100 -unit condominium tower. Recently the Planning Commission rejected a five -story condominium project in Newport Center. The Planning Commission should deny development that was too high. Barry Allen did not understand why the applicant was allowed to speak at length when residents were limited to three minutes. If the Planning Commission and the City Council could not find an obscure exemption, the project could not be approved. Luxury condominiums generated a higher number of trips than ordinary residential condominiums. Susan Skinner indicated the Greenlight Initiative was intended to put projects such as the Museum House to a vote. Repeatedly, residents had voted down any plan that added development like Museum House to the City. She expected the City Council would approve the project without modification. Any development over 21 units was required by law to be put to a vote. She requested the Planning Commission respect the wishes of 70 percent of the City that did not want projects like the Museum House and that she supported a Greenlight 2. Nancy McNash was interested in balancing growth with maintaining environmental amenities. When the Museum House was proposed as an addition to the General Plan, it did not seem to be consistent with the City's plans. She found it hard to believe that the project would help achieve a jobs/housing balance. Affordable housing was needed. The project benefited the developer or the Museum of Art. Robert Morgenson felt Newport Beach did not have the density or traffic of San Francisco or Los Angeles and retained a small town feel. The density of the City was increasing incrementally. Each project changed the character of the City over time. The citizens and residents of Newport Beach should decide whether high- density residential uses should be a part of Newport Beach. The residents should vote on the project, because it would fundamentally change the character of Newport Beach. Lorian Petry believed the project would result in far-reaching ramifications. Placing an obelisk -like structure between low-rise commercial and residential buildings would destroy the vision and create a precedent that could not be reversed. If approved, this project would be the first of many. The project should be denied or radically altered to fit the City's vision. Debra Allen remarked that the tallest buildings in Newport Center should be located on San Joaquin Hills Road; however, this building was not near San Joaquin Hills Road. This would be the first building of this height not located along San Joaquin Hills Road. 9of14 272 Nancy Skinner had met with Director Brandt and Assistant City Attorney Torres in an attempt to understand the transfer of the hotel rooms. She requested staff explain how the transfer could occur without a General Plan Amendment. Jo Carol Hunter expressed concern about the proposed changes in Newport Center. The project needed amendments to zoning and land use and was too large, too tall and too dense for the parcel. The project would block views from and cast shadows on other properties. The corner would look like a walled city. The project should not be approved until a change in the General Plan occurred. Chair Kramer requested speakers not repeat arguments in the interest of time. Karen Carlson stated a tremendous number of people felt the Museum House was not appropriate. The project should not be as tall as proposed. Newport Beach was not a high-rise City. Dorothy Kraus, speaking as an individual, expressed her frustration with responses to EIR comments, in particular the response regarding spot zoning. This project is a perfect illustration of spot zoning because it is a small parcel of land; it proposes a change to the current land use designation; it allowed a new residential development standard; and it is not compatible with any surrounding residential uses. Jean Watt advised that the site is intended to be used by private institutions for public benefit and should continue to be a cultural asset. Newport Center was built out in terms of the 2006 General Plan. Denying the project based on current zoning is appropriate. Carol Anne Dru stated Newport Beach was more than a building. It is landmarks such as the Crab Cooker, Woody's Wharf, and the Ferry. Karen Evarts indicated a county had the needed density for the arts to flourish. The issue is supporting the concept of an art center. The land donation would allow the Art Museum to join the art center of the County. Jim Warren advised that the project would have a significant impact on the Harbor View Hills area. No one attending a recent Speak Up Newport meeting supported the project. Another San Francisco architect turned a $60 million City Hall renovation into a $160 million renovation. Dennis Baker concurred with comments regarding spot zoning. The Planning Commission's role was not to fill market demand. This project was a good example of piecemeal planning. This project proposed a major General Plan Amendment. The transfer of hotel rooms to residential units would remain an issue until staff provided a satisfactory explanation of the issue. Penny McManigal wanted to see a better Art Museum. If the project does not work at this location, then the community should pay for another location in Newport Beach. Bob Currie expressed concern regarding development, traffic and water. Many of the problems people spoke about simply did not exist. Residents needed an Art Museum. This was an opportunity to develop a world-class Art Museum. Jean Beek requested the Planning Commission follow the zoning. Tom Baker stated the project did not comply with the General Plan. The proposed 25 -story, 295 -foot, 100 -unit residential tower was not compatible with surrounding development. The proposed height could be applied to only nonresidential projects. The project proposed an inappropriate General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code change to enable residential development on the site of the existing Art Museum. Approval would set an ill- advised precedent and would show disregard for the 2006 General Plan. The project was a fantastic example of what should not be done. Jim Mosher believed the Planning Commission had to make a finding exempting Planned Communities from height limits. He had questioned why the project did not disclose a primary objective of raising money to fund development of a new Art Museum in Costa Mesa and why those two projects should not be considered together. Mr. Witte's statement that the purpose of the project was to allow the Orange County Museum of Art to build a new Museum seemed to be substantial evidence. Pictures did not appear to accurately represent the 10 of 14 273 building and views of the building. He questioned staffs interpretation of Planned Communities being exempt from height limits provided in the subsection. The sentence was a grandfather clause, not an exemption. Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Mr. Witte remarked that people could be skeptical of depictions of the proposed building, but the project did not block any ocean corridor views and is mostly hidden by other buildings. The proposed building is most visible from Big Canyon. Support is more difficult to generate than opposition. Two hundred forty signatures in support of the project were submitted to the Commission. Residents would prefer to view open space as opposed to a Chinese wall. Chair Kramer requested Director Brandt and Assistant City Attorney Torres to address the perceived spot zoning question. Director Brandt reported that a Planned Community text was in place for the property. It contained an allowance for private institutional uses on the subject property. Over time, portions of the Planned Community had been incorporated into the adjacent North Newport Planned Community. In its original context, a broader range of uses was allowed in the Planned Community. The amendment would not change the zoning designation; however, a modification would introduce residential into the Planned Community. Residential was being added to the Planned Community text; but one had to look at the broader context of Newport Center. Several General Plan policies discussed the mix of uses. In relation to General Plan policies governing the area, staff did not consider it spot zoning. Assistant City Attorney Torres agreed with Director Brandt's comments. This was a mixture of uses. Immediately adjacent to the property was residential use. That was the intention for the Fashion Island area. In response to Secretary Zak's question, Director Brandt did not see any conflict between General Plan policies and a residential use for Newport Center. In response to Chair Kramer's request regarding the perceived 79 unit transfer triggering Greenlight, Director Brandt explained that the transfer of unbuilt hotel rooms from the Marriott site to the North Newport Center Planned Community was allowed by the General Plan. The General Plan specifically allowed transfers of development potential within Statistical Area L-1. Transfers, which were governed by certain guidelines, could also include conversion of development potential. The City Council adopted the transfer at the time of the public hearing in 2012. The City Council did not adopt a General Plan Amendment pursuant to General Plan policies. Assistant City Attorney Torres added that the Greenlight Initiative was triggered by a General Plan Amendment. The City Council action in 2012 did not include a General Plan Amendment; therefore, it did not trigger the Greenlight Initiative. In response to Commissioner Dunlap's question, Director Brandt stated General Plan policies allowed the transfer of development and contemplated conversions within the entire Statistical Area. In response to Chair Kramer's inquiry whether any party filing a lawsuit challenging the City Council action, Assistant City Attorney Torres replied that no one filed a lawsuit or challenged the City Council's determination in 2012. The time for filing a lawsuit had lapsed. In response to Commissioner Hillgren's question, Director Brandt recalled Ms. Watt correctly stating that the 100 units were not a General Plan allocation. The 100 units are a threshold identified in Charter Section 423 for requiring a vote. If 100 units were added to a Statistical Area through a General Plan Amendment, then a vote by the electorate was required. The issue was not the availability of 100 units for allocation within Newport Center. The threshold was further complicated by the consideration of any previous General Plan Amendments within the last ten years. Chair Kramer stated Director Brandt went into great detail regarding the issue at the last study session. In response to Secretary Zak's questions, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine reported there was a difference in trip generation rates between luxury and high-rise condominiums in terms of the peak hour trips. Luxury peak hour trips were higher than high-rise peak hour trips. Staff utilized high-rise trip generation rates because the manual did not contain an average daily traffic rate for luxury condominium. Staff used the high-rise condominium rate to determine the average traffic and continued to use the high-rise peak hour rates to conduct the traffic study. The manual contained peak hour rates for luxury condominiums, but not a daily rate for luxury condominiums. Using the high-rise rate, the PM peak hour rate was 33; and the AM peak hour rate was 30. Using the luxury rate, the 11 of 14 274 PM peak hour rate was 50, and the AM peak hour rate was 52. Peak hour rates were utilized in the Section 423 analysis; and those rates were below the 100 peak hour threshold. In response to Secretary Zak's inquiries, Director Brandt advised that under the terms of the Development Agreement, the developer could begin construction within the timeframe of the agreement's term. Staff was concerned that there could be changes in building materials or landscaping, so Condition of Approval No. 24 is proposed that requires final building design, building materials and landscaping to be returned to the Planning Commission for review and approval. Per the Municipal Code, any substantial change to the site plan also would return to the Planning Commission. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's inquiries, Director Brandt explained that "substantial" is a qualifier in terms of the intent of meeting the original approval. Oftentimes, minor adjustments have to be made as construction -level information becomes available. Staff reviews any changes to the site plan in relation to the conditions of approval and the findings to determine substantial conformance. Staff documents their substantial conformance findings through staff determinations, and notices of staff determinations are provided to the Planning Commission weekly. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, City Traffic Engineer Brine reported all rates were taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Traffic Manual, which was the national standard for trip rates. In response to Secretary Zak's question, Director Brandt referred to Section 20.30.060 regarding height limits within the City. Through the process of evaluating changes in height for base zoning or standard zoning, the Zoning Code indicated that height limits established as part of an adopted Planned Community shall not be subject to this subsection and listed standard exceptions. Mr. Mosher interpreted the subsection as the height limits established as part of an adopted Planned Community were those in effect at the time of the 2010 Zoning Code adoption. Staff reviewed General Plan policies, provisions of Zoning Code Section 20.30.060 and the height map and interpreted the subsection to indicate the height limits shown in Map H-1 could be applied to certain geographical areas. It is not necessarily the existing zoning, because there could be some deviation in the base zoning. In this case, the site had a Planned Community text. Staff believed the Zoning Code would allow the project to reach 300 feet with the appropriate amendments and required findings. All the information had to be considered together. The adopted Planned Community did not mean the increase in height was not allowed. Assistant City Attorney Torres added that the Zoning Code empowered the Director to make this type of interpretation. In response to Commissioner Hillgren's question, Senior Planner Ramirez indicated the height findings were listed at the top of page 16. Commissioner Lawler believed there was a strong demand for this type of project and an extremely limited supply. The only problem he found in the EIR is construction noise, and that was mitigated. The project would provide a significant City benefit. Secretary Zak felt the Commission respected differing viewpoints and appreciated the community's dialog and input. He had spent a great deal of time evaluating the project and speaking to City residents. He had consistently supported residential uses in Newport Center. Residential uses were consistent with General Plan Policy 6.14. Proposed amendments were not spot zoning, because they were consistent with many General Plan policies. He did not find a General Plan policy conflicting with proposed amendments. After considering the evidence and hearing staffs logic, he was comfortable with the proposed height. The loss of the institutional use would be less than 1 percent of institutional uses in the City. It is a great opportunity for the Museum of Art to relocate and become a regional facility. He is comfortable with recommending the City Council certify the EIR. Vice Chair Koetting stated Commissioners reviewed the entire EIR document and questioned staff about it. It is one of the cleanest Draft EIRs he has seen. The EIR is prepared independent of the applicant. He could not find anything wrong with the architecture and design. The landscaping quality is amazing. Commissioner Dunlap had raised concerns regarding land use issues with staff. The quality of the building is exemplary. Water and traffic impacts are inconsequential. Commissioners rely on staff for technical and legal determinations. His issues with the project are bulk and massing and the location. The zoning had to change to make the location a vibrant part of Newport Center. 12 of 14 275 VIII. IX. Commissioner Hillgren advised that Commissioners had talked to many residents. Newport Center was planned 50 years ago with a vision for high-rise buildings around the perimeter. He understood residents' frustration with traffic. Residents are experiencing entitlements that are part of the General Plan. He had had serious concerns regarding the height of the building. The proposed use, design, and location are appropriate. Chair Kramer concurred with all Commissioners' comments. He stated we should be so lucky to have what could be an iconic, world-class, five-star, multi -family residential project in the heart of our city, in Newport Center. It could be one of the most beautiful buildings and projects, not only in Newport Beach, but in Orange County. Chairman Kramer stated there are no significant CEQA impacts. The original vision for Newport Center is one of mixed-use in an intense, walkable area, and what we are approving is fulfilling that vision corresponding with General Plan policies. Newport Center is a regional hub that already includes retail, residential, commercial and recreational and it makes sense to add more high quality residential. The Commission has to focus on the facts of the application, not emotion. Chairman Kramer stated that some residents do not like change, but the reality is Newport Beach is not a static city, but a dynamic, cosmopolitan city with changing demographics. Chairman Kramer said he can make all required findings will be voting in favor of the project as recommended by City staff. Motion made by Commissioner Lawler and seconded by Secretary Zak to approve Museum House Residential Project PA2015-152, General Plan Amendment GP2015-001, Planned Community Development Plan PC2015- 001, Site Development Review No. SD2016-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map NT2016-001 (County Tentative Tract Map 17970), Development Agreement No. DA2016-001, Traffic Study 2015-004 and EIR 2016-002, Revoke Use Permit Modifications UP2015-017 and Modification Permit 2004-059 with revocation effective upon demolition or grading permit issuance. AYES: Kramer, Koetting, Zak, Dunlap, Hillgren, Weigand, Lawler NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 5 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None. ITEM NO. 6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT Update on the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee Update on City Council Items Community Development Director Brandt indicated the City's draft implementation plan would be presented to the City Council on October 25th. The California Coastal Commission has scheduled a hearing on November 4th regarding re-establishment of the City's categorical exclusion order and zones. The AutoNation appeal and the Newport Coast Development Agreement extension were scheduled for November 8th before the City Council. ITEM NO. 7 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT None. ITEM NO. 8 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Dunlap and Vice Chair Koetting will be absent on November 3rd. ADJOURNMENT —10:52 p.m. 13 of 14 276 Attachment Q Planning Commission Staff Report, October 20, 2016 277 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT October 20, 2016 Meeting Agenda Item 4 SUBJECT: Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) 850 San Clemente Drive ■ General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 ■ Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 ■ Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 • Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 (County Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 17970) ■ Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 ■ Traffic Study (TPO) No. 2015-004 ■ Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002 APPLICANT: Related California Urban Housing, LLC OWNER: Newport Harbor Art Museum PLANNER: Gregg Ramirez, Senior Planner (949) 644-3219, gramirez@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY The applicant is seeking approval of a 100 -residential unit condominium project, the Museum House. The proposed project includes demolition of the existing 23,632 square - foot Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) building. The proposed tower consists of 25 - floors totaling approximately 295 feet from finished grade to the top of the roof -mounted equipment and two levels of subterranean parking. The project site is approximately two acres (86,942 square feet) and is located between Santa Cruz Drive to the east and Santa Barbara Drive to the west. The applicant requests the following approvals: • General Plan Amendment (GPA) — To amend Anomaly No. 49 to remove the property and to reduce the allowed development from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Table LU2 and associated figures), and to change the land use designation for the property from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (Zoning) — To change the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential. The PC amendment also includes new residential development standards including a 295 -foot height limit measured from finished grade. • Vesting Tentative Tract Map — To allow the 100 individual dwelling units to be sold separately as condominiums. 1 278 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 2 • Site Development Review --- To ensure site development is in accordance with the applicable planned community and zoning code development standards and regulations pursuant to Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). • Traffic Study — To study potential traffic impacts pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). • Development Agreement — To comply with Section 15.45.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) because the requested GPA includes 50 or more units. • Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — To address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the legislative and project specific discretionary approvals pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Revoke Use Permit — To revoke Use Permit No. UP2015-017 (PA2015-086), which allows beer and wine sales at the museum. • Revoke Modification Permit - To revoke Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 (PA2004-184), which allows flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. (Attachment No. PC 1) and attached Exhibits recommending the City Council: • Certify Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002; and • Approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001, Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001, Site Development Review No. SD2016-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 (County Tentative Tract Map No. 17970), Traffic Study (TPO) No. TS2015-004, and Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 INTRODUCTION Analysis of the proposed project should be is considered in four components: A) The land use legislative amendments establishing residential uses at this location, which include the GPA and amendment of PC -19, the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community; B) The project entitlement including the site development review and tentative tract map; C) The project impact analysis including the environmental impact report and traffic study and other identified points of interest; and D) The proposed development agreement and other project considerations. The project site is located in the northwest area of Newport Center as shown on the following figure. 2 279 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 3 3 280 If 7v Subject Property - r s -•� -- _ _ ''� �Awa 9 7 � !� 0�6 �/-I GENERAL PLAN ZONING ? r g. - k LOCATION7F GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON-SITE PI (Private Institutional) PC -19 (San Joaquin Plaza) Orange County Museum of Art NORTH MU -1-113 (Mixed -Use PC -56 (San Joaquin Plaza Villas at Fashion Island Horizontal Sub -Area Apartments Multiple Residential PC -56 (North Newport Center, Pacific Life Office Building and SOUTH (RM) and Regional Block 800 Sub -Area) and OR The Colony Apartments Commercial Office CO -R (Office Regional Commercial) EAST MU -1-113 (Mixed -Use PC -56 (San Joaquin Plaza Parking Structure and Horizontal) Sub -Area Apartments WEST PI (Private Institutional) and MU -H3 (Mixed -Use PC -56 (North Newport Center, OCMA Administration Building Horizontal) Block 100 Sub -Area) and Parking Structure 3 280 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 4 DISCUSSION Prosect Description The requested amendment would allow 100 residential dwelling units and a maximum building height of 295 feet as measured from finished grade at the building entrance to top of roof. The tower footprint would measure approximately 75 feet by 22 feet, with floors becoming progressively smaller at the higher levels. The building would be located in the northeastern portion of the site and angles diagonally so the Bobby entrance faces the entry motor court. The site would be raised to a finished grade of approximately 187 above mean sea level (AMSL) and would be generally even with the grade of the adjacent San Clemente Drive right-of-way. The proposed tower is 482 AMSL to the top of the mechanical enclosure. Therefore, the height from finished grade is 295 feet. The 100 dwelling units would consist of 54 two-bedroom, three -bath units, and 46 three-bedroom, four -bath units. Unit sizes range between 1,800 to 6,000 square feet. The 25 -story building, as proposed, includes a total floor area of 391,158 square feet, not including the subterranean garage levels. Building architecture includes a textured stone base, masonry frames and pilasters, and metalwork details. The exterior is predominantly stone and masonry with large-scale architectural features such as multistory bay windows, large balconies, and terraces. All mechanical equipment and elevator overruns would be enclosed above the top floor. The main residential tower is set back a minimum of 36 feet from the front property line (San Clemente Drive), 34 feet from the right property line (adjacent to the office parking structure), 10 feet to the left property line (adjacent to the OCMA administration building site) and 42 feet to the rear property line (adjacent to the Villas at Fashion Island apartments). Parking level and basement setbacks occur largely below grade and are not immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. They maintain a minimum 10 -foot setback except on the right side where the access road is located along the property line adjacent to the office parking structure. Access to the site will be via San Clemente Drive. An entry gate and guard house staffed 24 hours per day would be located in a driveway off San Clemente Drive opposite Santa Maria Road. Parking is provided in a two-level underground structure in addition to the 12 spaces located around the motor court. A total of 250 marked parking spaces (200 resident, 50 guest) are provided. All parking would be valet with an attendant on-site 24 hours per day. Through the use of valet and vehicle stacking, additional parking spaces will be provided. All parking would be provided on-site as there is no on -street parking allowed on San Clemente Drive. Refer to Attachment No. PC 3 for the Parking Management and Valet Plan. The plan is a draft and subject to final review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. Emergency, refuse, and delivery access would be via a proposed access road located adjacent to the easterly property line. This road slopes down terminating on the upper 4 281 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 5 parking level and provides access to trash facilities and service elevators. Emergency vehicles would use either this access or the main motor court. Refer to Attachment No. PC 4 for the Fire and Delivery Truck Access Plan. This plan is also subject to final review by the City Traffic Engineer and Community Development Department. The design also includes a variety of resident facilities and shared spaces. The ground level exterior amenities include plazas, gardens and a dog run. A pool and garden terrace are proposed on second level, and another pool and garden area are proposed for the roof top. Interior features include meeting areas, home offices, a media room, lounge, fitness center, and other shared spaces. The basement levels include resident storage areas, mechanical rooms, refuse collection, and service areas. Additionally, the developer intends on securing Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver rating. LEED is a system created and administered by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) to evaluate the sustainability of a building. LEED buildings are often fitted with the most efficient plumbing fixtures, irrigation designs, and electrical systems. Some building materials are often created using recycled materials and refuse from demolished buildings are often recycled for other uses. LEED certification often exceeds the standard Title 24 and other energy and water conservation requirements applied to construction. Existing Land Use/Setting The project site is located in the Newport Center area and is presently occupied by OCMA. The property consists of a single parcel, which is 86,942 square feet in area (approximately two acres). The property is currently developed with the 23,632 square - foot museum which was originally occupied in 1978. The General Plan land use designation for the property is PI (Private Institutional). The property and adjacent site at 856 San Clemente Drive are designated as Anomaly No 49, and the combined maximum development capacity is 45,218 square feet for both properties. The 13,935 square -foot, single -story building at 856 San Clemente Drive is occupied by the OCMA administration and storage building. This building was previously the Newport Center Branch Library, but closed after construction of the Central Library. The PI designation is intended to provide for privately owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, health care, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. The site is located in the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC), which allows a variety of uses including civic, cultural, business and professional office uses, and support commercial activities. To the north of the site are the Villas at Fashion Island apartments that are currently under construction and are nearing completion. To the west is an office parking 5 282 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 6 structure and the aforementioned OCMA administration building; to the east is a parking structure, and to the south, across San Clemente Drive, are the Colony Apartments and Pacific Life office building. Newport Center Background The City's General Plan, approved in 2006, describes the City's overall vision and what the community hopes to have achieved by 2025. The General Plan establishes goals, policies, and development limits. Increases in development intensity beyond these limits require a review and recommendation from the Planning Commission and City Council approval through a General Plan amendment. As described in the General Plan, "Newport Center is a regional center of business and commerce that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential in a master planned mixed-use development. While master planned, the principal districts of Newport Center/Fashion Island are separated from one another by the primary arterial corridors. Fashion Island is developed around an internal pedestrian network and surrounded by parking lots, providing little or no connectivity to adjoining office, entertainment, or residential areas." Early in the 2006 General Plan Update Visioning process, a majority of residents and businesses supported little or no change to Newport Center, except for new hotels. However, some supported growth for existing companies, expansion of existing stores, and moderate increases for new businesses. Some participants favored mixed-use development and stressed the need for more affordable housing in particular. During development of the General Plan, public input reflected moderate to strong support for the expansion of retail and entertainment uses in Fashion Island, including the development of another retail anchor. Ultimately, the General Plan was approved by the voters with some increases in development limits. Several transfers of development rights and Planned Community text amendments have been approved since the General Plan adoption in 2006. For example, the additional dwelling units approved in 2006 were incorporated into PC -56 (North Newport Center Planned Community) are currently under construction as the Villas at Fashion Island. The approximate 240,000 square feet of office floor area that previously occupied that site, and other existing entitlements, were part of transfers that resulted in providing necessary floor area for the office towers recently constructed in Block 500 and Block 600. Measure Y was a proposed update to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element, Glossary, and Implementation Program (Amendment) in 2014. The Amendment was intended to alter, intensify, and redistribute land uses in certain subareas of the City, including major areas such as Newport Center/Fashion Island, Newport Coast, and the area near John Wayne Airport. Measure Y also included Land Use Element Policy revisions related to land use changes in support of recent neighborhood revitalization 0 283 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 7 efforts and other updates/refinements. Since the Amendment exceeded Charter Section 423 thresholds, the Land Use Element Amendment was placed on the ballot as Measure Y. On November 4, 2014, the voters denied Measure Y in a 30.8 percent yes to 69.2 percent no result. Remaining unbuilt development in Newport Center (Statistical Area L1) consists of five unbuilt dwelling units and 27 hotel rooms, which are previously entitled as part of the Newport Beach Country Club project (PA2008-152), and a nominal amount of nonresidential floor area. The proposed General Plan amendment would add 100 additional dwelling units to the General Plan within Statistical Area L1 while reducing the amount of nonresidential floor are by 23,632 square feet. The project would result in an additional residential land use in the northwesterly section of Newport Center where the development pattern is currently a mix of residential, office, institutional and civic uses. Leqislative Amendments — GPA and PC Text Amendments Prior to considering project specific design, the Planning Commission should consider whether the project site is appropriate for residential development. Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan as well as the establishment of a Planned Community Development Plan are legislative acts. Neither City nor State Planning Law sets forth required findings for approval or denial of such amendments. However, when making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission should consider applicable goals and policies to ensure internal consistency with the General Plan. The subsequent sections analyze consistency with the General Plan goals and policies, Charter Section 423, SB -18, and AB -52 (Tribal Consultation Guidelines), and the proposed Planned Community Development Plan. General Plan Amendment (GPA) The proposed GPA is from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM) with a maximum development limit of 100 units. If approved, Anomaly No. 49 would be reduced to only include the museum's administration building located at 856 San Clemente Drive. The amendment also reduces the allowed floor area from 45,208 square feet to 21,576 square feet (Refer to Attachment No. PC 1, Exhibit C for an exhibit of the proposed land use change). The proposed RM land use designation is intended to provide primarily for multi -family residential development containing attached or detached dwelling units. The proposed density is approximately 50 dwelling units per acre. Land Use Goals and Policies The General Plan identifies Newport Center/Fashion Island as a sub -area that includes goals and policies specific to this area. Goal LU 6.14 of the General Plan states Newport Center is intended to provide: 284 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 8 "A successful mixed-use district that integrates economic and commercial centers serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the subregion, with expanded opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation, and is supported by a pedestrian -friendly environment." The proposed land use amendment is in furtherance of this goal by providing additional opportunities for residents to live close to existing jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation in Newport Center. The property's location, approximately '/4 mile from Fashion Island, particularly lends itself towards this goal. Residential development at this location would provide a pedestrian -friendly environment by placing these uses within walking distance of employment, shopping, and entertainment. The proposed project would add residential units beyond the development limits specified in the current General Plan but would act in furtherance of the overall goal of Newport Center to provide opportunities for residents to live in proximity to existing commercial, retail, and recreational uses. Table 1. Residential Develorament in Newport Center (Statistical Area L1) Residential Development Height Limit Actual Height Dwelling Units Granville 28'/33' 18' 67 du Villa Point 32' 2-3 stories 228 du Sea Island 32'/37' 2 stories 132 du The Colony*** 200' 50'+(appurtenances) 245 du Meridian*** 65' 65' 79 du San Joaquin Plaza*** 65' 65' 524 du NB Country Club* 31'N/A 5 du Museum House** 300' 295' 100 du * entitled ** proposed ***communities in the North Newport Center Planned Community are measured from finished floor elevation Table 1 summarizes the development characteristics of the various residential communities in Newport Center. Figure 1 illustrates existing, newly developed/entitled, and proposed residential development in Newport Center Statistical Area L1. Since the 2006 General Plan Update was adopted, the economic market has experienced a demand for new residential development in the Newport Center area, as evidenced by the development of the residential units authorized by the General Plan such as Meridian (70 du) and the Villas at Fashion Island (524 du). 2 285 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 9 Figure 1. Newport Center Residential Development 9 286 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 10 General Plan Policy LU6.14.2 {Newport Center [MU -H3, CO -R, CO -M, and RM designations), states: "Provide for the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2." Currently, only five undeveloped residential units remain under the General Plan limits that are entitled as part of the Newport Beach Country Club project. The Land Use Element also includes Policy LU 6.14.4 Development Scale specific to Newport Center/Fashion Island addressing building mass and height: "Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. " The existing development in Newport Center reflects this policy as the majority of the office towers over 200 feet and the Island Hotel are located in northeasterly section in Blocks 500 and 600. However, the policy does not restrict high rise development to only the northeasterly section as indicated by Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation (Attachment No. PC 5) in the NBMC, This map depicts the project site and nearby properties in Block 700 and Block 800 as eligible for a 300 -foot height limit. Although this height limit is applicable to nonresidential buildings, the type and design of a structure, just not the use, are important in determining if the bulk and scale of building are appropriate for a particular location. Additionally, per NBMC Section 20.30.060 Height Limits and Exceptions, height limits in planned communities are not bound by its limitations provided that appropriate findings are made. Those findings are discussed later in the Planned Community amendment section of this report. Analysis of the Potential Loss of Private Institutional Designated Land Staff considered the impact of the proposed land use change on the ability to maintain and continue to provide for appropriate institutional uses in the Newport Center and the broader community. The existing development pattern in Newport Center is currently dominated by commercial, retail, and hospitality uses; however, there are several residential communities in Newport Center as well. The General Plan indicates the following for the PI land use category: The PI designation is intended to provide for privately owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, health care, TD 287 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 11 cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. Citywide there are approximately 60 parcels totaling over 220 acres with the PI designation. As indicated in the description, religious institutions, yacht clubs, private schools and several congregate care and convalescent homes are located on property designated PI. Other notable businesses and organizations include Hoag Hospital, Sherman Library and Gardens, and the Kerckhoff Marine Laboratory. In addition to the PI designated properties with a corresponding PI zoning, cultural institutions land uses (which includes museums) are allowed "by right" in ten zoning districts and several planned communities, including the North Newport Center PC. An example is the OceanQuest (formerly ExplorOcean) museum in Balboa Village, which is located on property designated as Visitor Serving Commercial (CV). The goal described in the General Plan for Newport Center is to expand opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation, supported by a pedestrian -friendly environment. The proposed residential community would be consistent with this goal, by providing a residential use that creates a strong sense of place and connection to the surrounding resources in the Newport Center area. As a result, staff suggests that the proposed residential land use is appropriate for this location and the goals set forth for the greater Newport Center area. Additionally, staff believes the loss of two acres from the PI inventory (less than 1 percent) is acceptable and the remaining PI properties, as well as the multiple other commercial designated properties, provide sufficient opportunities for cultural land uses throughout the City. Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Analvsis Pursuant to City Charter Section 423 and Council Policy A-18, an analysis must be prepared to establish whether a proposed GPA (if approved) requires a vote by the electorate. The amendment would be combined with 80 percent of the increases in traffic, dwelling units, and non-residential floor area allowed by previous CPAs (approved within the preceding ten years) within the same statistical area. The following thresholds are applicable: 100 dwelling units, 100 a.m. peak hour trips, 100 p.m. peak hour trips, or 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area. If any of the thresholds are exceeded and the City Council approves the requested GPA, it would be classified as a "major amendment" and be subject to voter consideration. Approved amendments, other than those approved by the electorate, are tracked for ten years and factored into the analysis of future amendments within the same statistical area as indicated. The project site is located within Statistical Area L1 of the General Plan Land Use Element, and would result in an increase of 100 dwelling units. There have been two prior amendments approved within Statistical Area L1 since the 2006 General Plan 288 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 12 Update (GP2010-004). The first amendment changed the land use designation to accommodate the new Civic Center and Park Site under General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-000. The second amendment authorized the Newport Beach Country Club to construct a new 21,000 -square -foot clubhouse under General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-005. Neither of these prior amendments included projects which added dwelling units to this statistical area. There are currently 100 units remaining in Statistical Area L1 toward the threshold for a vote of the electorate. Based on the trip generation rates contained in the Council Policy A-18 (commercial blended rate for the existing use and luxury condominium/townhouse rate for the proposed use), the proposed amendment would result in an increase of 30 a.m. peak hour trips and 33 p.m. peak hour trips. There would be no addition of nonresidential floor area. Table 3 summarizes the changes created by the proposed amendment with the proposed 100 dwelling unit. The table also shows threshold totals under Charter Section 423. As indicated, none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 would be exceeded, and therefore, a vote would not be required. The current Section 423 table before the proposed Amendment is provided as Attachment No. PC 6. Table 3: Charter Section 423 Analysis Summary Statistical Area L1 Increase in Increase in Increase in P.M. Increase in Allowed Floor A.M. Peak Hour peak Hour Trips Allowed Area (sq. ft.) Trips Dwelling Units GP2015-001 (PA2015-152) 0 30 33 100 850 San Clemente Drive Prior Amendments (80%) 1. Civic Center GP2008-009 0 0 0 0 (PA2008-182) 2. NB Country Club 16,800 0 0 0 GP2008-005 PA2008-152 TOTALS 16,800 30 33 100 Section 423 Thresholds 40,000 100 100 100 Vote Required? No No No No If the proposed General Plan amendment is approved by City Council, this amendment will become a prior amendment and 80 percent of the increases will be tracked for ten years. AB52 and SB18-Tribal Consultation Guidelines Pursuant to Section 65352.3 (SB18) of the California Government Code, a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult 12 289 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 13 for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that eight tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 12, 2016, Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code requires 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult. The City was not contacted by any tribal contacts during this 90 -day period. Pursuant to Section 21080.3.1 (AB52) of the California Government Code, a local government is required to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested in writing to be informed of proposed project in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe. As a result, a letter was later received from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation on February 24, 2016, requesting that a monitor from their tribe oversee ground -disturbing construction work. Staff consulted with their representative, Mr. Andy Salas over the phone, in writing, and in person regarding the matter. During consultation with Mr. Salas, staff discussed City Council Policy K-5 which requires a qualified archaeologist be present during ground breaking, and General Plan Policy, Historical Resources HR 2.3 (Cultural Organizations) which says to notify cultural organizations, including Native American organizations, of proposed developments that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources and to allow representatives of such groups to monitor grading and/or excavation of development sites. As a result, Mr. Salas agreed that the implementation of those two polices would be sufficient and consultation was closed. Planned Community Amendment The property is currently located in the San Joaquin Plaza PC Zoning District. The PC is comprised of two parcels totaling 2.92 acres. They are developed with the OCMA on the larger approximate two acre parcel and the OCMA administration offices on the smaller .92acre parcel. The stated intent of the planned community is to permit a combination of civic, cultural, business and professional office uses with support commercial activities. The PC was originally over 26 acres and included the properties to the immediate west north and east of the current boundaries. In 2007, approximately 23 acres, including the surrounding office buildings and parking structure sites and the land where the Villas at Fashion Island are located, were removed from the PC and placed in the North Newport Center Planned Community. The applicant requests to amend the PC to accommodate the proposed residential development. The PC text includes development standards to essentially accommodate the project as proposed. The requested PC amendment is for 850 San Clemente Drive only. Although the format has been slightly modified, the use and development standards for the 856 San Clemente Drive property are proposed to remain as they exist. Ts 290 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 14 The proposed PC amendment is divided into two chapters. Chapter 1 (PC Subarea 1) is new and includes standards and regulations for the proposed project. Chapter 2 (PC Subarea 2) is a re -formatted version of the existing use and development standards included in the existing PC for 856 San Clemente Drive. No changes to the use or development standards are proposed for that site. The proposed PC is included in Attachment No. PC 1 as Exhibit D. 4Ptha�kc The property abuts properties located in the North Newport Center Planned Community (PC) to the north and east. The North Newport Center PC includes setbacks from streets, which are typically 15 feet. No interior setbacks standards are included and the placement of buildings and structures is reviewed during the plan review process. Three developments in the North Newport Center PC abut the project site and provide the following minimum setbacks: • Easterly Property Line: 15 feet (parking structure) • Northerly Property Line: 70 feet (apartments) • Northwesterly Property Line: 45 feet (parking structure) The adjoining property, developed with the OCMA administration building, is in the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community, which does not include required setbacks. Building location and design is reviewed during the site development review process. The existing building is setback approximately 30 feet from the side property line. If standard RM setbacks were applicable to the project they would be as follows: Front - 20 feet, Rear -10 feet, Sides -15 feet. The proposed residential tower is setback a minimum of 35 feet from the front property line (San Clemente Drive), 34 feet from the right property line (adjacent to the office parking structure), 10 feet to the left property line (adjacent to the OCMA administration building site), and 42 feet to the rear property line (adjacent to the Villas at Fashion Island apartments). Parking level basement setbacks occur largely below grade and are not immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. They maintain a minimum 10 -foot setback except on the right side where the emergency and delivery access road is located along the property line adjacent to the office parking structure. The main structure of the proposed project exceeds the standard RM setbacks in the front, rear, and right side however; it only provides a 10 -foot setback on the left side. Cumulatively, the project provides greater aggregate setback areas and common open space than required by the base RM zoning district. Building Height The PC amendment also includes a request for 295 -foot height limit. In order to approve the requested height, the findings in NBMC Section 20.30.060.0.3 (Height Limits and Exceptions, Required Findings) must be made. 1-4 291 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 15 Existing building heights within Newport Center range from approximately 15 feet at the south end up to 300 feet in height at the northerly side end of Newport Center. Height limits range between 28 feet at the south end up to 300 feet at the north end. Existing building heights in the northwestern portion of Newport Center range from approximately 17 feet (OCMA administration building) to approximately 122 feet (800 and 840 Newport Center Drive) See the Table 1, below. Table 2. Heights and Height Limits of Nearby Buildings in Newport Center Development Height Limit Actual Height Dwelling Units OCMA Administration 65' 16.8' N/A San Joaquin Office Parking Structure 65' 46' N/A San Joaquin Office Building 65' 61' N/A Villas at Fashion Island 65' 61'-65' 524 du Pacific Life 300' 80' N/A The Colony 200' 50'+(appurtenances) 245 du Meridian 65' 65' 79 du 800 and 840 Newport Center Drive 125' 122' N/A Adjacent Parking Structure 65' 36.5' N/A Proposed Museum House 295' 295' 100 du When looking at the broader area of northern Newport Center the occurrence of taller buildings increases east of the project site in Blocks 500 and 600. Six buildings exceed 200 feet with the highest being the office building at 520 Newport Center Drive with a height of 315 feet at the top of mechanical screening. Refer to Attachment No. PC 7 for additional exhibits that depict nearby building heights in Newport Center. Table 3. Heights and Height Limits of High Rises in Newport Center Development Height Limit* Actual Height 520 Newport Center Drive 295 315' 610 Newport Center Drive 395 272' 620 Newport Center Drive 295 240' 650 Newport Center Drive 295 298' 660 Newport Center Drive 295 246' Island Hotel 295 217' *Plus 15 -feet for appurtenances and mechanical equipment enclosures and screens 15 292 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 16 Height Findings NBMC Section 20.30.060.C.3 (Height Limits and Exceptions, Required Findings) requires findings to be made to adopt a Planned Community District with an increase in the height of the structure above the base height limit: "a. The project applicant is providing additional project amenities beyond those that are otherwise required. Examples of project amenities include, but are not limited to: i. Additional landscaped open space,- ii. pace,ii. Increased setback and open areas.- iii. reas;iii. Enhancement and protection of public views; and b. The architectural design of the project provides visual interest through the use of light and shadow, recessed planes, vertical elements, and varied roof planes; c. The increased height will not result in undesirable or abrupt scale changes or relationships being created between the proposed structure(s) and existing adjacent developments or public spaces. Where appropriate, the proposed structure(s) provides a gradual transition to taller or shorter structures on abutting properties; and d. The structure will have no more floor area than could have been achieved without the approval of the height increase." In this case, staff believes that required findings can be made to authorize the requested 295 -foot height limit. The building design provides a high level of design with open space, landscape, residential amenities, and building setbacks that sufficient in an area that is developed with a mix of residential and office uses. The proposed height limit and datum for measuring height (finished grade) is similar to the greater North Newport Center PC which is located throughout the northern section of Newport Center. As demonstrated in the CEQA analysis in Chapter 5.1 of the EIR, the project does not negatively affect existing public views from coastal view roads including Avocado Avenue, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Center Drive as identified by the General Plan. These roads have been designated as Coastal View Roads because portions of them offer views of the coast. In this case, although the project may be seen from portions of these designated coastal view roads; it will not block or obstruct views of the coast. Basement level setbacks would occur largely below grade and would not be immediately visible from the street frontage along San Clemente Drive. The height, bulk, and scale of the residential building are comparable to height limits on surrounding properties and existing building heights throughout the northern half of Newport Center. The building is designed to provide variation and modulation between for visual interest, especially at higher floors. The front fagades include both vertical and horizontal off -sets and utilize a variation of building materials to provide enhanced visual relief. Finally, the proposed floor area for the project would conform to 1-0 293 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 17 the limit established through adoption of the amendment to the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community Development Plan. In summary, the Planned Community should ensure broader coordination and consistency with the surrounding neighborhood, including a higher level of architectural quality supporting an urban living environment with pedestrian connectivity. The proposal provides for a comprehensively designed residential project that adds to the mixed-use environment in the northern portion of Newport Center. The proposed building height is consistent with the Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation and the established height limits of the zoning for Block 700 and the 295 -foot height limit allowed in Blocks 500 and 600 of the North Newport Center PC. Therefore, staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed PC text amendments to City Council. Project Entitlement - Discretionary Applications Site Development Review Redevelopment of the project site is subject to a site development review to determine compliance with all applicable development standards of the proposed amendment to the San Joaquin Plaza PC. Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Review), residential developments of five or more units that are processed in conjunction with a tentative tract map require a site development review by the Planning Commission. The required findings for approval of a site development review must identify that: the project is allowed within the subject Zoning District, that the project will not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, and that the project is in compliance with applicable criteria including compliance with the General Plan, the Zoning Code, and any applicable specific plan, the efficient arrangement of structures on-site, the compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment, the safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, the adequacy of landscaping and open space area, and the projection of significant public views. In summary, the project proposes to replace the existing OCMA building with a 25 -story residential tower. Off-street parking is consistent with code requirements and is provided on-site. The design includes a multitude of interior and exterior resident amenities. Although taller than existing buildings in the immediate vicinity, the height, bulk, and scale of the residential building is comparable to height limits on surrounding properties and existing building heights in the northern half of Newport Center. The building is designed to provide variation and visual interest, especially on higher floors. 17 294 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 18 Mechanical equipment for the residential units have been located within enclosures at the roof level to reduce noise impacts, and the enclosures will provide effective screening below the roof parapet level to minimize aesthetic impacts. Access to the site, on-site circulation, and parking areas are designed to provide standard -sized parking spaces, adequate drive aisles and the minimum vehicle turning radius to provide safe access for residents and guests, emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. Landscaping is provided throughout the site in areas that are not utilized by the existing units or areas for parking circulation. The project's perimeter and street landscaping will complement the street tree pattern, enhance the pedestrian experience, and soften the view of the building fagade. The majority of setback areas are landscaped. As stated previously, the project does not affect existing public views nor does it detract from the character of the area Staff believes facts to support the required findings exist to approve the Site Development Review, and they are included in the attached draft resolution for approval (Attachment No. PC 1), Vestina Tentative Tract Ma The proposed project includes a request to establish a 100 -unit residential condominium tract (Attachment No. PC 1, Exhibit F). The property line locations and dimensions are not proposed for change with this map. NBMC Section 19.12.070 (Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps) provides required findings for approval of a tentative tract map. These findings include: consistency with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, that the site is physically suitable for development, that proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage to fish, wildlife, or their habitat, or cause serious health problems, that the project will not conflict with easements, solar access and passive heating requirements, impact the City's share of the regional housing need, nor result in an impact on the sewer system. NBMC Section 14.24.020 (Dwelling Unit and Business Structure Sewer Connection Required) requires each dwelling unit to maintain individual water meter and sewer connections. The project has requested a waiver of this requirement from the Municipal Operations Director since the units are located in one building and will together connect to the existing water and sewer systems. In summary, the Tentative Tract Map provides for a residential development in a mixed- use area of Newport Center. The site design provides adequate vehicle and pedestrian circulation. The site has a gentle sloping condition and the building design accommodates -1 12 295 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 19 this slope with a podium wall at the north and west edge and larger building setbacks above the podium. The site is safe and suitable for development. Under existing conditions, the project site and surrounding land areas are fully developed with urban uses and do not contain sensitive biological resources. The vegetation that occurs on-site is ornamental in nature, including trees and ornamental shrubs, groundcover, and vines growing on the existing building's facades and screen walls. Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed tentative map and believes it is consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision Code (Title 19) and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. Public improvements, consisting of the reconstruction of the curb, gutter, and sidewalks, access driveways along San Clemente Drive, and street trees will be required of the applicant per the Municipal Code and the Subdivision Map Act. A common sewer and water connection will be provided for the project and an upgraded 12 -inch sewer line in Santa Barbara Drive that connect to the existing Orange County Sanitation Sewer line at Jamboree Road will be installed. For the reasons noted above, staff believes the required findings for the Tentative Tract Map can be made. CEQA, Traffic and Other Impacts Analysis The Final EIR includes a comprehensive study, analysis and in the entire range of CEQA topics. This section of the report includes a summary of the EIR analysis and conclusions followed by more detailed discussion of traffic, water availability, and shade and shadow analysis. Environmental Review - CEQA Prior to making a recommendation of approval on the proposed project, the Planning Commission must first review, consider, and recommend City Council adoption of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), SCH No. 2016021023. The Final EIR is comprised of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), Initial Study (IS), Environmental Analysis, Alternatives Analysis, Appendices, Reponses to Comments, and Revisions to the Draft EIR The City contracted with Placeworks, Inc., an environmental consulting firm, to prepare an Initial Study and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed project in accordance with the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The DEIR was routed to the Planning Commission in advance of this staff report to allow additional time to review the report. The draft EIR was completed and circulated for a mandatory 45 -day public -review period that began on August 17, 2016, and concluded on September 30, 2016. A total of 29 comments were received from interested parties. The consultant and staff prepared detailed written responses to each of the comments received on the adequacy of the DEIR, which are included in Attachment No. PC 1, Exhibit A. x- 296 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 20 A copy of the Final EIR was also made available on the City's website http:/www.newportbeachca.gov/cegadocuments, at each Newport Beach Public Library, and at the Community Development Department at City Hall. The following environmental topics were identified as potentially affected by the implementation of the proposed project: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards/Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use/Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Sewer Services. These topics were the subject of the DEIR analysis, and potential impacts were identified. The document includes mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant adverse effects to a less than significant level related to Air Quality, Cultural Resources, and Geology and Soils and Transportation/Traffic. The noise analysis concluded that even with nine mitigation measures, the construction related noise impact would be significant and unavoidable. In particular the impact is due to the proximity of the apartments to the north of the site which will be occupied prior to the start of construction. The nine mitigation measures address vehicle and equipment maintenance and the erection of a temporary sound barrier/curtain between the construction site and apartments. All mitigation measures are identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is included as Attachment No. PC 1, Exhibit B. On the basis of the analysis provided in the draft EIR, City staff has concluded that the project would not have a long term significant impact on the environment and with the exception of construction noise, there are no significant short term or construction related impacts. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City and recognizes project design features, standard construction and engineering practices, and review and reevaluation of future projects as the means to avoid potential impact EIR Alternatives The EIR included an analysis of two .project alternatives. The first is the Reduced Height Alterative which contemplated a 65 -foot height limit and 100 units with approximately the same amount of floor area as the proposed project but with an enlarged building footprint and much less open space. This alternative was rejected because although impacts would be marginally less, the short-term construction impact would remain and the building would cast a shadow that exceeds the three-hour Winter Solstice threshold on 12 apartment units therefore, creating a significant unavoidable impact related to shade and shadow. Therefore, this alternative was considered but rejected. The second alternative is a reduced density consisting of 90 units and reduced height to approximately 271 feet. This alternative has similar impacts as the proposed project. For more information on both alternatives refer to Final EIR, Chapter 7. 20 297 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 21 One notable addition in the Final EIR (Revisions to the Draft EIR) is related to the Development Agreement's public benefit which includes the donation of the adjacent parcel containing the OCMA office and administration building to the City. As indicate in the Final EIR, the donation only changes ownership and no physical improvements are proposed. Additionally, future uses will be required to adhere to the use and development standards for the property as described in the San Joaquin Plaza PC. Therefore, staff believes no additional CEQA analysis is necessary or required. Traffic Analysis The traffic study prepared by DKS Associates under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer included a site specific trip generation study for the existing museum use and a traffic impact analysis of the proposed use. DKS performed a trip generation study of the current museum use to determine if an analysis pursuant to NBMC Chapter 15.40 Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) was required. DKS found that the museum generated 108 average daily trips (ADT) while the proposed project was expected to generate 418 ADT using the High Rise Condominium trip rate. Since the difference exceeded 300 ADT, DKS completed both a TPO study and CEQA required analysis. The traffic study (including the supplemental analysis) included 18 intersections which were analyzed for potential impacts based on the City's Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology. Intersections under the jurisdiction of Caltrans were analyzed for potential impacts using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology. The study accounted for all surrounding land uses including the unoccupied Villas at Fashion Island apartments. Utilizing these methodologies, the analysis concluded that the study intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service, as defined by the TPO nor would it cause traffic impacts considered under CEQA. Additional details can be found in Chapter 5.13 (Transportation and Traffic) and Appendices L-1 and L-2 of the Final EIR. Traffic Background — Newport Center Based on the 2006 General Plan update and development capacities therein, the City Council approved Development Agreement No. DA 2007-002 and amendments to the North Newport Center PC that expanded its boundaries to include among other sites, the current location of the Villas at Fashion Island apartments. These approvals established the entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, Villas at Fashion Island site, and others. The North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) Study TS2007-001 was prepared in November 2007 to evaluate a proposed project including residential dwelling units in Block 600, office square footage in Block 500, and retail shopping center space in Fashion Island. This project also included the removal of restaurant, office, and a health club in Block 600. 2x 298 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 22 Also in 2007, the Irvine Company proposed to remove various entitled land uses in Block 600 and replace them with office uses in Block 500. This was the first of a series of seven transfers of development rights within the different blocks of North Newport Center. Transfers of development rights between the sub -areas are allowed by the General Plan and transfer guidelines implemented by the North Newport Center PC. The transfers occurred between 2007 and 2015. The procedure for transferring development rights requires a Trip Transfer Traffic Study be prepared to determine the PM peak hour trips. In order to approve a transfer, the City Council must find that the transfer will result in no additional PM peak hour trips to the receiver site. Individual TPO Traffic Studies were not prepared for each project within a block because the 2006 General Plan Traffic Study and the 2007 North Newport Center Traffic Study already accounted for any traffic impacts associated with the overall development in Newport Center. The trip rates used for the office square footage are not concrete and subject to adjustment. For example, when an office is large (over 250,000 +/-), an "office regression equation" is used to calculate the trips. So, the trip rates vary based on the size of the office project. Based on traffic studies included in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, Table 4 summarizes the number of trips generated by the most recent and notable Newport Center developments, including the unoccupied Villas at Fashion Island apartments and the office complex it replaced. Table 4. Average Daily Trips — Recent Newport Center Projects Project/Address Unit Trip Rate Average Daily Trips 520 Newport Center Drive 365.059 TSF 9.58 trips per TSF 3,500 650 Newport Center Drive 398.864 TSF 9.40 trips per TSF 3,750 San Joaquin Plaza Office (demolished) 241.711 TSF 10.5 trips per TSF (2,550) Villas at Fashion Island 524 DU 4.20 trips per DU 2,200 Museum House 100 DU 4.18 trips per DU 418 Total ADT 5,118 Water Availability The ongoing drought across most of California and has resulted in adoption and implementation of numerous state and local mandates and regulations many of which are intended to reduce water consumption and make water use more efficient. These regulations are not intended to stop growth and development. State officials recognize that the state's population and demand for more housing will likely increase; some experts predict a dramatic increase in the future. This is evidenced by the California Department of Housing and Community Development Regional House Needs 22 299 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 23 Assessment (RHNA). This program has identified the need for thousands of housing unit across the state and local jurisdictions are required to provide housing opportunities in the general plan and zoning regulations to accommodate the assigned number. The goal of these regulations is not to stop all development but to require new development and infrastructure is as efficient as possible and reduce the use in existing developments. Following is summary of the major state and city water conservation efforts: State Programs The Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SB 7x7) This bill includes requirement to reduce gallons per capita per day (GPCD) water use by 20 percent by year 2020. The baseline target was established over a ten year average between 1996 and 2005. The City's 2020 goal is 203 GPCD with an interim goal of 228 GPCD in 2015. In 2015, the City achieved a GPCD of 176, well below the interim target and the City anticipates meeting the 2020 goal with no issue. The City has joined a regional alliance with other Orange County water agencies. It is anticipated that the alliance will meet all goals. Governor's Drought Declaration 2015 The Governor's declaration resulted in a new State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulation that all California water agencies must reduce water use to accomplish a statewide reduction of 25 percent compared to the same periods in 2013. Each agency was assigned a target goal. Newport Beach initially was given a 28 percent reduction standard in June 2015. In March 2016, the SWRCB lowered the City's standard to 21 percent taking in account the use of indirect potable reuse through the Orange County Water District's Ground Water Replenishment System. In June 2016, as a result of improved water supply conditions, the SWRCB allowed agencies to set their standards to meet a potential three-year continued drought. Most agencies in Orange County including Newport Beach, currently have a conservation standard of zero, meaning the agencies cannot use more water than was used for the same period in 2013. As of September, 2016 the City's accumulative reduction is 21 percent below the 2013 usage. There are provisions to identify an agency's increase in population. City Programs 2015 Urban Water Management Plan In July 2016, the City completed its 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) in compliance with the Water Code Sections of the Urban Water Management Planning Act. The plan outlines water supplies, use, reliability, projects and contingency plans. The City is in a fortunate situation in that it receives 75 percent of its water from the Orange County Water District groundwater supplies. The remaining demand comes 2S 300 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 24 from import supplies through the Municipal Water District of Orange County. Both water suppliers have indicated in the UWMP that they can meet the water demands of Newport Beach in dry and wet years. Projected increases in water demand from General Plan projects and unknown projects were considered in estimating use and reliability. There are no restrictions to future development. Future development projects must submit hydraulic and demand estimates for city approval. Senate Bill SB 610 and 221 requires developments of 500 units or more to complete a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) and agency verification. City's Water Conservation Regulations — Level Two Even with exceeding the SB 7x7 goals and State mandated regulations, the City Council elected to continue its conservation efforts by adopting a level two mandatory water conservation requirement. Each customer must reduce water use by 15 percent compared to the same billing period in 2013. These regulations are temporary in nature and anticipated to end once the drought is over. Shade and Shadow Analysis- Project Site As part of the CEQA analysis, a shade and shadow study of the proposed project was prepared to determine if the shadow cast by the building would create a significant impact on the adjacent apartments. Since the area of shadows cast vary from season to season the winter solstice presumes the worst case scenario because this is when the longest shadows are cast due to the tilt of the earth and corresponding location of the sun. The City does not have an established citywide threshold for shade or shadow impacts. However, the North Newport Center PC, which includes the adjacent Villas at Fashion Island site, does: "Prior to issuance of a building permit for a structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to shade residential areas north of San Joaquin Mills Road, a shade study shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City. The shade study shall demonstrate that the new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time." Although the project site is not located within PC -56 nor would it cast shade to residential areas north of San Joaquin Hills Road, this methodology has been applied to this project for evaluating project -related shade and shadow impacts to the adjacent apartments. The study concluded that no shadows would be cast on any individual apartment unit for no more than 2 hours and 30 minutes on the winter solstice (Pacific Standard Time). 24 301 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 25 Therefore the shade and shadow impact was determined to be less than significant. For the more detailed analysis, see Chapter 5.1 Aesthetics of the Final EIR. Previous Shade and Shadow Studies — 520 and 650 Newport Center Drive Since both of these office buildings are located in the North Newport Center PC, shade and shadow analyses were prepared to verify compliance with the North Newport Center PC standard. The analysis prepared for the 650 Newport Center Drive office building concluded that that during the worst case scenario, winter solstice (Pacific Standard Time), the shadow would be cast less than two hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. The analysis prepared for the 520 Newport Center office building again looked at the worst case scenario, winter solstice (Pacific Standard Time), and concluded that the shadow cast would occur for approximately one hour between the hours of 9:00 a.m.. and 3:00 p.m. Therefore, both buildings were reviewed for compliance with the adopted standards and demonstrated compliance prior to the issuance of building permits. Development Agreement and Other Considerations Development Agreement The terms of the proposed development agreement are still under consideration, and review. It is anticipated that a per unit public benefit fee will be provided in addition to the donation of the adjacent parcel to the City. Staff will provide an update to the Planning Commission at the time of the public hearing. Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) John Wayne Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles north/northeast of the project site and is the nearest public airport. The project is within the notification area of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the project is below the maximum transitional imagery surface heights, and thus the project is within the building height limits of the AELUP. The project site also falls outside the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level contour line established by the AELUP and would, therefore, not conflict with any land use compatibility issues related to noise. Finally, the project site does not fall within any of the AELUP Safety Zones, which identify certain land uses as incompatible and restricts them appropriately. Since the proposed project includes a building higher than 200 above ground level in additional to the GPA and PC amendment, review for consistency with the AELUP is required. The ALUC meeting is scheduled for November 17, 2016. Should the ALUC 25 302 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 26 find the project consistent, the project can proceed to the City Council. If ALUC finds the project inconsistent with the AELUP, the City Council will have to initiate the process to override ALUC. A vote to override the ALUC's determination requires a two-thirds vote of the Council Fiscal Impact Analysis The City's consultant has prepared an independent fiscal impact analysis (Attachment No. PC 8) in accordance with General Plan Implementation Policies 12.1 and 12.2. The City's fiscal impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in the same way that existing development does. The net impact of the growth in land uses at build -out of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the general fund of $21.7 million per year. The existing use and expanded museum alternative in the EIR result in a slight negative net fiscal impact to the City while the proposed project is expected to have a positive impact of about $600,000 per year. The positive fiscal impacts result from property taxes, fees, and revenue expenditures from residents above that produced by the museum. Due to the high market level targeted by the proposed project, the residential alternatives would exceed the fiscal benefit from the museum use of the site under the existing General Plan. Revocation of Existing Discretionary Approvals Revocation of Use Permit No. 2015-017 is requested which allowed beer and wine sales at the museum. Revocation of Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 which allowed additional flagpoles/signage beyond that allowed by the NBMC is also requested. The elimination of the museum would make these previous approvals inconsistent with the residential project and no longer valid. 01#prnntivpc Although staff believes that the findings for approval can be made for the proposed project as recommended and the facts in support of the required findings are presented in the draft resolution (Attachment No. PC 1). The following alternatives are available to the Planning Commission: 1. The Planning Commission may recommend approval to the City Council with suggest specific changes that are necessary to alleviate any identified concerns. If the requested changes are substantial, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions. 20 303 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 27 2. The Planning Commission may recommend approval to the City Council one of the project alternatives discussed in the Final EIR. These include the Reduced Height Alterative which contemplated a 65 -foot height limit and 100 units or, the Reduced Density Alterative that included 90 units with a 271 -foot height limit. Should the Planning Commission choose to do so, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions. 3. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the project, the Planning Commission may recommend denial to the City Council of the application without prejudice in the draft resolution for denial (Attachment No. PC 2). PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights-of- way and waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code. A courtesy notice of the hearing was also emailed to the interested parties list for this project. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. L-Mrn,rLr,►.1-IVA Staff believes that the proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable general plan polices for the City and specifically Newport Center. The loss of two acres of PI designated property is not expected to preclude the development of cultural institutions elsewhere in the City. Additionally, although the project site is not currently zoned for residential use, the land use change in the San Joaquin Plaza PC would create a functional residential project that integrates well with the surrounding residential, office, retail and service uses located throughout Newport Center. The project exhibits high quality architectural treatment. The resulting setbacks are consistent with the development pattern and setback standards within Newport Center and site access and parking are adequate. The overall design including the large setbacks of the main tower and tower design results in a development that is compatible and consistent with the surrounding allowed and existing development in the northern half of Newport Center. Additionally, based on the conclusions in the Final EIR the project will not interfere with any long term environmental goals nor create any long term significant impacts. Therefore, staff recommends Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the proposed legislative and discretionary applications. Staff believes that the residential land use for the proposed project is appropriate and that the findings for 27 304 Museum House Residential Project Planning Commission, October 20, 2016 Page 28 approval of the increased height limit, site development review, tract map, and TPO study can be made. Prepared by: M Gregg Rkr0rez Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS Submitted by: WisnesKi, VAICP, Deputy Director PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions PC 2 Draft Resolution for Denial PC 3 Parking Management and Valet Plan PC 4 Fire and Delivery Truck Access Plan. PC 5 Map H-1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limitation { PC 6 Current Statistical Area L1 Section 423 Table PC 7 Newport Center Building Height Exhibits PC 8 Fiscal Impact Analysis 0410s14 22 305 Attachment R Applicant Letter 306 October 31, 2016 Mayor Diane Dixon City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Diane: r R E L AT E& '_ '_" t:- D On Thursday, October 20`h, the Newport Beach Planning Commission unanimously approved Museum House. in their 7-0 vote, the Planning Commission praised the project's world-class design, use of open space, sensitivity towards views, commitment to sustainability, and unprecedented public benefits. City staff and the Planning Commission have spent an exorbitant amount of time and resources to commission independent studies to evaluate every alleged concern from opponents of the project. In the end, the Planning Commission's decision to recommend the project was based on independently confirmed facts in the environmental impact report which concluded that Museum House would not generate any long-term significant impacts. Height and Mass The EIR concluded that Museum House is consistent with the all of the applicable goals and policies of the City's General Plan, including height and mass. Museum House promotes smart growth principles, complements the existing skyline of Newport Center, and reinforces the original design vision of Newport Center. Museum House will not obstruct any ocean views along view corridors, and will appear nearly 60 feet shorter than other high-rises in Fashion Island. Even the most vociferous Museum House opponents have publicly praised the project for its design and architecture. Traffic In regards to traffic, the EIR concludes that Museum House will not result in any significant impacts to existing traffic patterns. Museum House will generate less than a third of the traffic from an average Starbucks, and less than 1110 of the traffic from the PIMCO office tower. The EIR elucidates the fact that residential projects generate far less traffic than office or commercial uses — refuting a common misconception. Emergency Services In response to concerns raised by opponents about the impacts of Museum House to the City's emergency response services, the Newport Beach Police Association and the Newport Beach Firefighter's Association have endorsed the Museum House with their full support. A copy of their letter of support for Museum House is attached as Exhibit A herein. Quoting the Police and Fire Association's support letter, both agencies "have studied the project and find it exceptional from all aspects" and "feel confident that Museum House will not adversely impact any Police or Fire Services in any substantial way." Both agencies request that "you note and take into RELATED CALIFORNIA • 18201 Von Korman Avenue, Suite 940, Irvine, CA 92612 • (949) 660-7272 phone • (949) 660-7273 fax - www.refated.com 307 consideration [their] unanimous support of this quality project and development company from start through completion." Community Support In addition to the support from Police and Fire, Museum House also received the endorsement of more than 22.0 individuals who have signed a petition in support of Museum House. Nearly 75 of these supporters attended the Planning Commission hearing on October 20`h, and we hope to have a repeat performance at our upcoming City Council hearing. A compendium of the signatures Museum House has received to date is attached as Exhibit B herein. As you know, opposition to new developments is often easy to find, rallied by established groups and political action committees devoted to opposing any and all developments regardless of public benefit. Supporters of new developments, however, are very difficult to find. belated has conducted over 80 community outreach meetings with various community and political stakeholders over the past 18 months in order to solicit feedback on the project. The level of support Museum House has generated is a testament to the Project's merits and the outreach conducted to date. We expect to receive additional supporters leading up to our City Council hearing. FAA A number of opponents have alleged that Museum House is in violation of the FAA height restrictions. Contrary to these allegations, Museum House has already received the FAA's Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for all four comers of the project's site. A copy of the Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for one corner is attached as Exhibit C. We are happy to forward a copy of the other three corners should you require them. As you are aware, Museum House is scheduled to be heard by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) on November 17`h. ALUC's approval of Museum House is critical to the project's hearing schedule. We understand that ALUC's staff is recommending approval of Museum House based on the FAA's study and would welcome an opportunity to discuss your understanding of the ALUC Commissioner's position on this issue ahead of the hearing date. Related is committed to making Museum House a world class residential project befitting of the luxury brand that is Fashion Island. The project addresses an underserved market that is in great need of quality residences within walking distance of amenities that Fashion Island offers. Thank you Mayor Dixon, please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Best regards, r William A. Witte Chairman -2- 308 Exhibit A Letter of Support from the Newport Beach Police and )Firefighter's Associations 309 October 20, 2016 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Attention: The Honorable Kory Kramer, Chair And Commissioners Koetting, 'Zak, Dunlap, Hillgrcn, Lawler, Weigand c/o: Brenda Wisneski, Staff Liaison and Deputy Community Development Director 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach. CA 92660 (1441 ef"ail or in pet -son) Re: Item 4. Support of Relatcd C alifomia Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) Honorable Chair, Conunissioners, City Staff and Fellov., Newport Beach Residents As President and Consultant, respectively, of the Newport Beach Police Association (NBPA), on behalf of our members and that also of the Newport Beach Firefighters Association (NBFA)-- we are pleased to announce our strong support of Related California's proposal to develop the Museum House Residential Project before you tonight. The NBPA and that of the NBFA are on the front line protecting our community and offer unique insights into the duality of this applicant and proposed project they respectfully submit to you for your consideration and out' hope unatumous approval. We at the NBPA understand the unique and special role the business community provides and we believe we must be proactive in helping when appropriate, to grow the city budget and resources responsibly. We take our role seriously and want to help you do your,job even better and always help whenever we can. The NBFA feels the saine.vay and our proud to signal then' support with us as well. This is a model our consultant and others have used in Anaheim and other cities where the police and public safety groups join with the business community on key proiects of mutual interest. ']'his creates a winL/wIn and we want to do our part to f row (lie city budget, resources and see good prctiects become a reality. This includes development, city, public benefit and more items in the fitture. 310 Both groups understand the role we play for calls for service as well as that of code enforcement. We have studied the project and find it exceptional from all aspects_ The draft. EIR shotes that Museum [louse will have no significant long-term impacts. This was important to our decision to endorse Musettin House. This prgject will not significantly impact traffic patterns or tenter supply in Newport Beach, The applicant also feels that by promoting walkability. Museum House makes our roads safer (thus by decreasing trips). We feel confident that Museum House will not adversely impact any Police or Fire Services in any substantial way. The draft LIR found that Musetnn House is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The building is in the right part of Fashion Island, along the northern portion, where other residential developments already exist and in proximity to Newport Beach's other high rise office buildings. Set at a lower elevation. Museum House will appear up to 60 feet shorter than surrounding buildings. Museum House complements the existing skyline without compromising ocean views. Related's commitment to open space and LEED-Silt cr design is a model for environmental sustainability, energy savings, and water usage reduction in Newport Beach. Some of the many benefits this project will bring: • Museum house twill grow and enhance the Newport Beach tax brise, which will provide inure dollars for critical city services. • Designed to a first class standard by one of the world's finest architects, Museum House will further enhance property values in the surrounding area: • Designed by world-renowned architect Robert A.M. Stern, Museum House will become an extension of the luxury brand of Fashion Island and will be developed to an unprecedented level of duality and luxury; • The Prpject will include lifestyle amenities such as a wellness center, state-of-the-art fitness center: • Museum House will feature around-the-clock valet and concierge services in addition to proper security staffing at all times. therefore helping in solve problems before they become unnecessary culls for service cut tis as first responders. We are particularly pleased to learn of the Public Benefits it has to the City and that on the revenue/tax base: S5.9 million in Permit and Impact lees, o Approximately S1.8 million in Permitting Fees. o Approximately S4.1 million in Impact Fees. o S2.9 million in In -lieu Park fees. S 150,000 in Traffic Fair Share Fees. 4-1 SI 16,000 in Transportation Corridor Fees_ 5720,000 in School Fees. o S240,000 — SJ Transportation Corridor Fee. S6.7 million Community Benefit Contribution Payment. 311 • Donation by OCMA of a 0.9 acre parcel of land (located immediately adjacent to the Project) to the City. • Approximately $4.5 million of annual property tax revenues. • Provides new housing stock for ctn-rent Newport residents. For these reasons and many more we urge your "ayc" vote and unaninious support of this project. We arc planning on being in attendance now and at all preceiling's to lend our voice as outlined in this letter. As we have important calls for service or other items that arise without warning, please excuse our absence as it may occur. Iiowever, respectfidly please do note and take into consideration our uuanintous support of this quality project and developtuent company from start through completion. Resp�ectfttlly. (/ t'�� G��1� Wit• Vlad Anderson President, Newport Beach Police Association (NBPA) Peter W. Mitchell Consultant, Newport Reach Police Association (NAPA) Executive Director, The Oran©e County Coalition of Police and Sheriff% (OC Cops) 312 Exhibit B Museum House Supporters 313 Asa resident of Southern California, I would like to express my support for the Museum House project. It is a smart growth with a beautiful building in the best Newport Beach location that also takes steps to minimize any significant environmental impact. It's good for Newport Beach and helps orange County to realize anew, world-class museum. I strongly insist that you support this project... Newport Coast will set a new standard to quality and taste most other cities are obviously clueless about. This timeless'work of art' will inspire us to create wonders and strive for perfection. 21 Corbin Sav000ulous Newport Beach 22 Name City Comments t Linda Maggard - ..... . C.. DM ._ _ __ __ ...... ,._.... __....-_-_._......_.___. ..w......__............... 2 .............._, Betsy Fiorentino Newport . _.._._.__...._................ ..._�......_........_—_�__._... 3 ..... Barbara a Groot ....___._.._.........._............_.__...... ...... CDM is Is a fine project that willbenefit Newport Beach ................................_...........___.........._..__ 4 .. Alana Hedley ............................................................._............_...._......---........_................_....._._..__..._......._......................._..._............................._..........._.._......__._......_..._......................................_._.._.....__............._............ Newport Coast ___.._ _ _.___ _,.m,. ,......_ .......... _.. .._._. .................. ... _._ Beach ......._,........._ ..— 2g _.. _._. Hopkins.... _.._ ,,........ _...... ...._._...._...__- Museum House will bean excellent addition to Newport Center- aesthetically and SJoanne Mercer Newport Beach financially, and to our community 6 .._............_......._..........._..., John Cashion __._CDM —......._I .wholeheartedly support this project. 7. _.._Marcia . -__......_.---......_._. Cashion Ca. CDM .. _._.__.__._—........Y_ . _.___.._,._. —.....__,_........_.__........ .___--.._. I can't think of a better project for the area-__.._....__.._..__ . 8 ..._.._........ _._._........__-_____..._...._ Sandra Your -.............. . _..__. ...._..._ . Newport Beach ..._._ ... ._..........„_.....,.....____ _------ _.. _ .._�.._. 9 Valerie and Tom Greeley Newport Beach 10 _............_._ _.......__... . James pick ..... ... -- . Newport Beach - - .... ,. _._..._.—. .... ....... ..........,...... 11 RobertYellin --- ._ __.. Newport Coast _..,__. __.... _ _ �._.._ _—. _ _ 12 Linda Yellin Newport Coast .�....._.--_ ................_�._..._.—.........._........_—.�—.. _ _..._...._.. _-—..._..._..- - ,...._.._...__....�. -- _ _ I live in Big Canyon. My home is closest to the proposed Museum House, but I think it is 13 Darrell Anderson Newport Beach much needed in Newport Beach. It belongs here, but no where else in the city. _.._....._�...._.__....__ 14 AnthonyAuello _..... ._._._......._.......__......_.__..__.._.__.........._ __Newport Beach _._._.._ ..............._.._..... _.... _.. — ....................__........__.._ - ..__......_. - _..._..__..._...._-........_...__.__ 15 Doug McCrea Newport Beach _ 16 _...__...._.___....._.__._.......___.._ Lawrence Wilkes _.._ _ Newport Beach .........____..._ 17 Colby Northrid e_.........._.._.__,___._Newport Beach _—.._... .... _.._.......... 18 Pat Fu . _..., .....__........._................................. ................................._........., .......................... .... .... ........ - ........... __........... I have lived In Irvine and worked in Newport Beach forthe past THIRTY years. I unequivocally support this new project. - Howard Gleicher, CEO of Aristotle Capital 19 Howard Gleicher Works in Newport Management. 20 David Noble Works in Newport I work in Newport Beach Asa resident of Southern California, I would like to express my support for the Museum House project. It is a smart growth with a beautiful building in the best Newport Beach location that also takes steps to minimize any significant environmental impact. It's good for Newport Beach and helps orange County to realize anew, world-class museum. I strongly insist that you support this project... Newport Coast will set a new standard to quality and taste most other cities are obviously clueless about. This timeless'work of art' will inspire us to create wonders and strive for perfection. 21 Corbin Sav000ulous Newport Beach 22 Bili Taormina_...._..._........._. __._..._Newport Beach .,......,,,-..... It wil...kre_a..�reat,asse...to our area! _.____.....,,.. _ ..,... _ ..._,.,,, 23 CindyTaormina _ _ ........ ...........,........_._.,. ..„ .....M ............ .......... Newport Beach Really beautiful building Please build it ....... ................................. - _--------------- ..........__........___.........._..._--....._.....__._._...._ ...._........ 24 Katy Nix __,. _...... _._.. _.._..__ _ ,_......... .............. _... Newport Be .........__.......................................ach ....................... 25 BrianGentner..._ . . Newport ..... ._ ---..Beau#iful buil din $....... .... --..... 26 _ .. Ten Kennady _......__—........__.. ................. ............. ............. _........... ......... _................................................. _............. _........ .._.... _... ............... ......... ... New ort Beach P... �....._—............. _... .......... _._27... Annette Wiley — .._ —......_.__Newport ._.__... _.__. Beach ___. ......._._.....,....._..., ... _ . _.. _.._._ .__. . _ _ .._. ........................ ............... ._.._..... _...__.._._. 28 ._.,,David Beth HopkinsNewport .................. ... _._ Beach ......._,........._ ..— 2g _.. _._. Hopkins.... _.._ _......._.........._.__...._ __.__ ...__.. ...._ .........—......................._......._....-_..---._..—_�..........---— Newport Bea ch ... ... _......-......__..__........__..__._.._........._........................ �._._.......... _ _...._�.�.---.._...— — 30 Joe Kross Newport Beach I think this would be a well thought out and planned, wonderful addition to the the skyline of Newport Center. 31 Mark Hales Newport Beach 32 Karen Root Newport Beach _...._—_-_...____...._.._______ ................ _....... _.�.._.—__�—_.__�..._._.______ 33 Jeff Nichols Newport Beach 34 Kate Nichols Newport Beach 35 Karla Molina Newport Beach 314 Namecity Comments 36 Kare__:...._.___..._._._._..._—..._..__..___.._... ......... __� Karen Root Newport Beach I think this project will greatly enhance and benefit our community!! 37 Toni Berlin r Newport Beach 38 Georgia Rith Newport Beach ..._.�._..---- _...-- -------- -- _ ._ ... ,..... ._ - . ._..._.. _._..__ 39 Sve. Stern NemortBeath 40 Donna Schroeder Newport Beach 41 Patricia Allen CDM My wife Joyce ,who is a Visionary and I have been donors to the orange county museum of art for many years. I also serve on the board of the Segerstrom center, and we are very 49 Thom Tucker Newport Beach excited about having The art museum as an Intercal part of ourcampus of our. campus _r _. .-.-...-- _ ..._ . . ...... Museum House will be a wonderful addition to the menu of high quality residential living choices in Newport Reach. It is the last and only chance for us to buy rise 50 Joyce Tucker Newport Beady residential view home in Fashlon island, Newport Beach. 51 Ann Moorhead Newport Beach The use of this land for residential use is vitally important to the economic growth of our 42 Bill and Ronna Shipman Newport Coast city. ---... _.._ . . ..._._._. - - . _............. 43 Patrick Clark. Newport Beach This project is very exciting and will be a wonderful addition to the community. 53 Karen Belson Newport Beach My wife and I own homes in both Newport Beach and Laguna Beach we would like to 54 Lynne Hamilton Lang Newport Beach consolidate both homes into one of these luxury high-rise residences as a retirement 55 Howard Lang Newport Beach home. I urge you to approve this project, I personally have a number of friends who are _ 56 ....... .__ ..-----. Ramona Bemamonti-Morrissr Newport Beach _._._._- interested in living in this wonderful complex should become a reality. Best wishes, John el ly Mazzo--- JohnGtn�er__.._._.._.._..._._. _____New P ort Beach Gin er andTanE_ -- ... _ 45 Jana Hacket _..._.__..... Newport Beach _ .�-- �-- - 46. Ga le WI olar Newport Beach 59 47 .,._._._.__._-.._...__ Valaree wahler —.._,..,..____._._ CDM _...,_....-._ 48 Elizabeth Florentlno Newport Beach ______._a__.___, ___.._.__ __— My wife Joyce ,who is a Visionary and I have been donors to the orange county museum of art for many years. I also serve on the board of the Segerstrom center, and we are very 49 Thom Tucker Newport Beach excited about having The art museum as an Intercal part of ourcampus of our. campus _r _. .-.-...-- _ ..._ . . ...... Museum House will be a wonderful addition to the menu of high quality residential living choices in Newport Reach. It is the last and only chance for us to buy rise 50 Joyce Tucker Newport Beady residential view home in Fashlon island, Newport Beach. 51 Ann Moorhead Newport Beach I love the new development. The views will be wonderful, the area needs more housing, —52 —Marcia Cashion Newport Beach _ 1 think the Musuem house would be a fantastic addition to our community_ 67 ..._.. .................__........ Sue Stem Newport Beach This project is very exciting and will be a wonderful addition to the community. 53 Karen Belson Newport Beach The plans look wonderful! 54 Lynne Hamilton Lang Newport Beach -_— I live on Buck Gully overlooking the ocean. It's quite beautiful, but at my age, which is 71, 55 Howard Lang Newport Beach it's getting to be a bit of a burden. It would be so nice to have the option of keeping my _ 56 ....... .__ ..-----. Ramona Bemamonti-Morrissr Newport Beach _._._._- 57 el ly Mazzo--- Newport Beath I support the new museum plans. Awesome. _ erfect o tion. 70 Michael Parisi Lets get this project approved the city needs more condos for the baby boomer 58 Bryan Mora_._._ ._.,......._...._._._._..._.__ Newport Beach .._. generation to downsize to! .__.....___._... ... ... ... __..._...._..- 59 Alise Larson Newport Beach lie Larson _Mf...........m........................... ..----._._._._._._.._._.. Newport Beath„__..._._._..-..._. _ _..__.....•. ..._.._...__....___...._.._. .._._,._ _61„ Raya Jafee „ New ort Beach P._.._.. ---_......-- ._._....... ... ................. ....... .... ... ----_.. 62 .................._......_.._....._...._._._..._.—:_ James Broo New ort Beach ----p- _.......m. ...................._.._ - - — _.......,._...........-.......W - .__......._....._.._...._... .... _._......_......._..........._..._.._ __. ... . _ _ I work In Fashion_.._—_. Island PIMCO and feel strongly that preserving and su,� - I j g y p g supporting cultural outlets like OCMA in Newport Beach's "epicenter” is critical. Otherwise we risk becoming a soulless sprawl of commercialism and cookie cutter housing developments, which no 63 _ John Cavaliers __..._._ CDM one wants (other than the housing developers of course}. —_._.____- ._---- .._...._._..._...._.,......._...._.....---- 64 Sandi Simon Newport Beach 65 Ron Simon Newport Beath 315 I love the new development. The views will be wonderful, the area needs more housing, 66 _.....___........_____......___.._._—.— Patrick Ranspach Newport Beach and Newport Center Dr. can more than handle extra traffic! .-.__.�.__---- 67 ..._.. .................__........ Sue Stem Newport Beach -------_.._ --- ._.-.._... 68 ___...........__...._.._..._____.____._ Richard Mandel ..............__ COM __._____.--__._.............. -_— I live on Buck Gully overlooking the ocean. It's quite beautiful, but at my age, which is 71, it's getting to be a bit of a burden. It would be so nice to have the option of keeping my beloved ocean view, without the property upkeep. The Museum House seems like a 69 Gale Edelberg CDM erfect o tion. 70 Michael Parisi Newport Beach 315 Name city Comments Looking forward to looking at museum house in the near future. ItwiII be a wonderful 71 Marsha Anderson Newport Beach architectural addition to ourcommunity This property development is necessary to help people who wish to downsize find 72 Alan Norton Newport Coast appropriate housing so they may stay in the area. This Is a needed and wanted product by residence in Corona del Mar, and throughout Coastal Orange County. While change is always difficult, the value and benefit of these residences will address not only the market demand, but they will beautify the already 73 Steven Sergi CDM World Class amenities of Fashion Island. This project will be a great addition to the City of Newport Beach and we are fully behind 74 Saeed Bekam Newport Beach it. 75 Guy Alexanderlli Newport Beach 76 Scott Richter Newport Beach 77 Griffin Hoover Newport Beach 78 Aaron Byrnes Newport Beach 79 Timothy Tamura CDM 80 Richard Gollis Newport Beach 81 Carlos Lopez _ Newport Beach 82 Steohen Lanni NewoortBeach 83 Cao McLarand Newport Beach I am a former director of the orange county museum of art This is the type of project we need in our City. This is smart development which concentrates density in the area where it should be, next to employment and amenities. We are lucky that a developer is contemplating such a high-end project like this. High- rise construction is much more expensive than low rise construction. This developer is spending the money and hiring a world-class architect. Homes that face Newport Center are highly sought after because of the "city lights" view. Here is an opportunity to 84 Paul Julian Newport Beach enhance that view. 1 sincerely hope that this project is approved`Thank You. 85 Tracy Schroeder Newport Beach _ _...,_.__,._................._..._,.......__........,._,_____ 86 David Davutoglu CDM Love to see this project happen. 87 Molly Ring Newport Beach I, like other Newport Beach residents, am concerned about growth and the impact of additional traffic in our community. Having said that, 1 wholeheartedly support the Museum House project in Newport Center. This is thoughtfully developed and located. To me it represents the kind of quality type of development that is currently lacking in Newport. I believe that with the mix of retail, restaurants and office in the immediate area, Museum House will help stimulate a more pedestrian friendly urban environment 88 Chris Fletcher Newport Beach that residents have come to enjoy in Newport Center. I support the project. Great addition to the city and will help ajoining local businesses 89 Rick Teasta Newport Beach out. 90 Remo Poselli Newport Coast 91 Kirstine Wright Newport Beach 92 Alexander Philips Newport Beach 93 Robert Curd Newport Beach I forward my support forthis important project 94 Brian Davis Newport Beach 95 Traci Bowman Newport Beach 96 Hanna Karcho Newport Coast 97 Adisen Little CDM 98 Wendv Webb Newoort Beach 99 Natalie Matsler Newport Beach 100 Sean Matsler Newport Beach Fashion Island will benefit from these homes and the City as a whole will significantly 101 Jeremy Krout Newport Beach benefit from the publicbenefits package offered as part of the project. 102 Michelle Kendall Newport Beach�� 103 Scott Lanni Newport Beach 104 Tim StraderJr. Newport Beach 105 Tim Strader Newport Beach 316 Nam. 106 Ste a_nie Lowe 107 Susan Strader 108 Maria_Huang -409 VDavid House Comments I think this will be a great project to continue to help bring more }obs and more people to Newport Beach invest their money in our great commun f Newport Beach Beach 110 Brian Garbutt Newport Beach 111 Jessee Rodriguez 112 Gabriel Torre NewoortBeach The Museum House will be a wonderful addition to Fashion Island as It continues its 113 Jenny Duke . 114..Jeff _ _N�....__...__.._.._.-..._,_.-- IIS Camille Strader Newport Beach Newpo rt Beach Newport Beach transformation, The project is well thought out and has strong community support here in Bi Canyon, ... _ —.. __.__..._......,...,.... _--...,._.........._..__.-_- ---__�_..._.___............._........_.__._.._____._.,._....__._..._..._._._.__.._,.,_..._.„. ..116 John Gates KathleenSchaefer Neport[oast 117 Andrew Watkins NewportBeach_ - Fashion Island needs new development and the added residential will be excellent. -.v..- 118 EhsanGharatappeh Newport Beach i3_SM-Charles ...126 119 Seth Ring NewportBeach ... r wholeheartedly support the Museum House project. It will be a great addition to our 120 GnCatanzano Newport Beach community.. 121 Kelsev LA Corona Del Mar Our community has precious few art oriented venues relative to its wealth. Museum House will Improve quality of life in OC by significantly expanding community access to 122 _Anna Marie Dunlap Corona Del Mar important,-worksofmodernandcontemporaryart- _,., _..,.__.__.�-.__.__ 123 KathleenSchaefer Neport[oast 124 Gena Reed_ - Corona Del Mar - ......... .. i3_SM-Charles ...126 Frazier Newport Beach_.._.,..._...,......-_---.. ... Jennifr Frazier t B_...,..,..._._._...______,_-.,......,_ Newport h reat 127 Rick Westberg Newport Beach Snlflcant addition to our city in many ways. 128 Laurie Gordon Newport Reach 129 Jeffrey Gill 130 James Ray Newport Beach Great project 131 Jeane_tte_Justus Newport Beach -132 -...133- -"Paul Nielsen .....___..__...... ---------------------..-....._—.,___..._ Corona Del Mar Matt Cady Corona Del Mar 134 _ RobertAhike NewportBeach 135 Rob Rakunas _- NewportBeachlnsupportofproteq. _ - 136 Christopher Gibbs Newport Beach 137 Scott Watson Newport Beach T- -- 138 Linda Hortoka Newport Beach 139 ElliottLowe Newport Beach -TF} 144) Ken Perkins Corona Del Mar 141- Christy Frank Newport _ I love the idea and Related always produces an unbelievable projectf it will be a great 142 Ross Bourne __.. _ Newport Beach _____..,___...............__.___..........._...__._...__._.._,_._...._.._.._.__._.___...,----__-- addition to Newport beach. 143 _.. ......... Matt Mclarand .. Newport Beach __....,..,..,_,__.......,...__.-_.._,....___.._.__...,..,_..._.._,..,...,..,._,.....,._,.._......__. -------.--.-__._..___-.-- ............ .....144 Woodruff ..... .... ,-„__._.___----- Newport Beach -....._.---------.-.___.__.__._...... -___.-_.._____. -_.... .... ....... .. _._..._.___....................__..._,.._.._.. ____.______..._-,._._.., _.__._.-..,..-__...__._,._ ......... . 146 Ste Vlet 147 _......__.......__._...—_._._—_.,--- Veronica Giordano Newport Beach —p--_...................... . m_.Tm, ... _..__..,......_-_......... _...... .__, 148 Allison Olmstead Newport Beach ....._..........,...--_..._..,......._ .............._, _.,.------ _ _ -- ------ 149 Andrew Holstein Newport Beach _ _ „ I feet that Museum House will be an exemplary addidtion to the quality ~qu lity lifestyle of Newport Beach. Our family are in complete support of the development of this quality product for our treasured community. 1.50 David Colfins Newport Beach Thank You 151 Gina Curd Carona Del Mar - ^--_ A financial and esthetic win for Newport Beach, and much-needed single4evel, high-end housing for long-time Newport residents who are aging out of their two-level homes. And a great boost for our county's museum, which properly belongs in a more 152 Roger Davisson NewportCoast concentrated area of cultural attractions. This initiative is an imaginative and essential enhancement to the vitality of Newport Beach. If we are to maintain our true "competitive edge” as the most desirable city in 153 Michelle Jordan Newport Beach southern country in which to live, work and play we cannot afford to loose this probed; _ 317 160 Joan Riach Gayner Newport Beach Hi. I have lived in Newport since 1975. And in Big Canyon my parents were residents for 37 years. I and my family have supported our Museum since that time. Thank you foryour _161_Diane Stovall Newport _Beach support ofthis very important project for ourfuture Museum. 162 Larane Cinquini - Rudnick Newport Beach Yes...Yes...Yesss...— I have been a docent at OCMA since 1979 and I hope to have a world class museum when we are able to move to Costa Mesa. 163 lane Fowler Newport Beach 164 John Santry Newport Beach A financial and esthetic win for Newport Beach, and much-needed single -level, high-end housing for long-time Newport residents who are aging out of their two-level homes. And a great boost for our county's museum, which properly belongs in a more 165 Roger Davisson Newport Coast concent ratedarea of cultural attractions. Name City Comments Asa 20 ear docent and member of the museum I have y ve first hand how much the museum has benefited Orange County children and adult audiences. This project is a win - 166 Lynda Wilson Irvine win forthe arts and OC. 167 Lauren and Trace Chalmers Irvine 168 Diane Cherniss Seal Beach 169 Name City Comments 154 RebeccaMCLarand Newport Beach This pTlect enhances ALL of Orange County. 155 Steven Nelson Newport Beach 1S6 Daryl Nelson NewportBeach _ 173 Ross Wallace � Fullerton��� Museum House will be a beutriful addition to Fashion Island and allow Orange County 157 Kathyn Porter Newport Beach the world class museum it deserves. 158 Linda White_ NewQartBeach 181 Sandra Biddulph Irvine OCMA needs to join the other arts venues of our county, over In Segerstrom Arts Center. 182 _................................. Allison Garofalo ..... ....... .... ,._.__._........... Los Angeles .................. .,... _...........,.........,......._......................_.............,......................_.._...._ Allowing Museum Houseto occupyOCMA's current s1te--which will facilitate the move-- 159Karen Evarts Newport Beach _... is awin-win for all residents of Orange County. . __....._._._._...._.,_,.._.. _._.----- � __..As 183 Peter Garofalo Los Angeles --_._._..,._....__._..._.._......__._.__.__.,........_........_.._....._.._-_......_._...._,................._.._..........___.__.__.___,_._._..____ a l ongtime resident of Newport Beach,l applaud the designers of this project for its _ ................._..anne 184 De r Flicke Corona aesthetic and environmental qualities. It would be a great asset to our city I 160 Joan Riach Gayner Newport Beach Hi. I have lived in Newport since 1975. And in Big Canyon my parents were residents for 37 years. I and my family have supported our Museum since that time. Thank you foryour _161_Diane Stovall Newport _Beach support ofthis very important project for ourfuture Museum. 162 Larane Cinquini - Rudnick Newport Beach Yes...Yes...Yesss...— I have been a docent at OCMA since 1979 and I hope to have a world class museum when we are able to move to Costa Mesa. 163 lane Fowler Newport Beach 164 John Santry Newport Beach A financial and esthetic win for Newport Beach, and much-needed single -level, high-end housing for long-time Newport residents who are aging out of their two-level homes. And a great boost for our county's museum, which properly belongs in a more 165 Roger Davisson Newport Coast concent ratedarea of cultural attractions. Name City Comments Asa 20 ear docent and member of the museum I have y ve first hand how much the museum has benefited Orange County children and adult audiences. This project is a win - 166 Lynda Wilson Irvine win forthe arts and OC. 167 Lauren and Trace Chalmers Irvine 168 Diane Cherniss Seal Beach 169 Suzanne Paulson Laguna Beach It is astunning project. 170 Rabin Lang North Tustin This pTlect enhances ALL of Orange County. 171 Suzanne Clemer Los Angeles 172 Barry KylerHungtington Beach _ 173 Ross Wallace � Fullerton��� 174 Kathryn Irish Buena Park 175 ScottStephens Hungtington Beach 176 Edna Jimenez Tustin__ -177 Shah Ghanbarl _ Laguna Hills 178 Heather McAllister Menifee 179 Liane Pham Yurba Linda 180 Mick Moran San Clemente 181 Sandra Biddulph Irvine 182 _................................. Allison Garofalo ..... ....... .... ,._.__._........... Los Angeles .................. .,... _...........,.........,......._......................_.............,......................_.._...._ Gorgeousl.........._.....__.,_.,,._,_.....,........_..........,.._........................ This looks Iike a fantastic project, a true architectural gem It will be a beautiful Icon in 183 Peter Garofalo Los Angeles --_._._..,._....__._..._.._......__._.__.__.,........_........_.._....._.._-_......_._...._,................._.._..........___.__.__.___,_._._..____ Newport Beach. _ ................._..anne 184 De r Flicke Corona _ _ _ Additional residential units in Fashion Island will make fora more well rounded, 185 John Olivier Orange walk_ablecommunity. 186 Violet Cruz _ Irvine s 187 Jeffrey Higgins Cost Mesa _ 188 Kalev Dohertv Manhattan Beach — 189 Craig Wells Costa Mesa 190 RogerHerringa Seattle Great Project! 318 215 Alex Oh Irvine 216 Newport Beach Supporters Name City Comments 191 Robyn Fischer Irvine Irvine 192 Adam Cleary Costa Mesa 220 193 flke Tooley Irvine Bibi Yang 194 Penni Wynne Monarch Beach Laguna Beach 195 Sunn Kim Aliso Viejo 196 Sarah Haraiambous Orange 197 Patricia Falzon Fountain Valley 198 Kathe Katz Irvine 199 David Fmmes Laguna Beach 200 Dana Dowers Laguna Beach This is n Incredible additiontothe community 201 Mitchell Goodman Los Angeles 202 _ Forrest Newhall Coto de Caza _ _ 203 Jerome Herrick Piedmont Not a full time resident but share a vacation home m the community. This development may induce us to move to NB full time. 204 RobertGoodman Los Angeles 205 Lynda Wilson Irvine Please approve the Museum House Project. This action will have an enormous positive Impact by helping the OC Museum of Art move forward on Its move to the Segerstrom Center complex. Thousands of visitors, children and adults, from OC and well beyond, will be able to visitthe museum in its more centrally located site. The housing development near Fashion Island, while high density, means that the city will have new local taxpayers who can help fund parks, greenbelts and community activities that will benefit NB residents and visitors alike. 206 Melissa Beck Laguna Niguel 207 Jason Foreman Costa Mesa _ My family is a longtime Corona del Marand Lido Island residents. I believe the city-like living The Museum Project would afford in Newport Center is long over due and would be an amazing place to call home. 208 Sarah Gaulke Hungtington Beach 209 Tara Freese Costa Mesa 210 TerIAlkin Irvine 211 Randall Parker Laguna Beach 212 Veronica Gray Irvine 213 Oriana Slasor Orange 214 Don Wood Seal Beach 215 Alex Oh Irvine 216 Pieter Berger This level of project is what the Fashion Island address deserves. It will only enhance the area and add value to the surrounding properties. Irvine 217 James Donovan Irvine 218 Lourdes BottgerNark Irvine 219 Judith Hendler Hungtington Beach W 220 Randa Phair Irvine 221 Bibi Yang Hungtington Beach 222 Paula Tomei Laguna Beach 223 Clav Knapp Costa Mesa 319 Exhibit C FAA Determination of leo Hazard to Air Navigation 320 Mail Processing Center Aeronautical Study No. Federal Aviation Administration 2016 -AWP -7722 -OL Southwest Regional Office Obstruction Evaluation Group 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth. 1:K 76177 Issued Date: 10 19 2016 Steven Oh Related CalilbMia Urban Residential 18201 Von Karnon Avenue Suite 900 Irvine. CA 92612 ** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION ** The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. pan 77. concerning: Structure: Building Museum House Location: Newport Beach. CA Latitude: 33-37-16.90N NAI. 83 Longitude: 117-52-42.97W Hctehts: 187 feet site elevation (SE) 325 feet above ground level (AGL) 512 feet above tucan sea level (AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure would have no substantial adverse etTect on the safe and ellicient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on the operation of air navigation lacililies. Therefore. pursuant to the authority delegated to ane. it is hereby determined that the structure would not he a h.v:ird to air navigation provided the following conditions) is(are) met: As a condition to this Detenutnation. the Structure is marked lighted to accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70 7.460-1 L Changs 1. Obstruction Marking and Lighting. red lights - Chapters 4.5(Red).& 12. Iu is required that FAA Fonn 7460-2. Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be c -filed any line the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to start ol'eonstruction (7460-2. Part 1) _X_ Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2. Part 2) Sec attachment for additional condition(s) or information. The structure considered under this study lies in proximity to an airport and occupants may he subjected to noise fnnn aircraft operating to and from the airport. This determination expires on 04 I9 2018 unless: Page l of 7 321 (a) the Construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Foam 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, is received by this office. (b) extended. revised. or ternlivated by the issuing office. (c) the construction is suhject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and ,in application l'vr a construction pernui has been filed. as required by the FCC, within 6 months of the date of this determination. In such case. the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of Construction. or the date the FCC denies the application. NOTE: RFQ1TEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MITST BE E• -FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE_ AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS INTHE AREA OF THE, STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AFRONAUTIC'AL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRFD, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLY FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is subject to review if all interested party files a petition that is received by the FAA on or before November 18, 2016. In the event a petition for review is filed. it must contain a full statement of the basis upon which it is made and be submilted to the Manager, Airspace Policy & Regulation. Federal .Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave, SW, Room 42-3. Washington. DC 20591. This detemtuuation becomes final on November 28, 2016 unless a petition is tinkly filed. In -tvhich case. this determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the grant of any review, For any questions regarding your petition. please contact Airspace Regulations & ATC Procedures Group via telephone -- 202-267-878; - or facsimile 202-267-9328. This deternnunation is based, in part, on tine foregoing description wli clt iuctudes specific coordinates, licights, frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will void this deterinination. Any fixture construction or alteration. including increase to heights, power. or the addition of other transmitters. requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such ascranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However. this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment 1i'hlelt has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable in ipacc by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any federal. State. or local government body. Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and ailects a top light or flashing obstruction light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice. to Airmen (NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number. This aeronautical study considered and analyzed the impact can existing and propcised arrival, departure_ and en route procedures for aircraft operatin_ snider both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules: the impact on all existing and planned public -use airports. Military airports and aeronautical facilities. and the cumulative impact resulting from the studied structure when combined with the impact of other existing or proposed structures. The study disclosed that the described struCturC would have no substantial adverse effect oil air navigation. Pace 2 of 7 322 An account of the study findings, aeronautical objections received by the FAA during the studs' (if any). and the basis for the FAA's decision in this niattcr can be found on the following pagc(s). If vve can be of further assistance. please contact Karen McDonald. at (310) 725-6557. On any future correspondence concerning this (natter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2016-AWI'-7722-OE. Signature Control No: 301386406-307871518 Mike Hehvey Manager, Obstruction E -valuation Group Attachment(s) Additional Inforination Map(s) Page 3 of 7 (DNH) 323 %ilditi+onid infoornmtiou for ASN 2016-.X%VP-7722-0E The proposal will construct a 3 25 oot above ground level (agl) 512 -foot above nteaii sea le% -el (,inial) 25 -story residential structure. in Newport Beach. Calilornia. The site is located approximately 3?9 nautical miles (NM) southeast of the John Wayne (SNA) airport reference point. 'I lie SNA Field Elevation (FF) is 56 feet above incan sea level (ainisl). SNA is the closest civilian public-usc landing area. lhte site elevation of this proposal is 187 feet amyl. The structure height exceeds the obstruction Standards of title 14 Code of f=ederal Regulations (CFR) Part 77 as follows: Section 77.17(a)(2) by 90 feet - a height more than 229 feet agl, at the site, within 3.29 nin of the SNA airport refcrelice point. The proposal was not circularized for public aeronautical corainent because internal FAA evaluation finds that the adverse effect of this structure is known. Strictures of similar height exist in the area. There would be no derogation of the navigable airspace overlying the site. Existing obstacles and terrain control the development of future approach and departure instrument Tenninal Procedures at SNA. Obstruction evaluation policy exempts tram circularization proposals which exceed the A2 obstruction standard, provided the proposal does not lie within an, airport naf3ic patient. Therefore, no forther attempt to negotiate the structure to a louver height was considered necessary. This does not affect the right to petition for review determinations regarding structures which exceed the subject obstruction standards. AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE EFFECT UPON THE OPERATION OF AN AIR NAVIGATION AID: - None. AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES (IFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED I'HE FOLLOWING: - The proposal would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR arrival departure routes, operations, or procedures. - The proposal would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR en route routes, operations, or procedures. -1-he proposal would have no cftect on any existing or proposed IFR minimum flight altitudes. AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE VISUAL FLIGHT RULES (VFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED THE FOLLOWING: - The proposal would have no effect on any existing or proposed VTR arrival or departure routes, operations or procedures. - The proposal would not conflict with airspace required to conduct normal VFR traffic pattern operations at any known public use or military airports, including SNA. The proposal does not penetrate the maneuvering area associated with VFR Traffic Pattern operations at SNA. Aircraft at norrtnal Traffic Pattern altitudes and standard rates of descent have reasonable clearance alcove this stnieture. Pane 4 of 7 324 - llic proposal ~could not pcaictraic those altitudes nonnally considered available to airmen for VFR en route flip -Ill. The cumulative impact of the proposed structure. when combined with other existing structures is not considered significant. Study did not disclose any adr-crsc effect oil existing or proposed public -use or military auTorts or navigational facilities. Nor mould the proposal affect the capacity of any known existing or planned civilian public -use or military airport. Therefore, it is detcrniined that the proposed construction would not have a substantial adverse effect on the safe and ctticient utilization of the navipablc airspace by aircraft or on any air navigation facility and Nvould not be a hazard to air navigation. This detennination, issued in accordance with Part 77. concerns the effect of the proposal on the safe and efficient use of the nivigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of any compliaticc responsibilities relating to laws, ordinances. or regulations of any Federal. state, or local governmental bodies. Detentiinations. wltich arc issued in accordance with Part 77, do not supersede or override any state, county, or local laws, ivieation casements, or ordinances, or local zoning inaxinnuit heights. Page 5 of 7 325 J k4lr.vt .� TOPO Map for ASN 2016 -AWP -7722 -OE Page 6 of 7 w 326 Sectional Map for ASN 2016-AN17P-7722-OE r�W 1` IS is N 20rNM MINOE La na B`` 35 316.125. 269.61 1 —�� ■ DISNEYL�►ND THEME PARK is Law 108=199, Section 521, aircraft flight operation4 Lnd below 3000 feet AGL within a 3 nautical mile radii J Theme bark (334805Nil 175517W or the Sean Beach Page 7 of 7 U/ CRO LAKE \\ '122. SANTA A aUN LL4 A Af s S_c L� I- --< 327 Attachment S Public Comment Letters 328 Ramirez, Gregg From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:37 PM To: Campbell, James; Ramirez, Gregg Subject: FW: Auto Nation & museum house -----Original Message ----- From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:25 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Auto Nation & museum house From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:24:57 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Auto Nation & museum house For the record - November 7 and November 29 -----Original Message ----- From: ryan long [mailto:ryanalong@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 1:20 PM To: Dept -City Council Subject: Auto Nation & museum house Good Day City Council, am a home owner and resident of Newport Beach. Over the past 3 years I have noticed much more traffic in the city, mostly due to development. I would like our city to stop all this new development and revert back to what made Newport so great, a small easy going beach city. We are becoming Santa Monica and starting to inherit all the issues and problems that come with over development. Please vote no auto nation and museum house development. Thank you, Ryan Long 329 Ramirez, Gregg From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 1:50 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg Subject: FW: ddixon@newportbeachca.gov; tpetros@newportbeachca.gov; dduffield@newportbeachca.gov; kmu[doon@newportbeachca.gov; edselich@roadrunner.com; speotter@newportbeachca.gov; keithcurryl@yahoo.com From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 12:37 PM To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: ddixon(anew portbeachca.gov; tpetros@ new portbeachca.gov; dduffield@new portbeachca.gov; kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov; edselich@roadrun,ner,com; speotterCbnewportbeachca.gov; keithcurryl@yahoo.com For the record, November 291n [ d ..com] From: 3o Caro Hunter ttZ,am.li to:ioc ro Cavix.netcom, Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 11:55 AM To: Dept - City Council Subject: dd[xon(&newportbeachca.gov; tpetros@newportbeachca.gov; dduffield@newportbeachca.gov; kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov; edselich roadrunner.com;o r@riewport„beachca.gov; keithcurryl@yahoo.com Hello to my Mayor and City Council members — I`ve Iived and worked in Newport Beach for over 45 years. I`m proud of my City and have usually approved of it's growth. It's a beautiful City in most parts. One exception for growth that I oppose is the "Museum House" in Newport Center. I heartily disapprove of this misplaced building. I`ve attended Planning Commission meetings, listened to citizens speak on both sides, and I even added my 2 cents worth. Something I read recently hit home ...... This mega condo high rise violates FAA and Newport Beach height restrictions". I hadn't heard a word said about the FAA during the approval process. I wonder why. The Planning Commission and Staff did an inadequate study if the FAA and John Wayne Airport were not included and consulted. The Mayor and City Council need to remedy this omission. Thank you for listening, Jo Carol Hunter 4220 Park Newport Newport Beach, CA. 330 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:18 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Bibi Yang [mailto:bibiyang2003@gmaii.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:42 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Bibi Yang Huntington Beach 331 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:30 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Donald Evarts [mailto:dpevarts@me.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 11:20 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Donald Evarts Newport Beach 332 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:18 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: John Santry [mailto:jsantry@icloud.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:47 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. John Santry Newport Beach 333 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:18 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Jane Fowler [mailto:Janof1220)gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:51 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. I have been a docent at OCMA since 1979 and I hope to have a world class museum when we are able to move to Costa Mesa. Jane Fowler Newport Beach 334 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:19 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: LARANE CINQUINI - RODNICK [mailto:cinquini@me.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:55 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. YES... YES...... YESSS.... LARANE CINQUINI - RODNICK Newport Beach 92660 335 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:19 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Diane Stovall [mailto:dianebeachcomber@earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:59 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Hi. I have lived in Newport since 1975. And in Big Canyon my parents were residents for 37 years. I and my family have supported our Museum since that time. Thank you for your support of this very important project for our future Museum. Sincerely Diane Stovall Diane Stovall Newport beach 336 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:19 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Joan Riach Gayner [mailtoJoanriach@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:24 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. As a longtime resident of Newport Beach,I applaud the designers of this project for its aesthetic and environmental qualities. It would be a great asset to our city! Joan Riach Gayner Newport Beach 337 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:19 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Steve Roush [mailto:roush007@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:33 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. This structure will just add to the class act of the City of Newport Beach Steve Roush Newport Beach 338 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:21 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Deborah Johnson [mailto:debtj@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:37 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Deborah Johnson Newport Beach CA 339 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:22 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Hedda Marosi [mailto:hmarosi&oadrun ner.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 2:06 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Should not be so tall. Hedda Marosi Newport Beach 340 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:22 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Randa Phair [mailto:Randaphair@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 2:17 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Randa Phair Irvine 341 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:22 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Karen Evarts [mailto:krmevarts@me.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 3:03 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. OCMA needs to join the other arts venues of our county, over in Segerstrom Arts Center. Allowing Museum House to occupy OCMA's current site --which will facilitate the move-- is a win-win for all residents of Orange County. Karen Evarts Newport Beach 342 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:26 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Lynne Hamilton Lang [ma ilto:Lynne. hamiltonlang@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 3:31 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. I very much support the Museum House. Lynne Hamilton Lang Newport Beach 343 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:27 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Linda White[mailto:lindawhite@roadrunner.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:42 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Linda White Newport Beach 344 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:27 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: judith hendler [mailto:jhendler@socal.rr.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 6:55 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. judith hendler huntington beach 345 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:27 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Lourdes Bottger Nark [mailto:lourdesbottger0l gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 8:26 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Lourdes Bottger Nark Irvine 346 Nova, Makana From: Dixon, Diane Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:28 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Gayle Widyolar [mailto:gaaylewidyolar@cox.net] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 10:07 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Gayle Widyolar Corona Del Mar 347 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:28 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Katherine Porter [mailto:katherineporter@me.com] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 10:31 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Museum House will be a beautiful addition to Fashion Island and allow Orange County the world class museum it deserves. Katherine Porter Newport Coast 348 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:28 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Daryl Nelson [mailto:da[yl 01@mac.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 3:01 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Daryl Nelson Newport Beach 349 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:29 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Steven Nelson[mailto:strevennelson0l@cox.net] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 3:03 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Steven Nelson Newport Beach 350 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:29 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Michelle Jordan [mailtoJordanllc@cox.net] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 9:22 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Michelle Jordan Newport Beach 351 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:29 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Alfred Ferrari [mailto:fubine42@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 10:11 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Alfred Ferrari Laguna Niguel 352 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:29 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Karen Swanson[maiIto: NewportBeachkaren i@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 10:55 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Would this be going in at FI or SCP area in CM? Karen Swanson NB 353 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:30 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT From: Rebecca McLarand [mailto:rmclarand@me.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 11:17 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Rebecca McLarand Newport Beach 354 Nova, Makana From: Libby Huyck <libonlido@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 8:29 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Muldoon, Kevin; Duffield, Duffy; Peotter, Scott; Petros, Tony; Selich, Edward; Curry, Keith; Nova, Makana Subject: Museum House on Nov 29th Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged I feel strongly that there is very little support for this 25 story Museum House project. (1000 signatures on petition, but even at NB Headquarters over the last 2 months, nobody I knew there, close to 300 people, were for it). So the logical step would be to put this to a vote of the people here. It's that simple. We are tired of seeing these massive condo complexes which destroy the character of our city. Enough is enough. Please keep this as a public record. Thank you. Libby Huyck 355 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:07 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: The Museum House -----Original Message ----- From: Robert Craig[mailto:robert.craig6@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 10:10 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: The Museum House Please take into consideration the character and peaceful environment we currently enjoy in our City as you make a decision regarding the Museum House high rise development. - we already have water restrictions in Newport so where will the City source the extra water required ? - our main thoroughfare roads are already under stress so how will we mitigate the extra traffic ? Thanks Robert Craig 418 Snug Harbor Road Newport Beach 356 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:01 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: We do not want the building of the museum house From: Arthur Baker [mailto:abakerrph(a)yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 3:40 PM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: We do not want the building of the museum house Dear Mayor Dixon, We do not want the building of the museum house; we already have too much traffic on Jamboree blvd. Please uphold the Measure Y vote and implement the will of the people. Thank you, Arthur Baker, Newport Beach resident Arthur Baker 906 S. Bay Front Newport Beach, CA 926662 (949) 673-3304 abakerrph@yahoo.com I 357 Nova, Makana From: Dixon, Diane Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:01 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: stop the museum house From: Miriam Baker [mailto:mbakersculptor yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 3:37 PM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: stop the museum house Dear Mayor Dixon, We do not want the building of the museum house; we already have too much traffic on Jamboree blvd. Please uphold the Measure Y vote and implement the will of the people. Thank you, Miriam Baker, Newport Beach resident Miriam Baker 906 S. Bay Front Newport Beach, CA 926662 (949) 673-3304 http://miriambakersculpture.com/ 358 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:06 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: THE MUSEUM HOUSE -----Original Message ----- From: cindygates@cindy7.com [mailto:cindygates@cindy7.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 10:00 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: THE MUSEUM HOUSE STOP THE BUILDING OF THE MUSEUM HOUSE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC Cindy Gates 359 Nova, Makana From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:06 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: 25 story museum house -----Original Message ----- From: Christine Gayner[mailto:christinegayner@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 11:12 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: 25 story museum house PLEASE DO NOT BUILD THE 25 STORY MUSEUM HOUSE .... TO MUCH TRAFFIC. WE DO NOT NEED MORE IN THIS CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 360 Nova, Makana From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Rieff, Kim Monday, November 21, 2016 10:02 AM Ramirez, Gregg; Nova, Makana FW: Musuem House 20161020_200612jpg Follow up Flagged From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 9:23 AM To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Musuem House For the record, November 29. From: Jesse W Spears [mailto:jwspears@pacbell.net] Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 1:39 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Musuem House Dear City Council, I attended the recent Planning commission meeting and witnessed the developers sales pitch (attached). The developer and his advocates several times insisted that the 100 units were needed to accommodate the pent up demand of local residents wanting to downsize. The fiscal analysis done by Applies Development Economics assumes new young residents at full tax value in it's report, not current residents downsizing. This skews the real income to the city as there is no accounting or Proposition 60 and 90 tax transfers. The retail numbers are also off as senior household expenses of travel and health care are much larger than the retail and food consumption numbers used by Applied Development. Being a senior and actually living in Fashion Island, I can tell you the city does not receive nearly those percentage numbers from our household. We only go to Fashion Island occasionally for lunch as the parking is abysmal later in the day and any retail we do is done on the Internet or South Coast (easier parking). We are fortunate enough to be healthy so the balance of our budget is spent on recreation and travel neither of which fill the city coffers but are a cautionary tale of reality versus marketing estimates. I bring these discrepancies up as the City Council tends to vote on development projects based solely on developers marketing pitches, consultants numbers and reports. Your votes on traffic issues are also solely based on national ITE standards without fully understanding the impact and change the residents perceive and experience in their daily life. When you receive angry correspondence from residents it is because they feel their lives are not changing for the better. The reason there was a Greenlight and 2006 General plan update was to balance the Newport Beach "beach identity" with reasonable growth. The final EIR for Museum house basically gives you carte blanche to disregard public sentiment but does bury a line of caution deep within it "in the absence of a mandatory duty arising from an initiative petition, referendum petition, court order or other mandatory legal obligation". I am new participant to the council, commission and letter writing scene, but I find myself part of it now because my lifestyle is being downgraded by council votes for hodgepodge urbanization. I have been to enough meetings to hear the "Urban Center" pitch for Fashion Island and can tell you its not an Urban center, it is an overcrowded suburban shopping mall. California only has one truly urban center and 361 it's in San Francisco. I believe that the residents in Newport Beach have reached a tipping point and that its time for the city council to decide if they are for the residents or the developers. As I see it, you have three choices. 1. Put the Museum House and all projects that require an General plan amendment to a citywide vote. 2. Renegotiate the Development agreement so that residents are fully compensated for their aggravation and loss of lifestyle. To my way of thinking the city should receive at least $55 million in development fees to even consider this project. The $71,000 per unit that this developer is offering is a disgrace. If you are going to vote for development then do not sell the voters short. This is less than 2 percent of the project value and is roughly $79 per resident. Accepting the developers offer does not set a stellar example of serious fiscal responsibility by the council. 3. Disregard the letters and petitions that you have received from voters and wait for more restrictive measures or court cases to be initiated by angry residents. As a city council your duty is to your constituents. Just because the Museum wants to move to South Coast does not obligate you to assist them or the developer. Please remember that past Museum boards turned down a very good offer to have a world class museum built here in Newport where Gulfstream and Tommy Bahama are now. Those of us who have lived here for years remember and have very little sympathy. Sincerely, Pamela Spears 362 In Public 8 cacfiu. • S519M Pent w ywvxt hers �pm s I. sm APM S4 t \1 S?9\t • pCm►1111 Eery lmput fmi tn•I1cu Park [cc Traffic Fra Shire Ta j +on Condor 1 -re School Fee ' S2401K Si Map Thom Fz,c fa V 111 Comrnumn Bicinerlit Cuntributoa W031100 to the Cm of a Q 9 acrc sift by MM#A Wued at S� �\t Flthct Public Bendws Addtitiml S 18M in cumulatnr tuts gad fm tt, the ( M k�►-� ;1 Prm4ksi ntp% hmmg skxk 1 4 Of Cuffmi \.'mTjtln rmknt% lookm s Museum House PA2015-152 The following list represents residents that contacted City staff regarding the Museum House project as of November 21, 2016. Support 1. [No name provided] Opposed 1. James Vogel (949) 642-0166 30. Roger Sherwood 2. Sharon Wright (949) 887-0337 31. Pete Rabbitt 3. Marta Alexander -404 Vista Grande 32. Jo Carol Hunter 4. Roger Alexander - 404 Vista Grande 33. Jennifer Wilde S. Mary McKennon (949) 644-2445 34. Drew Lawler 6. Linda Ernst (949) 675-2789 35. Kent 7. Patricia Culpepper (949) 230-7469 36. Donald Weld 8. Debra Hartunian 37. Carol Smith 9. Karen (949) 646-1190 38. Joanne Thomas 10. Jack Guiney (949) 646-1190 39. Linda Lawler 11. Dana Petit (949) 673-3899 40. John Durio 12. Shari Reel 41. Wally Ziglar 13. Marta Pacham 42. James Alexander 14. Elaine Johnson 43. Susan Watson 15. Richard Johnson 44. Dave Mazzotta 16. Sasin Corbin (714) 642-4872 45. Barbara MacAdam 17. Phil Stevens (949) 644-4759 46. Susana Hegstrom 18. Christopher Reale (949) 723-0521 47. LaVonne Voit 19. Claudia Kerr (949) 285-7474 48. Lisa Scorziell 20. Emily Ogden (949) 675-4508 49. Barbara Munson 21. Marilyn Hendrickson (949) 675-1029 50. Tina Sills 22. Mary Vanian (949) 759-1677 51. Sara Jane Bartholomae 23. Gordon Henry (949) 640-6000 52. Kevin Leonard 24. Sherri Stevens 53. Doreen Chandler 25. Alice Vieira (949) 720-9464 54. Dean Chandler 26. Virginia Snyder 55. Mary Jo Steiman 27. Don Weber 56. Ruth Tallman 28. Patrick Barrett 57. Gary Edwards 29. Wife of Patrick Barrett 58. Jeff Karsten 364 59. Robert 91. [No name provided] 60. Craig Caliger 92. [No name provided] 61. Jana Reynolds 93. [No name provided] 62. Diane Field 94. [No name provided] 63. Barbara Schaaf 949-673-0346 95. [No name provided] 64. Gary Ellerbroc 96. [No name provided] 65. Patricia Warmington 949-640-0655 97. [No name provided] 66. Edward Warmington 949-640-0655 98. Helen Dwan 67. Jim Gagney 949-400-1904 99. Betty Bottorf 68. Matthew Stone 100. Catherine Britton 69. Beverly Bernstein 101. Cheryl Manos 70. Carol Strauss 102. Marion Coddington 71. Mary Willison 103. Virginia Labahn 72. Karen Larsen 104. Linda Robertson 73. Jo Carol Hunter 105. Beverly Winans 74. [No name provided] 106. Peter Ellison 75. [No name provided] 107. Catherine Winter (949) 644-1065 76. June O'Neil 108. Marie Kontos (949) 640-7690 77. Terry O'Neil 109. George Wentworth (949) 721-1721 78. Christopher Madsen 110. Maryanne Wentworth (949) 721- 79. Charmin Wu 1721 80. Susan Mulcaire 111. Bruce Trotter 81. Lynn Sparman 112. Joan Carr 82. Patricia Lewis 113. John Schram 83. Allen Lewis 114. Georgia Foell 84. Patricia Insley 115. Ronald Foell 85. Marcia Nordlund 116. Maryann Green 86. Quinton Burchell 117. Leroy Green 87. Nancy Burchell 118. Brick Huston 88. [No name provided] 119. Wendy Huston 89. [No name provided] 120. [No name provided] 90. [No name provided] 121. [No name provided] 365 Ramirez, Gregg From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 12:04 PM To: Ramirez, Gregg; Brandt, Kim Subject: FW: Uphold the will of the people and vote down The Museum House Attachments: Museum House Petition 11-7-16.pdf From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 12:03 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Uphold the will of the people and vote down The Museum House From: Kiff, Dave Sent. Monday, November 07, 2016 12:02:39 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Uphold the will of the people and vote down The Museum House For the record, November 29th From: petitions(acitizensagainsthicihriseurbantowers.com [mai.ito:petitions citizensagainsthighriseurbantowers.com] Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 8:41 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith; Dept - City Council Subject: Uphold the will of the people and vote down The Museum House Dear Mayor and City Council Members: So far more than 1,000 Newport Beach residents have signed our ongoing petition to stop The Museum House: the 296 -foot high, 25 -story mega condo tower set for City Council consideration at your November 29, 2016 meeting. As you know, in November 2014 voters rejected Measure Y overwhelmingly. And in, so doing, voiced their strong opposition to high density housing in Newport Center. Now, it's up to each one of you to uphold the will of the people and vote down The Museum House. We are counting on you to stop the Los Angelization of Newport Beach. Now! Thank you, Sincerely, Citizens Against High Rise Urban Towers citizensagaiiisthighriseurb antowers.com 366 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Holly Jarvis 9266o 11/7/16 Jason DiRocco 9266o 11/7/16 Curtis Last 92646 11/7/16 Barbara Richardson 9266o 11/7/16 Dong Duong 9266o 11/6/16 Lisa Winter 92662 11/6/16 Aliza Riba 9266o 11/6/16 Barry Steele 92625 11/6/16 Patricia Smith 9266o 11/6/16 Sandra Rados Rados 92663 11/6/16 Greg Bartz 9266o 11/6/16 marta aza 9266o 11/6/16 Laurie OBrien 9266o 11/6/16 patricia warmington 9266o 11/6/16 Lucy Cordova 9266o 11/6/16 Kerry Rhodes 9266o 11/6/16 Gordon Henry 9266o 11/6/16 Katherine Ladd Pearson 9266o 11/6/16 Ishmail Elahi 92657 11/6/16 Greg Strelzow 9266o 11/6/16 367 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Lee Clark 92657 11/5/16 Anita Clark 92657 11/5/16 Karen Larsen 92660 11/5/16 NINA BALIS 92660 11/5/16 Patti Lindsay 92663 11/5/16 James Crawford 9266o 11/5/16 Catherine Bartz 9266o 11/5/16 Leslie Thompson 92663 11/5/16 timothy chelf 9266o 11/5/16 Stephen Koffter 9266o 11/5/16 Lynne Koffler 9266o 11/5/16 Trudie Mann 92663 11/5/16 Carol Strauss 9266o 11/5/16 Jay Reed 92662 11/5/16 Neil Perlman 92625 11/5/16 Mischelle Perlman 92625 11/5/16 Lee Ann Cheadle 92657 11/5/16 Mildred Litke 9266o 11/5/16 Leslie Keane 92618 11/5/16 Mary Keane 9266o 11/4/16 368 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jennifer Perez 92663 11/4/16 Elizabeth Bradley 9266o 11/4/16 Connie Sacherman 9266o 11/4/16 Steve Land 9266o 11/4/16 Connie Sacherman 9266o 11/4/16 Barbara Shapiro 92657 11/4/16 Katie King 9266o 11/4/16 Dana Gabriel 92625 11/4/16 Gregory Gabriel 92625 11/4/16 Scott Perkins 92663 11/4/16 John Sherwood 92662 11/4/16 Wesley Hockinson 92625 11/4/16 Wesley Hockinson 92625 11/4/16 Nicholas Foster 9266o 11/4/16 Rachel Fowler 92627 11/4/16 Ignacio Maldini 92602 11/4/16 Chris Shepherdson 9266o 11/4/16 Robert Sullivan 92663 11/4/16 Philip Fowler 92627 11/4/16 kevin hart 92663 11/4/16 369 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Blake Zimmerman 92627 11/4/16 Brian Newquist 9266o 11/4/16 Cliff Shepherdson 92625 11/4/16 mike hollern 92625 11/4/16 John Lanni 92662 11/4/16 Reed Williams 9266o 11/4/16 Lori Williams 9266o 11/4/16 (Ms.) Willie Disbrow 92625 11/4/16 Shelby Gualter 92663 11/4/16 Cheryl Dobson 9266o 11/4/16 kim nicks 92625 11/4/16 Sheryl Sizelove 92657 11/4/16 Kimberly Coskinas 9266o 11/4/16 Jelle Brons 92657 11/4/16 Catherine Messina 92625 11/3/16 Franz Kallao 9266o 11/3/16 Griffin Hornby 9266o 11/3/16 Cindy Freyman 92657 11/3/16 JOHNNY DUONG 90201 11/3/16 Lucia Vincent 9266o 11/3/16 370 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. PAtricia Klingensmith 92663 11/3/16 Andrew Schmidt 92662 11/3/16 ROBERT UNDERWOOD 92625 11/3/16 Dominique Borchard 92669 11/3/16 Juli Cook 9266o 11/3/16 Esther Behnam 9266o 11/3/16 Sandra Weiner 92663 11/3/16 Henry Schielein 9266o 11/3/16 Luke Gardner 92625 11/3/16 Christine Laws 92625 11/3/16 Doro Brandenburg 92625 11/3/16 Dean Laws 92625 11/3/16 Kim Slick Slick 9266o 11/3/16 Maureen Slick 9266o 11/3/16 Marsha Jennings 9266o 11/3/16 Archie Hefner 9266o 11/3/16 Lynn Lorenz 92663 11/3/16 James Tyrrell 92663 11/3/16 Lynn Lorenz 92663 11/3/16 Mimi Hefner 9266o 11/3/16 371 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Olivia Abel 92657 11/3/16 Brett Davidson 92625 11/3/16 Susan Bubb 9266o 11/3/16 Barbara Evans 92662 11/3/16 Richard Lowery 9266o 11/3/16 Ann Washington 92627 11/3/16 Elizabeth Stake 9266o 11/3/16 Karen Jacoby 92625 11/3/16 Janice Moore 9266o 11/3/16 Kimberlee Belli 9266o 11/3/16 Andrew Leguay 9266o 11/3/16 andrew bartlett 9266o 11/3/16 Stacey Mckinnon 92627 11/3/16 Jeanne Johnson 92625 11/3/16 Tom Szulga 92663 11/3/16 Blake Davidson 92625 11/3/16 Grant Nutt 9266o 11/3/16 Lynn Friedman 9266o 11/3/16 Austin Ridge 9266o 11/3/16 Brian Leguay 9266o 11/3/16 372 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Matthew McKinnon 92663 11/3/16 Mary Lynn Turner 92663 11/3/16 Paul Fulton 9266o 11/3/16 Jamie page 92663 11/3/16 Maureen Halpert 92657 11/2/16 Andria Strelow 9266o 11/2/16 Jeanne Conwell 92625 11/2/16 Jennifer Flatten 92663 11/2/16 Ali Tadjedin 9266o 11/2/16 Kristen Schmitt 92625 11/2/16 Anna Rager 9266o 11/2/16 David Rager 9266o 11/2/16 Trina Andry 92657 11/2/16 Edward Miller 92662 11/2/16 bridget crook 92662 11/2/16 Fati Tadjedin 9266o 11/2/16 Michael Jarvis 9266o 11/2/16 Allie Rath 92629 11/2/16 Tamerra Jarvis 9266o 11/2/16 Suzanne SALZER 9266o 11/2/16 373 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Dinah Piggott 9266o 11/2/16 Vicki M. Baker 9266o 11/2/16 Alan Baron 9266o 11/2/16 Msryann Bogner 92625 11/2/16 Jana Johnson 92657 11/2/16 Ruby Wilbur 92627 11/2/16 Kelley OBryan 9266o 11/2/16 Pete Flath 92629 11/2/16 J Ridley 9266o 11/2/16 Lynne Halley 9266o 11/2/16 Valen Treadaway 9266o 11/1/16 Andrea Domoslai 9266o 11/1/16 Christine Powell 9266o 11/1/16 Geofrey Wickett 92663 11/1/16 Rebecca Hunt 9266o 11/1/16 Marie Clemons 92657 11/1/16 Jordan Straubel 92662 11/1/16 Michelle Straubel 92662 11/1/16 Michelle Straubel 92662 11/1/16 Annette Marin 90815 11/1/16 374 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Marilyn McCallum 9266o 11/1/16 Katharine Hanson 92663 11/1/16 michelle prescott 92657 11/1/16 Irene Barr 92625 11/1/16 Gwen Forquer 92625 11/1/16 maddy anderson 92663 11/1/16 Edward Dailey 9266o 11/1/16 Margaret Rumsfeld 92625 11/1/16 Beverly Purdum 92661 11/1/16 Daniel Bassett go623 11/1/16 Chinita Aleonar 9266o 11/1/16 Debbie Sidebotham 92657 11/1/16 Rob DeLorme 92627 11/1/16 Kay Heaney 9266o 11/1/16 Alice Ovanesian 92657 11/1/16 Polly Smith 92625 11/1/16 Mary Pat Lucas 92625 11/1/16 Zach Lucas 92625 11/1/16 Mace Rapsey 92625 11/1/16 Kallan Rapsey 92625 11/1/16 375 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Michael O'Riley 9266o 11/1/16 Jung Lee 92625 10/31/16 Dana Ritchie 9266o 10/31/16 Conner Kent 92663 10/31/16 Teresa Strombotne 9266o 10/31/16 Kim Flores 9266o 10/31/16 John Terpening 92663 10/31/16 Oren J. Chesebro 92625 10/31/16 Sally L. Chesebro 92625 10/31/16 Reagan Ritchie 9266o 10/31/16 jerome Muenchow 92661 10/31/16 Kathleen Kort 92663 10/31/16 Gilbert Kort 92663 10/31/16 Kathryn Kendall 9266o 10/31/16 Laurie Lowry 92661 10/31/16 Lawrence Weeshoff 92625 10/31/16 Ian Sender 9266o 10/31/16 Mary Robinson 92661 10/31/16 Morgan Hill 92627 10/31/16 mary wiehardt 92663 10/31/16 376 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Susana Tamayo 92663 10/31/16 Robert Anderson 92663 10/31/16 Susan Hawkins 92663 10/31/16 Jill Donahue 92663 10/31/16 CAthy Thomas 9266o 10/31/16 N Prasad 9266o 10/31/16 Pamela Hoffman 9266o 10/31/16 mark seres 92663 10/31/16 John Taylor 92625 10/31/16 Susan Leal 92663 10/31/16 Sandra Weiner 92663 10/31/16 Mary Buckingham 9266o 10/31/16 Alexandra Meyer 92625 10/31/16 Mary Willison 9266o 10/31/16 Gwen Fisher 9266o 10/30/16 BILL LYON 9266o 10/30/16 Kathy Purdy 9266o 10/30/16 James Kerrigan 9266o-3911 10/30/16 Randy Johnson 92625 10/30/16 Malcolm Schneer 92626 10/30/16 377 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Sheri Walling 92694 10/3o/i6 Carey Borland 92663 10/30/16 Jill Wiese 92663 10/30/16 Danielle Vieth 9266o 10/30/16 Brooke Sanita 9266o 10/30/16 mike munz 92625 10/30/16 Mary E Newman 92625 10/30/16 Dan Simkins 92663 10/30/16 Nicholas Wenger 9266o 10/30/16 Brahm Wenger 9266o 10/30/16 Lori Wenger 9266o 10/30/16 Carson Hill 92663 10/30/16 Eileen Caravello 92625 10/30/16 Michael Hoopis 9266o 10/30/16 Carol Lovely 9266o 10/30/16 Barbara Massey 9266o 10/30/16 Dana Anderson 92663 10/30/16 Dee Curry 92663 10/30/16 austin ahlgren 92663 10/30/16 Kristin Shay 92663 10/30/16 378 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Linda Vanderlip 92869 10/3o/i6 john & Leslie earnest 92625 10/30/16 Todd Godfrey 92625 10/30/16 Joanne Capetan 92625 10/30/16 Audra Wright 92662 10/30/16 Eddie Tung 9266o 10/29/16 JefF Schneidewind 9266o 10/29/16 Corinne Capiaux 9266o 10/29/16 Donna Holden 92663 10/29/16 Svetlana Zhuravkova 9266o 10/29/16 Linda Slaughter 9266o 10/29/16 Louise Lee 9266o 10/29/16 Jean Cole 9266o 10/29/16 Barbara Cole 9266o 10/29/16 Jay Stephenson 9266o 10/29/16 Lisa Brennan 9266o 10/29/16 John Bennett 92663 10/29/16 Troyce Cornell 92663 10/29/16 Ian MacGregor 92663 10/29/16 Joanne Kim 92625 10/29/16 379 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Patricia Silver 92661 10/29/16 Mike Bonds 92663 10/29/16 Lynn Kasper 92657 10/29/16 Regina Lesley 92663 10/29/16 Patricia Livingston 9266o 10/29/16 Sandra Stransky 92625 10/29/16 Maria Betz 92661 10/29/16 deborah macheski 9266o 10/29/16 Tricia Kerrigan 9266o 10/29/16 George Ann Dennis 92657 10/29/16 Florence Mcdonald 9266o 10/29/16 Viviane Schultz 9266o 10/29/16 Jonas Schultz 9266o 10/29/16 Sandy Collier 9266o 10/29/16 Phil Drachman 9266o 10/29/16 Anne Ewing 92662 10/29/16 Kenneth Dennis 92657 10/29/16 Ken Rawson 92663 10/29/16 Carmen Rawson 92663 10/29/16 Nancy Bauerlein 92657 10/29/16 380 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Daniel Crowley 9266o-7368 10/29/16 Mark Guillod 92625 10/29/16 charles bogner 92625 10/29/16 tristan aley 92663 10/29/16 Justin Mann 92625 10/29/16 Erin Addison 92625 10/29/16 Gordon Vanderslice 9266o 10/29/16 Helen Melmet 92626 10/29/16 Patsy Dowling 92625 10/29/16 Betty Kim 92625 10/29/16 Phil Butts 92625 10/29/16 Karen Ved 92625 10/29/16 Geoff Wiegman 92625 10/29/16 Jennie Jung 92625 10/29/16 Nancy Alai 92625 10/29/16 Clint Cronkite 92625 10/29/16 Marisa Peasley 92625 10/29/16 Nina Diamant 92625 10/29/16 Steve Adam 92625 10/29/16 Angela Fong 92625 10/29/16 381 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Linda Cronkite 92625 10/29/16 Eric Jung 92625 10/29/16 Ca Jung 92625 10/29/16 Linda Buzzard 92625 10/29/16 Elizabeth Malone 92663 10/29/16 Sima Moayed 92656 10/28/16 carolyn goodson 92657 10/28/16 Grant Goodson 92657 10/28/16 Mildred Litke 9266o 10/28/16 E v Di Massa 9266o 10/28/16 Karen Mancino 9266o 10/28/16 Nancy Lenney 9266o 10/28/16 Monica Burke 92625 10/28/16 Virginia Tadjalli 9266o 10/28/16 Ellen Rieder 92657 10/28/16 Emily Fujita 92657 10/28/16 Patti Phillips 92661 10/28/16 Thao Stein 92657 10/28/16 Julie fujita 92657 10/28/16 M Tattoli 92657 10/28/16 382 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. M Tattoli 92657 10/28/16 Nedda Mitchell 92657 10/28/16 Sandra Banker 92662 10/28/16 Steve Wallin 92657 10/28/16 T om Baker 92663 10/28/16 Gerald H. Fitch 9266o 10/28/16 Sandra Wareing 9266o 10/28/16 Mary Ann Fitch 9266o 10/28/16 Tina Wayt 92662 10/28/16 Carrie Berg 92663 10/28/16 Alana Schmidt 92663 10/28/16 Jason Schmidt 92663 10/28/16 Carole Johnson 9266o 10/28/16 Marjorie Ringwalt 92625 10/28/16 Heather Shields 9266o 10/28/16 Heather Shields 9266o 10/28/16 Scott harvey 92657 10/28/16 Jo Carol Hunter 9266o 10/28/16 Shireen Dastur 92662 10/28/16 Jamshed Dastur 92662 10/28/16 383 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. John Dunham 9266o 10/28/16 Alyson Rowden 92662 10/28/16 CARLA WARD 92625 10/28/16 Casey Lauren 92662 10/28/16 Nate lott 92663 10/28/16 Thomas Crosson 92662-____ 10/28/16 Thomas Davies 9266o 10/28/16 Ron Pasik 9266o 10/28/16 Rodica lova 92663 10/28/16 Karen Buder 92663 10/28/16 Brenda Clauss 9266o 10/28/16 Randy Slaughter 9266o 10/28/16 David Finch 92663 10/28/16 Gloria Smith 92662 10/28/16 Arlene Rose 92662 10/28/16 David Rose 92662 10/28/16 Rhonda Talpash 92662 10/28/16 Pamela Jacobs 92661 10/28/16 Mike Hamrock 9266o 10/28/16 Gwen Cruttenden 92662 10/28/16 384 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jennifer Day 92662 10/28/16 Stanley Sackler 9266o 10/27/16 Gloria Sullivan 92625 10/27/16 Larry Selwitz 92662 10/27/16 Sondra Valentine 9266o 10/27/16 Doolittle Debi 92625 10/27/16 mike singh 9266o 10/27/16 Shuling Raheja 9266o 10/27/16 Katherine Choate 92663 10/27/16 John Tyson 9266o 10/27/16 Stacy Ownbey 9266o 10/27/16 Marc Buccheri 9266o 10/27/16 Lisa Scorziell 92661 10/27/16 Joseph Greenleaf 92661 10/27/16 Martin Greenberg 92662 10/27/16 Laura Gale 92662 10/27/16 Linda Lawler 92662 10/27/16 Yogi Bear 92661 10/27/16 char peterson 92661 10/27/16 Stanley Levine 9266o 10/27/16 385 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Lois Levine 9266o 10/27/16 Tony Miller 92658 10/27/16 Jan Harzan 9266o 10/27/16 Vee Fath 92663 10/27/16 Vernona Kreitz 92663 10/27/16 Constance Ruhe 92625 10/27/16 Larry Lerner 9266o 10/27/16 Eric Curtis 9266o 10/27/16 Jodie Ricketts 92663 10/27/16 Doru Avram 92663 10/27/16 Karen Stockman 92657 10/27/16 Bridget Gallagher 9266o 10/27/16 David Miller 9266o 10/27/16 Kim Andrews 9266o 10/27/16 miguel link 92663 10/27/16 John Vombaur 92832 10/27/16 Antonette Koch 9266o 10/27/16 Susan Sinclair 9266o 10/27/16 Dana White 9266o 10/27/16 Dorothea Perrin 9266o 10/27/16 386 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Donna Kidde 92625 10/27/16 John Kidde 92625 10/27/16 nancy McNash 9266o 10/27/16 Steve McNash 9266o 10/27/16 Gary Lott 92663 10/27/16 James Salter 92663 10/27/16 Diane Kelly 92663 10/27/16 Kristina Coombe 9266o 10/27/16 gil may 9266o 10/27/16 Mari Lou Fitzgerald 9266o 10/27/16 Mary Madison 92662 10/27/16 James Madison 92662 10/27/16 Marty Vaughan 92663 10/27/16 william power 92657 10/27/16 Chad Smith 92663 10/27/16 sheryl brewer 92625 10/27/16 Judith Muncy 9266o 10/27/16 Douglas Muncy 9266o 10/27/16 Marcy Kim 92625 10/27/16 Ron Siegel 92657 10/27/16 387 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. James Bell 9266o 10/27/16 Darlene Bell 9266o 10/27/16 Heidi Siegel 92657 10/27/16 Debbie Chao 92663 10/27/16 Barry Cole 9266o-4250 10/27/16 Meg O'Maley 9266o 10/27/16 patrick solomonian 92625 10/27/16 Michael Skibba 9266o 10/27/16 Jo Carol Hunter 9266o 10/27/16 Sharon Glickman 9266o 10/27/16 Kimberly Wells 92625 10/27/16 Ralph Smith 92625 10/27/16 pam howard 92625 10/27/16 Sam Khorram 9266o 10/27/16 Mary Whitehill 92625 10/27/16 Terry Bright 92625 10/27/16 Roger Wang 92657 10/27/16 Dina Mead 92625 10/27/16 Linda Roberts 92625 10/27/16 Laura Feddema 9266o 10/27/16 388 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jennifer Peterson 9266o 10/27/16 Cliff A tkinson 92663 10/27/16 Susan Dow 9266o 10/27/16 Anne Davis 92625 10/27/16 Karen Kimball 92663 10/27/16 Alice Flynn 9266o 10/27/16 Mary Fazio 92657 10/27/16 Becky Peterson 9266o 10/27/16 Virginia Sands 92662 10/27/16 Diana Dang 92625 10/27/16 Joanne Diefenbach 9266o 10/27/16 Bonnie Scidmore 92625 10/27/16 Don & Judy Cole 92663 10/27/16 victoria Blair 9266o 10/26/16 Brenda Mccroskey 92625 10/26/16 Annette Harzan 9266o 10/26/16 Colleen Premer 9266o 10/26/16 Susan Duby 92625 10/26/16 Mary Ann Bruce 9266o 10/26/16 Why did your flier and video show a 100 story tower? This is mis- 389 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Dinamarie Stefani 92625 10/26/16 Janet DiChiro 92625 10/26/16 Mary Ruck 9266o 10/26/16 Christine Chai 92657 10/26/16 mark hilbert 92657 10/26/16 Michele Murphy 92625 10/26/16 Sheryl Snow 92663 10/26/16 Pauline Lemmon 92625 10/26/16 Marc Atkin 9266o 10/26/16 DAVID HENRY 9266o 10/26/16 Margaret Romberg 9266o 10/26/16 Steve Arrigo 9266o 10/26/16 Jennifer wilde 92625 10/26/16 Dewayne Kirksey 92625 10/26/16 Jim Whistler 92625 10/26/16 Remie Whistler 92625 10/26/16 Kathy Green 92663 10/26/16 Michelle Brown 9266o 10/26/16 Mike Vercruse 9266o 10/26/16 Michelle Brown 9266o 10/26/16 390 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Rosemary Hezlep 92625 10/26/16 Kristin Mains 9266o 10/26/16 Blake Brown 9266o 10/26/16 Phil Hayes 9266o 10/26/16 John Ellis 9266o 10/26/16 Robin Ellis 9266o 10/26/16 Paul DeRidder 92663 10/26/16 Barbara Dickey 92657 10/26/16 Barbara Dickey 92657 10/26/16 Barbara Dickey 92657 10/26/16 Wayne redfearn 9266o 10/26/16 Marykay Shelton 92657 10/26/16 Cami Young 9266o 10/26/16 Bernadette Giel 9266o 10/26/16 Jan Deters 9266o 10/26/16 Jim Sutter 9266o 10/26/16 Deanne Allred 9266o 10/26/16 Anita Eaton 9266o 10/26/16 Yvonne Kahlen 92663 10/26/16 dorothy alguire 9266o 10/26/16 391 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. steve Livingston 9266o 10/26/16 Paul Christ 9266o 10/26/16 Sharon Rahimi 9266o 10/26/16 Larry Mathena 92661 10/26/16 Derek Torley 92625 10/26/16 Lore Waechter 92625 10/26/16 sau tran 9266o 10/26/16 tri le 9266o 10/26/16 tri le 9266o 10/26/16 Jason Gilboa 92657 10/26/16 Chris Karjala 92625 10/26/16 Ruth Westphal 9266o 10/26/16 Barbara Geraghty 9266o 10/26/16 Brian Bilder 92663 10/26/16 Henry Ode 92663 10/26/16 Henry Ode 92663 10/26/16 Gary Nishanian 9266o 10/26/16 Scott DeFreitas 92663 10/26/16 Nicole Nishanian 9266o 10/26/16 Thomas Davin 9266o 10/26/16 392 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jenieve Davenport 92658 10/26/16 Sharon Speights 92663 10/26/16 Carol Lovely 9266o 10/26/16 Thai Tran 92663 10/26/16 Joann Kenton 92625 10/26/16 William Wiles 9266o 10/26/16 Susan Hoffman 92662 10/26/16 Lisa Burnand 9266o 10/26/16 Julie Lowery 9266o 10/26/16 Gary Austin 9266o 10/26/16 Laura sherlock 9266o 10/26/16 Patricia Wright 92625 10/26/16 ALINE MONIN- DOREMUS 92663 10/26/16 Lynne george 9266o 10/26/16 Susan White 9266o 10/26/16 Renee Childs 9266o 10/26/16 Clive Soden 92625 10/26/16 Raman Tejwani 9266o 10/26/16 Lisa hupp 9266o 10/26/16 Oksana Fink 9266o 10/26/16 393 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Natalie Hill 92657 10/26/16 Trejsi DeGuire 92625 10/26/16 Harold Meany 92625 10/26/16 Charlene Prager 92625 10/26/16 John Chiu 9266o 10/26/16 Paul Merino 9266o 10/26/16 Edward Thorp 9266o 10/26/16 Ed Geraghty 9266o 10/26/16 Deborah Myers 9266o 10/26/16 Carol Martini 9266o 10/26/16 shari ciko 92625 10/26/16 Margaret Torley 92625 10/26/16 Jane Sungaila 9266o 10/26/16 Nickole Jaquess 9266o 10/26/16 Patricia Westerman 9266o 10/26/16 MORTEZA KHALILI 92657 10/26/16 MORTEZA KHALILI 92657 10/26/16 Sherry Haber 9266o 10/26/16 David Mddlemas 9266o 10/26/16 Lynn brown 9266o 10/26/16 394 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Marcheta Burlingham 92625 10/26/16 Sorel Reisman 92663 10/26/16 Francis Burlingham 92625 10/26/16 Gail Reisman 92663 10/26/16 Cheryl Karg 92625 10/26/16 Lise StJohn 9266o 10/26/16 LYNNE ANTHONY CAMPBELL 92625 10/26/16 Carl Mumm 92663 10/26/16 Shirley Celtik 92625 10/26/16 Kevin Contreras 9266o 10/26/16 Herbert W Karg 92625 10/26/16 Helga Meyer 9266o 10/26/16 Diane Osgood 9266o 10/26/16 Margery Davidson 9266o 10/26/16 George Hill 9266o 10/26/16 Donna Hill 9266o 10/26/16 susanne Lee 92625 10/26/16 Bill Cope 9266o 10/26/16 Lisa Cope 9266o 10/26/16 Ruth Clemence 9266o 10/26/16 395 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. charles harvey 92625 10/26/16 Julie Gaumond 92625 10/26/16 ryan long 92663 10/26/16 Caroline Patterson 92625 10/26/16 Michael Gaumond 92625 10/26/16 marc ingram 92663 10/26/16 Deborah Dorf 92625 10/26/16 gerald Serra 9266o 10/26/16 eileen Serra 9266o 10/26/16 Karen Carboni 9266o 10/26/16 Val Riley 92663 10/26/16 dean Wilson 9266o 10/26/16 Salli H 9266o 10/26/16 Lisa Stuard 92625 10/26/16 LaDonna Kienitz 9266o 10/26/16 Devin Murtaugh 9266o 10/26/16 Moira Auld 9266o 10/26/16 Stu schreiberg 92625 10/26/16 Robyn Ashton 9266o 10/26/16 Dene Stratton 92625 10/26/16 396 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jane Stratton 92625 10/26/16 Jeanne kirrane 92625 10/26/16 william kirrane 92625 10/26/16 Lorene Delany -Ullman 9266o 10/26/16 Kent Greeley 92663 10/26/16 Carolyn Beaver 92625 10/26/16 Bianca Mossman 9266o 10/26/16 Mervin Goldstein 92657 10/26/16 Meredith Davin 9266o 10/26/16 David Macchiarola 9266o 10/25/16 Gail Ihle 9266o 10/25/16 John Stillman 92625 10/25/16 Neil Harvey 92625 10/25/16 Laurie Lee 92677 10/25/16 Christopher Lal 9266o 10/25/16 Mary Jane Rumbley 9266o 10/25/16 Natalie Vogt 9266o 10/25/16 zuleika marino 9266o 10/25/16 zuleika marino 9266o 10/25/16 Barbi Townsend 9266o 10/25/16 397 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Karima Hunter 92625 10/25/16 Milane Hauser 92663 10/25/16 Craig Ima 9266o 10/25/16 George Hauser 92663 10/25/16 Cynthia C. Siebel 92662 10/25/16 Richard Sungaila 9266o 10/25/16 karisa botch 9266o 10/25/16 Anne Yahn 9266o 10/25/16 Mark Finkelstein 92625 10/25/16 Elizabeth Yost 9266o 10/25/16 Timothy Hodges 9266o 10/25/16 Peter Neely 9266o 10/25/16 Jackie Pirkle 92662 10/25/16 Jackie Pirkle 92662 10/25/16 Edna Cole 9266o 10/25/16 G Edmund Siebel Jr 92662 10/25/16 Arnold Reznick 92625 10/25/16 Chip Long 9266o 10/25/16 MJ Harris 92626 10/25/16 Pam Shean 9266o 10/25/16 398 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Amy Webb 92670 10/25/16 April Straub 92691 10/25/16 Jennifer Lefebvre 9266o 10/25/16 Leanne Swanson 92627 10/25/16 Susan Chen 9266o 10/25/16 James Andre 9266o 10/25/16 Laura Forbes 9266o 10/25/16 Michelle Andre 9266o 10/25/16 Stephanie Hopkins 92627 10/25/16 Erik Ingersoll 92663 10/25/16 penny naughton 9266o 10/25/16 Rick Greaney 92663 10/25/16 BETTY HITTENBERGER 9266o 10/25/16 Patricia Naruse 9266o 10/25/16 Leslie Van Dalsem 9266o 10/25/16 ROLF UITZETTER 92663 10/25/16 Nat Harty 92625 10/25/16 James Hirsen 9266o 10/25/16 Nickole Jaquess 9266o 10/25/16 Carolyn Moody 9266o 10/25/16 399 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. ROBERT F FITZGERALD 9266o 10/25/16 Jamie Marsh 9266o 10/25/16 Larry Marsh 9266o 10/25/16 Warren Lefebvre 9266o 10/25/16 Carol Goldstein 92657 10/25/16 marie Lefebvre 9266o 10/25/16 jan catlin 9266o 10/25/16 Michael Smith 92625 10/25/16 James Teng 9266o 10/25/16 Jillian Griffin 9266o 10/25/16 janet stoneman 92625 10/25/16 Maria Lara diaz 9266o 10/25/16 shelly petrilli 9266o 10/25/16 Diane Lyons 9266o 10/25/16 Virginia Wright 9266o 10/25/16 Michelle Nenova 92625 10/25/16 Sunny Beeker 92627 10/25/16 Sini Corbin 92663 10/25/16 Barbara Hood 92625 10/25/16 Doug and Joyce Edlund Edlund 92625 400 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Tom Pham 92657 10/25/16 Jerry Hood 92625 10/25/16 Merrie Weinstock 9266o 10/25/16 Hanh Pham 92657 10/25/16 James Vogt 9266o 10/25/16 sandy rettig 9266o 10/25/16 Michael Reed 9266o 10/25/16 Babette Kelly 9266o 10/25/16 Tim Covert 9266o 10/25/16 Scott Lee 92625 10/25/16 sharon nevins 92625 10/25/16 Kenneth Herold 92662 10/25/16 David Gambill 92657 10/25/16 Rosemarie Herold 92662 10/25/16 Kathryn White 92662 10/25/16 Lawrence H Davidson 9266o 10/25/16 Mark Tabbert 9266o 10/25/16 Patricia Berry 9266o 10/25/16 Allen Berry 9266o 10/25/16 marsha kendall 9266o 10/25/16 401 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Paul Specterman 9266o-6045 10/25/16 James Ryan 92657 10/25/16 Janet Roer 9266o 10/25/16 Janet Roer 9266o 10/25/16 Joshua Baer 9266o 10/25/16 Barry Chaitin 92625 10/25/16 Robert Lyons 9266o 10/25/16 Kathleen Miller 9266o 10/25/16 karol Wilson 9266o 10/25/16 Fenton Carey 9266o 10/25/16 Charyl Butterworth 92662 10/25/16 Andrew Wobbe 9266o 10/25/16 Tina Buss 92625 10/25/16 suresh khemlani 9266o 10/25/16 Tony Manos 9266o 10/25/16 Kelly Randall 92663 10/25/16 Glenn Braunstein 9266o 10/25/16 Judith Witt 92662 10/25/16 Helen Dinkins 9266o 10/25/16 Tim Fier 9266o 10/25/16 402 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. susanne mortensen 9266o 10/25/16 William Buckley 9266o 10/25/16 Anne Ima 9266o 10/25/16 Andrew Thompson 92625 10/25/16 bessie meily 92661 10/25/16 Eric Nowlin 92625 10/25/16 Katherine Tucker 92625 10/25/16 donald stoughton 92625 10/25/16 Ed Ryer 92657 10/25/16 dennis riff 92651 10/25/16 doris stoughton 92625 10/25/16 Matthew James Murphy 92625-1413 10/25/16 Teri WINTON 92625 10/25/16 gait riff 92651 10/25/16 Juliet Hwang 9266o 10/25/16 Jamie Bewernitz 92657 10/25/16 William Warren 92625 10/25/16 Jeri Hayes 92662 10/25/16 Lorraine Robinson Lorraine 9266o 10/25/16 Richard Burns 92625 10/25/16 403 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Kim Akasaki 92683 10/25/16 James Tucler 92625 10/25/16 Pamela Milner 9266o 10/25/16 Karen Blakely 9266o 10/25/16 Linda horton 92625 10/25/16 Robert Bielen 92657 10/25/16 Kurt Kost 9266o 10/25/16 Kate Hardwick 92658 10/25/16 Jean DiCostanzo 92677 10/25/16 Floranne Dunning 92625 10/25/16 Cynthia Smith 92625 10/25/16 Susan Jacobs 9266o 10/25/16 John Overdevest 92625 10/25/16 Goron Vanderslice 9266o 10/25/16 Michael Jacobs 9266o 10/25/16 Marsha Witucki 9266o 10/25/16 Sarah Hall 92627 10/25/16 Molly Calder 9266o 10/25/16 Molly Davin 9266o 10/25/16 Robert Broaddus 92625 10/25/16 404 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Charles Roum Jr. 9266o 10/25/16 Goldie Daruty 9266o 10/25/16 Kristina Coombe 9266o 10/25/16 amy Allred 92625 10/25/16 Joeph Daruty 9266o 10/25/16 Robert McLean 92625 10/25/16 Ronald Michelson 92625 10/25/16 Scott Pearson 9266o 10/25/16 Mary Michelson 92625 10/25/16 Ryan Farnsworth 9266o 10/25/16 Richard Tester 92625 10/25/16 Simone Sims 92663 10/25/16 John & Cathy MacDonald 92625 10/25/16 todd crone 9266o 10/25/16 alexandra omahana 9266o 10/25/16 Nyo Aye 9266o 10/25/16 Dwight Ryan 9266o 10/25/16 Christine Broaddus 92625 10/25/16 Cedric Fields 92625 10/25/16 James Clarke 9266o 10/25/16 405 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Cherrie Covington 92663 10/25/16 Karen Tipton 92625 10/25/16 susan Earlabaugh 9266o 10/25/16 Alfred Mayer 92625 10/25/16 Ron Covington 92663 10/25/16 Patsy Tipton 92625 10/25/16 John Wahlen 92625 10/25/16 Cynthia Bright 9266o 10/25/16 Sarah Pascoe 92625 10/25/16 kristen petros 92663 10/25/16 Ryan Sierra 92625 10/25/16 Deborah Polsinelli 92625 10/25/16 Robert Thompson 92625 10/25/16 Vicki Merrill 92625 10/25/16 Richard Eimers 9266o 10/25/16 Gordon Beach 9266o 10/25/16 Carolee Kondra 92663 10/25/16 Gail Kalscheur 9266o 10/25/16 Tracy Specter 9266o 10/25/16 Elias Ghanem 92630 10/25/16 406 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Mariko Plowman 92675 10/25/16 Jim Casey 92625 10/25/16 Kati Tormanen 92663 10/25/16 Ron White 92663 10/25/16 John Barneson 92625 10/25/16 Betty SACKLER 9266o 10/25/16 dale snyder 9266o 10/25/16 Joyce snyder 9266o 10/25/16 Robert Puich 9266o 10/25/16 Andrew Betz 9266o 10/25/16 Sundra Sanchez 92625 10/25/16 Pete & Sabra Bordas 9266o 10/25/16 Lee olsen 92662 10/25/16 Michael Mudd 9266o 10/25/16 Marianne Trigg 9266o 10/25/16 Elizabeth Gribben 9266o 10/25/16 richard simon 9266o 10/25/16 katherine simon 9266o 10/25/16 Colin Krawitz 92657 10/25/16 Robert Knapp 92625 10/25/16 407 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Martha Beauchamp 9266o 10/25/16 Diane Mondini 92662 10/25/16 Mark Eubanks 9266o 10/25/16 joseph fischella 92663 10/25/16 Robyn Zieper 92657 10/25/16 susan prostor 92662 10/25/16 Karol Hatch 9266o 10/25/16 Susan Gray 92663 10/24/16 Lorraine Bernardy 92663 10/24/16 Marilyn Money 9266o 10/24/16 Nancy Helm 92663 10/24/16 Karye Norsworthy 92661 10/24/16 SHERYL RADOS MANOS 9266o 10/24/16 Richard Bennett 9266o 10/24/16 Joyce Nelson 92663 10/24/16 Susan Spiritus 92657 10/24/16 Kimberly Riker 9266o 10/24/16 Sloane Keane 92625 10/24/16 Michael Brey 92663 10/24/16 Rhonda V 92663 10/24/16 408 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Debra Miller 92662 10/24/16 Eve Lowey 93660 10/23/16 Erin Hatch 9266o 10/23/16 Mary Shackleton 92660 10/23/16 carole king 92625 10/23/16 Deborah Lucas 9266o 10/23/16 Chris Collie 9266o 10/23/16 Carolyn MacBeth 9266o 10/23/16 Stephen Whittington 9266o 10/23/16 Mildred Litke 9266o 10/23/16 Thomas Price 92663 10/23/16 Elena Simgletary 9266o 10/23/16 Desiree Gamble 92660 10/23/16 Cindy Valdes 9266o 10/23/16 Greg Peters 9266o 10/23/16 Stephanie Simpson 9266o 10/22/16 Meera Krishnan 9266o 10/22/16 Susan Machin 92657 10/22/16 Jim Hart 92625 10/22/16 Susan Hart 92625 10/22/16 409 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Rick Allen 9266o 10/22/16 David Jervis 92625 10/22/16 Kristine Hoffman 92625 10/22/16 Cole Schisler 9266o 10/22/16 Jonathan Weiner 92663 10/22/16 Nancy Solomon 9266o 10/22/16 Angela Glaser 92662 10/22/16 Michele Leal 92663 10/21/16 Douglas Hauser 9266o 10/21/16 Jayne braga 92657 10/21/16 denise nicks 9266o 10/21/16 Brent Clem 92625 10/21/16 David Fastiggi 92663 10/21/16 Halli Heston 9266o 10/21/16 Gina Marler 92627 10/21/16 James Crawford 9266o 10/21/16 Ramsey Kukalis 92661 10/21/16 Richard Heston 9266o 10/21/16 BERNADETTE MULVENNA 92627 10/21/16 Donald Bassler 92663 10/21/16 410 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Steve Leonard 9266o 10/21/16 Beverley Jones 92625 10/21/16 Scott Weisgerber 92694 10/21/16 M Woodward 9266o 10/20/16 Stephanie Sandoz 92657 10/20/16 Mildred Litke 9266o 10/20/16 Carol Strauss 9266o 10/20/16 Lynne Halley 9266o 10/20/16 Keri Miller 92657 10/20/16 Brian Leyba 92648 10/20/16 Candace House 98342 10/20/16 Carol Saiz 92657 10/20/16 Brittney Bastedo 9266o 10/20/16 Lisa Winter 92662 10/20/16 Diane Weinsheimer 92663 10/20/16 Carol Rogers 9266o 10/20/16 Margaret Romberg 9266o 10/20/16 ana long 9266o 10/19/16 Jennifer Leeper 92663 1o/19/16 Mindy Ensign 9266o 10/19/16 411 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Erin Peacock 92657 10/ig/16 Doug Robb 9266o 1o/19/16 Joy Heilig 92625 10/19/i6 Susan Skinner 9266o lo/19/16 Helena Schneider 92625 1o/19/16 Ron Hazlewood 9266o 1o/19/16 anne kinney 92661 1o/19/16 Kevin Hyder 9266o 10/19/i6 Aleida Oehlke 92657 10/1g/16 Michael Janicin 9266o 1o/19/16 Rebecca Reutter 92625 1o/19/16 Mildred Litke 9266o 1o/19/16 jillian bedrosian 9266o 1o/19/16 Blake Allred 9266o 1o/19/16 Jeanne Conwell 92625 1o/19/16 Judy Leeper 92663 1o/19/16 Alan Freeman 9266o 1o/19/16 Sarah Jay 9266o 1o/19/16 Moe Mirali 9266o 1o/18/16 timothy chelf 9266o 1o/18/16 412 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Cathleen Joseph 92659 10/18/16 Perry Anthony 92663 10/18/16 Laura Dunn 92661 10/18/16 Aidan Raney 92660 10/18/16 Nikki Leeper 92625 10/18/16 Christy Lea 9266o 10/18/16 Stephen Hogan 9266o 10/18/16 Mark Adams 9266o 10/18/16 Maureen Khamsi 92625 10/18/16 Lela Briggs 92627 10/18/16 Jessica Tizon 92663 10/18/16 pamela hauber 9266o 10/18/16 Ike Suri 9266o 10/18/16 Michelle Clark 92663 10/18/16 Diana Siciliano 9266o 10/18/16 Frank Muscatello 92663 10/18/16 Georgina Laube 92657 10/18/16 Helene Hardin 92707 10/18/16 Jill Byers 92662 10/18/16 Alaina Cerbasi 92663 10/18/16 413 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Barbara Laube 92657 10/18/16 RICHELLE Moodie 9266o 10/18/16 Steven Gentile 92663 10/18/16 Susan Gray 92663 10/18/16 Mary Pat Hastings 9266o 10/18/16 Bonnie Gainer 92657 10/18/16 Bahram Mirhashemi 92657 10/18/16 Kathy Schurkman 92860 10/18/16 Christina Page 9266o 10/17/16 Elizabeth Spain 92625 10/17/16 Cari Zylstra 9266o 10/17/16 Sarah Rauth 9266o 10/17/16 Tonia Zev 9266o 10/17/16 Mona Ellini 92612 10/17/16 Karen Hinton 9266o 10/17/16 Jazz Bryant 91702 10/17/16 Allen Motakef 92657 10/17/16 William Rauth 92657 10/17/16 Matt Gray 9266o 10/17/16 Joan Hoelscher 9266o 10/17/16 414 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Tina Wayt 92662 10/17/16 Jeff Mayhew 9266o 10/17/16 Richard Knight 92663 10/17/16 Dorothy Stephens 9266o 10/17/16 ALAN LEMMERMAN 92626 10/17/16 Sue Branica 92625 10/17/16 Kim Brennan 9266o 10/17/16 Leslie Ann Harty 9266o 10/17/16 Dana Farkas 92662 10/17/16 Deanna Hanour 92625 10/17/16 Jessica Mae Jennings 9266o 10/17/16 Lindsay Bibb 9266o 10/17/16 Wendy Wuitschick 9266o 10/16/16 Martha Beauchamp 9266o 10/16/16 marjorie cooling 9266o 10/16/16 Matthew Cute 9266o 10/16/16 Kathy Burt 9266o 10/16/16 Phil Drachman 9266o 10/16/16 Mary Fallon 9266o 10/16/16 Tonya Johnstone 92625 10/16/16 415 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Karen Larsen 9266o 10/16/16 Susan MacDonald 9266o 10/16/16 nabil shehade 92657 10/16/16 Kathleen O'Connor 92663 10/16/16 Heidi Perreault 92661 10/15/16 Ramsey Kukalis 92661 10/15/16 Tracy Arnold 9266o 10/15/16 Harvey Roer 9266o 10/15/16 Cory Flynn 92663 10/15/16 mackenzie reay 92625 10/15/16 Don Larsen 9266o 10/15/16 Brad Cohen 92657 10/15/16 Jeff Cestra 9266o 10/15/16 Tonya Johnstone 92625 10/15/16 Barbara Lawler 92662 10/15/16 Kevin Grit 92647 10/14/16 Linda Bertone 92663 10/14/16 Kaycee Fortanasce 92625 10/14/16 Marcia Mohler 9266o 10/14/16 Kent Russell 92625 10/14/16 416 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Ruby Hayes 9266o 10/14/16 Debra Yao 92627 10/14/16 Susana Hegstrom 9266o 10/13/16 Chris Lal 92627 10/13/16 Rachel Ashton 9266o 10/13/16 Carlos Laube 10/13/16 robert Walker 9266o 10/13/16 Brenda Wilfert 92663 10/13/16 peggy Marotta 92662 10/13/16 Toni Wilkey 9266o 10/13/16 Nicholas Beyrooty 9266o 10/13/16 JefF Williams 92663 10/13/16 Trevor Elste 92602 10/13/16 Maureen Cotton 92663 10/13/16 Peter Belden 92663 10/12/16 Julie Peterson 10/12/16 amanda schwer 92663 10/12/16 Mark Eubanks 9266o 10/12/16 Lauren Maddox 92663 10/12/16 Danah Stimpson 9266o 10/12/16 417 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Lisa Rhodes 92663 10/12/16 Clifford Wendt 9266o 10/12/16 Floriana Anhood 9266o 10/12/16 Seychelle Cannes 10/12/16 Kathy Youngman 9266o 10/12/16 Devon Tucker 92625 10/12/16 Sharon Bell 9266o 10/12/16 Denise Howell 92663 10/11/16 Alessandra Shea 92629 10/11/16 Susan Kopicki 92663 10/11/16 Yelena Vakulenko 9266o 10/11/16 Kimberly Ramser 9266o 10/11/16 Tyler Schwartz 9266o 10/11/16 Kristen Sonntag 9266o 10/11/16 John Hamilton 9266o 10/11/16 Diane Dales 92657 10/11/16 Monique Selwltz 92662 10/11/16 Amy Chen 92657 10/11/16 Marc DiDomenico 92663 10/11/16 Jordan Blanchfield 9266o 10/11/16 418 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Laurie Beverage 92663 1o/11/16 Charmaine Rosa 92627 1o/11/16 ralph dillon 92625 1o/11/16 Leslie Thompson 92663 1o/11/16 Boyd Bilbo 9266o 1o/11/16 Robin Fazekas 9266o 1o/11/16 Janet Kerber Roberts 92657 1o/11/16 Sam Wang 9266o 1o/11/16 Lindley Overmyer 92663 1o/11/16 Arlene Kuykendall 92627 10/10/i6 Robert Corbin 92663 1o/1o/16 Joan McCauley 1o/1o/16 Nancy Alston 9266o lo/1o/16 Thomas Hess 9266o 1o/1o/16 Gayle Clark 92625 10/1o/16 Diana Lugo 92663 10/1o/16 Francis Rhie 9266o 1o/1o/16 Davida Anderson 92663 10/so/16 kerri hirsch 9266o 10/1o/16 Joanna Robertson 92663 10/1o/16 419 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Kathryn Anderson 92627 10/so/i6 Carol Mason 92663 1o/1o/16 Susan Dvorak 92660 10/10/16 Susan Burns 92663 10/10/16 Kristina Olah 1o/1o/16 JennifFer Manavi 92663 1o/1o/16 Nancy VanDalsem 92663 10/10/16 Dean Hayward 92663 10/so/16 Darci THARP 92663 10/10/16 Stephen Fobes 92663 10/10/i6 Xavier Trevino 92663 1o/1o/16 Tom Baker 92663 10/10/16 Lu Baker 10/10/16 Danielle Rigali 92657 10/10/16 Carlos Polit 92660 1o/1o/16 Joseph Stuart 9266o 10/10/16 Michael Hoopis 9266o 10/10/16 Steven Gamble 9266o 10/so/16 Phil Hamilton 9266o 1o/1o/16 tracy rath 92663 10/10/16 420 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Sophie Cripe 9266o 10/io/i6 JefFrey Marheine 92657 10/10/16 Marsha Perluss 92627 1o/1o/16 Tomidan Jordan 10/so/16 carolyn acufF 92657 1o/1o/16 Kimberly Jameson 92663 10/1o/16 Louis Narens 92663 1o/1o/16 Kimberly Jameson 92663 10/so/16 Claire Smith 92663 10/10/i6 Danielle Dino 92663 10/10/16 Jennifer Ward 1o/1o/16 Juan Zaragoza 92663 10/1o/16 Grace Hobbs 9266o lo/1o/16 Fred Engelhard 92627 1o/1o/16 jake melham 9266o 10/1o/16 Kerstin Woods 9266o 10/1o/16 Martha Glasgow 92663 10/1o/16 Ross Shanberg 10/so/16 Shawn Spears 10/1o/16 Tyler Woods 10/1o/16 421 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jeanne Fobes 10/10/16 Ruthie Lonnes 92663 10/1o/16 Christophe Beyrooty 9266o 1o/1o/16 Karen Carlson 92625 10/1o/16 Patti ODesky 92663 1o/1o/16 Karen Guiney 92663 10/1o/16 Sam Silverman 10/1o/16 Laura Williams 9266o 10/so/16 Brian Kokski 92663 10/10/i6 martine thomas-phillips 92663 10/10/16 Brian Mull 10/1o/16 Evelyn Romanofsky 92663 10/g/16 Katerina Kurteeva 10/g/16 Sherry Pollack 92625 10/g/16 Sharon Hance 92663 10/g/16 Adam Miller 92663 10/g/16 Terri Mendoza 92627 10/g/16 Cait Maher 92627 10/g/16 Valerie Danzig 10/g/16 Megan Cournyer 9266o 10/g/16 422 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Jaimie Sellers 92663 10/g/16 Cathy Carlson 9266o 10/g/16 Mary Ker 92662 10/g/16 Renee Higheagle 9266o 10/g/16 Sabra Ackerman 92625 10/g/16 Steven Land 9266o 10/g/16 Marci Franklin 9266o 10/g/16 Attila Kovacs 9266o 10/g/16 Dorothy J Hallett 9266o 10/g/16 Scott thomson 92661 10/g/16 Karen Larsen 9266o 10/g/16 Linda Smith 9266o 10/g/16 William Kul 92625 10/g/16 Anne Lindt 92625 10/g/16 Brian Stern 9266o 10/g/16 Alice Willett 9266o 10/g/16 L Sharp 9226o 10/g/16 Jack Parker 9266o 10/g/16 Susan Dvorak 9266o 1o/8/16 Joy Heilig 9266o 1o/8/16 423 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Dave Geoff roy 92625 10/8/16 Diana Lugo 92663 10/8/16 Sherry Sumner 92662 10/8/16 Tamara Unvert 9266o 10/8/16 James Curley 92625 10/8/16 Sophie Cripe 9266o 10/8/16 Virginia Serra 9266o 10/8/16 Piero Serra 9266o 10/8/16 Christine Luetto 9266o 10/8/16 Katherine Meleski 9266o 10/8/16 Julie Tator 9266o 10/7/16 Karen Rhyne 9266o 10/7/16 Niina Bagdasar 10/7/16 Michael Sonntag 10/7/16 Kevin Knox 10/7/16 Sue Branica 92625 10/7/16 Ayelet Nachman 92657 10/7/16 Donna Eckmann 9266o 10/7/16 Sue Reese 92663 10/7/16 mahin taheri pak 9266o 10/6/16 424 Yes! I oppose the Museum House condo tower. Please add my name to the list of individuals and organizations opposed to the destruction of the Orange County Museum of Art building, and the construction of the 25 story mega condo tower. Stephanie Stedfield 92663 1o/6/16 Naira Antonyan 92618 1o/4/16 Florence Stasch 9266o 1o/4/16 Julie Reed 76262 1o/4/16 Mary Becktell 9266o 1o/4/16 425