Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_Mariner Square Residential Condominiums_PA2017-24804"O;""t CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT June 21, 2018 Agenda Item No. 3 SUBJECT: Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) • Planned Development Permit No. PL2018-001 • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2017-005 SITE LOCATION: 1244 Irvine Avenue APPLICANT: Mariner Square 2017, LLC OWNER: Mariner Square 2017, LLC PLANNER: Chelsea Crager, Associate Planner 949-644-3227, ccrager(a)newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY The project includes the demolition of an existing 114 -unit apartment complex and the construction of a 92 -unit residential condominium development, including private streets and common open space on a 5.76 -acre site. The proposed development complies with development standards including height, site coverage, and parking requirements. One adjustment is requested at the front setback along Irvine Avenue to allow second and third stories of 10 units to project two feet into the required 20 -foot setback. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15302 under Class 2 (Replacement of Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-019 approving Planned Development Permit No. PL2018-001 and Tentative Tract Map NT2017-005 (Attachment No. PC 1). 1 9 LOCATIONrERAL VICINITY MAP ZONING CURRENT USE ON-SITE U RtMResidential Multi -Unit (RM- Mariners Mariners Square Apartments 6,000Resid) NORTH Facilities PF Public Facilities PF Mariners Elementa School SOUTH ghborhood Commercial Neighborhood Westcliff Plaza Shopping Center Costa Mesa mercial CN N Uniit�IResidential Multi -Unit Residential (RM) Multi -Unit Residential 'oy 4v WEST City of Costa Mesa `! r.pRIS Lq Low Density Residential Single Unit Residential (R1) m� Qiy 4T 6� 'r.F qp 4 GENERAL PLAN ZONING L✓ PPt� L9 i N%L 0 4 y ---F �0 ss 33. NEN�2SrN <P .tea NtY R. Y� R1 kFN-b \. 66 ANVRIALY .off' _ry 4� rL 9(L 4'IRi LOCATIONrERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON-SITE U RtMResidential Multi -Unit (RM- Mariners Mariners Square Apartments 6,000Resid) NORTH Facilities PF Public Facilities PF Mariners Elementa School SOUTH ghborhood Commercial Neighborhood Westcliff Plaza Shopping Center mercial CN N Uniit�IResidential Multi -Unit Residential (RM) Multi -Unit Residential WEST City of Costa Mesa City of Costa Mesa Residential Low Density Residential Single Unit Residential (R1) 3 V� QP �. Project Setting The subject property is located on the east side of Irvine Avenue, north of the Westcliff Plaza shopping center and south of Mariners Elementary School. The project site is bordered by Irvine Avenue, Mariners Drive, and Rutland Road. The 5.76 -acre property is slightly irregular in shape and is currently developed with a 114 -unit apartment complex, Mariner Square Apartment Homes. The site is accessed by eight vehicle driveways. Three driveways are located on Rutland Road, three on Irvine Avenue, and two are located on Mariners Drive. The existing development features thirteen buildings, including the 114 residential units and the leasing office, a community pool and spa, and landscaped common open space. The site is fairly flat with an average grade elevation of approximately 86 feet (NAVD88). The property is located in the Multi -Unit Residential (RM -6,000) Zoning District and is surrounded by commercial, residential, and public facility land uses. The existing two-story apartment complex features a front setback of 6 to 30 feet on Irvine Avenue, which faces a single-family residential neighborhood of Costa Mesa. The existing apartments have several surface parking lots and carport structures also fronting Irvine Avenue, and carports fronting Mariners Drive and Rutland Road. There are 187 parking spaces onsite. Project Description The proposed project includes the demolition of the entire apartment complex including all associated accessory improvements, and the construction of a 92 -unit condominium development with private streets, guest parking, and common open space. Residential Units The project includes 92 residences in duplex, four-plex, six-plex, twelve-plex, and eighteen-plex buildings. There are 24 buildings in total. Each dwelling unit would be three stories, with height ranging from 32 feet 8 inches to 33 feet, and include an attached two - car garage with space to store refuse and recycling cans so that they are screened from view. All floor plans include private open space on first floor patios and/or second floor balconies that exceed the minimum required by the Zoning Code. The proposed floor plans are further described in Table 1 — Residential Units. 5 Table 1 — Residential Units Floor Plan Unit Count Gross Floor Area Bedroom I Count Bathroom Count Private Open Space Duplex 14 buildings) and Four-Plex 7 buildings) Floor Plans Plan 1 14 2,067 sf 3 3.5 166 sf Plan 2 14 2,349 sf 3 4 134 sf Plan 3 14 2,477 sf 5 5 278 sf Plan 4 14 2,742 sf 4 4.5 309 sf Townhome Six-, Twelve- and Ei hteen-Plex Floor Plans Plan 1 12 1,724 sf 3 2.5 93 sf Plan 2 12 1,908 sf 3 3 104 sf Plan 3 12 2,172 sf 4 4.5 375 sf Total 92 The design is described by the applicant as contemporary California coastal architecture with comprehensive and cohesive designs. The colors of the materials will include white, beige, blue, green, and gray. Materials will include a combination of board and batten siding, horizontal lap siding, shingle siding, stucco, and metal elements as shown in the visual simulations, materials and color scheme exhibits, and project plans. Stucco on the buildings will have a smooth finish. Roofs include varied planes with a 3:12 pitch finished with composition roofing shingles in a weathered wood color, or metal in a zinc gray color. Two floor plans on duplex buildings include optional roof decks from 122 to 152 square feet in size. The project is designed with buildings that offset from vehicle entrances to create visual interest from the street and prevent long, unarticulated driveway appearances. Canopies over front doors fronting on Irvine Avenue create a pedestrian orientation that helps integrate the project into the surrounding area. The two -foot projections into the 20 -foot front setback on Irvine Avenue are intended to provide building articulation and enhance visual interest. On -Site Improvements and Access Project design includes three vehicular entrances, one from Irvine Avenue and two from Rutland Road, a reduction of three driveways compared to the existing condition. Forty- seven guest parking spaces are proposed throughout the subject property. Also included in the design is a pedestrian access point between the development and Westcliff Plaza, the commercial center to the south. The pedestrian access point is located near Rutland Road and promotes walkability to the commercial center, which includes a grocery store, pharmacy, restaurants, and other retail and service uses. A shared recreational area is proposed that includes a pool/spa, restroom, seating and lounge areas, turf areas, enhanced paving, and landscaping. Walkways are provided throughout the project and provide access to the recreational area from the homes. N Water -efficient landscaping is proposed throughout the site with significant plantings along the front, rear and exterior side property lines, along interior streets, at the project entrance, and in the centrally -located recreational area. Landscaping along Rutland Road and Mariners Drive includes protecting existing London Plane Tree street trees where possible. When necessary to accommodate the new driveway locations, the existing street trees will be replaced with 48 -inch box Sycamore trees, or other species approved by Municipal Operations, as required by conditions of approval. Landscaping along Irvine Avenue includes thirty-six inch Brisbane trees in the right-of-way and 36 -inch box Hybrid Strawberry and Little Gem South Magnolia trees proposed in the front setback. The primary project entrance, off Irvine Avenue, is proposed to be lined with Date Palms. The interior of the project features African Sumac, Fruitless Olive, Kentia Palm, and other plantings. Discretionary Applications The Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) requires the following discretionary applications for the project: • A Tentative Tract Map subdivision for condominium purposes; and • A Planned Development Permit to authorize the overall project design including the proposed setback adjustment in lieu of a Site Development Review, which is required for residential construction with five or more units with a tentative map. Planned development permits are intended to ensure efficient use of land and a better living environment, ensure high standards of environmental quality, and provide for enhanced amenities. The permits may adjust, where necessary and justifiable, development standards including setbacks. Analysis General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) which is intended to provide primarily for multi -family residential development containing attached or detached dwelling units. General Plan Land Use Element Figure LU10 allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre for a maximum of 115 units (5.76 units/acre x 20 acres). The 92 -unit attached residential development is consistent with this designation. The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 5.1.9 (Attachment No. PC 2), which requires multi -family dwellings to be designed to convey a high quality architectural character in regards to building elevations, ground floor treatment, roof design, parking, open space, and amenities. The dwelling unit entrances primarily face internal streets and walkways. Ten units fronting on Irvine Avenue feature entrances and canopies facing the street to help integrate the project into the surrounding area. The view of the project from Irvine Avenue is further enhanced by an 18 -foot setback to the residences, and enhanced landscaping including Brisbane, Kentia Palm, and Little Gem Southern Magnolia trees. The primary entrance to the project will be lined with Date Palms. The views from Rutland Road and Mariners Drive are also consistent with this policy and feature 6 -foot setbacks to the residences and enhanced landscaping including London Plane Trees and Afghan Pines. The units facing these streets are oriented inward toward the interior paseos, with three private open space patios facing Mariners Drive and six facing Rutland Road. The proposed elevations of the structures are further consistent with this policy in that they would convey a high quality architectural character through the building modulation, quality materials, and multiple colors and materials, as shown on Sheets 06, 08, and 11-13 of the project plans (Attachment No. PC 9). Covered parking is provided as attached 2 -car garages integrated with the residential structures, and uncovered guest parking is provided throughout the site. Zoning Code The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the RM -6,000 Zoning District, including the minimum density requirement of 92 units, as further described in Table 2 — Development Standards below. Table 2 — Development Standards Development Standard Requirement Proposed Lot Area 6,000 square feet minimum 251,044 square feet (existing) Lot Width 60 feet minimum Approx. 508 feet(existing) Density 92 units minimum 92 units 115 units maximum Lot Coverage 60% maximum 34.2% Building Height 28 feet flat roof 28 feet flat elements 33 feet sloped roof 33 feet sloped roof Front Setback (Irvine 20 feet (first floor) Avenue) 20 feet minimum 18 feet (second and third floors)' Side Setbacks 6 feet minimum 6 feet Rear Setback 6 feet minimum 6 feet Common Open Space 75 square feet per unit 14,288 square feet Total: 6,900 square feet 5% of gross floor area per Private Open Space unit minimum 93-375 square feet per unit 86-137 square feet per unit 2 per unit covered, plus 0.5 2 garage spaces per unit, Parking guest spaces per unit plus 47 guest/open spaces Total: 230 spaces Total: 231 spaces 1. Adjustment of standards may be authorized with approval of a Planned Development Permit N Setbacks Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards), developments in the RM -6,000 Zoning District require setbacks of 20 feet along the front property line (Irvine Avenue), and 6 feet along the side and rear property lines (Rutland Road, Mariners Drive, interior side at shopping center). The project would feature 6 -foot setbacks along the interior side, Rutland Road, and Mariners Drive. The structures along Irvine Avenue feature a 20 -foot setback to the first level and 18 -foot setbacks to the second and third levels, which extend over the first floor to provide enhanced articulation and visual interest. These 18 -foot setbacks are shown in Figure 1 — Front Setbacks from Irvine Avenue highlighted in green, blue, and yellow Additionally, the front doors facing Irvine Avenue feature a 5 -foot canopy, allowed pursuant to NBMC Section 20.30.110 (Setback Regulations and Exceptions). The proposed setbacks are consistent with the purpose and intent of the RM -6,000 Zoning District and the adjustment is allowed with an approved Planned Development Permit, pursuant to NBMC Section 20.52.060 (Planned Development Permits). Setbacks between structures ensure adequate light and air to individual dwelling units. The proposed 18 -foot second -story front setback on Irvine Avenue is adequate and, compatible with surrounding uses, and allows for increased articulation in the building fagade. The adjusted setback above the entryways is approximately 14 feet in width and occurs 10 times on the 488 -foot street frontage, and is further offset by landscaping including Brisbane, Hybrid Strawberry, and Kentia Palm trees. The proposed design, with a front setback of 18 feet, and front doors facing Irvine Avenue, creates a pedestrian - oriented frontage that is compatible with the neighborhood across Irvine Avenue. The proposed design also includes a well landscaped parkway and sidewalk along Irvine Avenue. The site has been designed to reduce potential impacts to the residents from the adjacent Westcliff Plaza commercial center to the south, where the proposed setback to the residences is 6 feet. These units have been designed so that the interior stairwells are along the southerly boundary to minimize noise intrusion from commercial activities, including the nearby loading dock. The project design also includes the retention of the existing block wall separating the two properties. Wall height ranges from 2.7 to 11.6 feet to help further minimize potential noise impacts to the residents. 0 Figure 1 — Front Setbacks from Irvine Avenue Parking and Circulation Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.40.040 (Off -Street Parking Requirements), parking for multi -unit residential developments is required at a rate of two covered parking spaces per unit, plus one half of a parking space per unit for guest parking. The proposed 92 -unit project requires 184 covered parking spaces, which are provided as attached 2 -car garages integrated into the residential structures, and 47 surface guest parking spaces. The 47 guest parking spaces are dispersed throughout the site, as shown in Figure 2, highlighted in yellow and green. The proposed two -car garages provide interior dimensions of 20 feet wide by 20 feet deep, and will also accommodate trash can storage. The project site is adjacent to Mariners Elementary School to the north across Mariners Drive. The design includes eliminating two driveways on Mariners Avenue, featuring instead one vehicular entrance from Irvine Avenue and two from Rutland Road. This will reduce vehicle activity on Mariners Drive and should provide a safer and more compatible relationship between the proposed residential project and the elementary school. Across Rutland Road to the east of the project site are multi -family residences with pedestrian access from Rutland Road. Because these residences have vehicular access from an alley to the rear of the development, the two driveways to the proposed project from Rutland Road will not create new vehicular conflicts. Site access has been reviewed and approved by the City's traffic engineer and improvements including landscaping in proximity to the driveways must be low to ensure proper vehicle sight distance consistent with NBMC Section 20.30.130. 10 Figure 2 —Onsite Parking A PARKING SUMMARY: d -e'„ -� i .1 �I< 1 NORM i it y 1 i M1 -o--M --o a I Planned Development Permit The applicant requests a Planned Development Permit to authorize the design and proposed setbacks of the project, which will ensure efficient use of land and enhanced amenities. Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.52.060 (Planned Development Permits), the Planning Commission must make the following findings in order to approve a Planned Development Permit: 1. The proposed development would: a. Include only uses allowed within the base zoning district, b. Be substantially consistent with the purpose, intent, goals, policies, actions, and land use designations of the General Plan, and any applicable specific plan; c. Be substantially consistent with the purpose and intent of the base zoning district; 11 d. Include sustainable improvement standards and protection of environmental resources; and e. Be compatible with other development within the zoning district and general neighborhood of the proposed project. 2. The project would produce a development of higher quality and greater excellence of design than that might otherwise result from using the standard development regulations; 3. The subject site is adequate in terms of size, shape, topography, and circumstances to accommodate the proposed development, 4. The project, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties or allowed uses; 5. The project includes improved quality of life provisions and enhances amenities, including an additional and appropriate variety of structure placement and orientation opportunities, appropriate mix of structure sizes, high quality architectural design, common open space, landscaping, parking areas, private open space, public art, recreational amenities for adults and/or children, private or separated entrances, sustainable improvement standards (e.g., energy efficient building design, construction, and operation; convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation; water and resource conservation), etc.; and 6. The design, location, operating characteristics, and size of the project would be compatible with the existing and future uses in the vicinity, in terms of aesthetic values, character, scale, and view protection. As demonstrated in the draft resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) that provides facts in support of each required finding, staff believes the findings for approval can be made. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the RM and RM -6,000 designations of the General Plan and Zoning Code. The project includes landscaped setbacks on all exterior property lines facing Irvine Avenue, Mariners Drive, and Rutland Road, where street trees are proposed to be protected in place where possible and replaced when needed. The project includes adequate setbacks between structures and from the property lines, increased open space above the minimum requirement, pedestrian pathways, and recreational amenities. The proposed use is consistent with the surrounding residential, neighborhood commercial, and public uses. The project includes a front setback adjustment, proposing an 18 -foot setback for second and third stories where 20 feet is required. The proposed setback provides for increased articulation in the building fagade creating a better visual elevation. The proposed design, with increased setback to 18 feet and front doors facing Irvine Avenue, creates a more pedestrian -oriented frontage that is compatible with the neighborhood across Irvine Avenue. The proposed design also includes a landscaped parkway and sidewalk along to Irvine Avenue. 12 The design includes several complementary materials, building articulation and modulation, and varied roof planes to provide visual interest. The design is described as contemporary California coastal architecture with comprehensive and cohesive designs. The colors of the materials will include white, beige, blue, green, and gray. Materials will include a combination of board and batten siding, horizontal lap siding, shingle siding, stucco, and metal elements. The proposed garages accommodate two vehicles per unit, including refuse storage areas. Vehicular access to the site is improved with the elimination of driveways on Mariners Road, which increases compatibility with the neighboring elementary school by reducing turning activity on this street, and with the reduction in driveways on Irvine Avenue. Reducing driveways on Irvine Avenue from the existing three driveways to a singular primary entrance promotes increased compatibility with Irvine Avenue and an enhanced pedestrian walkway. Walkability is further increased at the proposed project by incorporating pedestrian access to the adjacent Westcliff Plaza commercial center. Tentative Tract Map A Tentative Tract Map is proposed for condominium purposes to allow multiple property owners for one parcel. 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 As demonstrated in the draft resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) that provides facts in support of each required finding, staff believes the findings for approval can be made. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision Map Act, and City Subdivision Code. The 5.76 -acre site is only slightly irregular in shape, fairly flat, and is large enough to accommodate the density proposed. The project is in compliance with all applicable Zoning requirements provided the findings for an 18-footfront setback on Irvine Avenue can be made pursuant to the Planned Development Permit. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed tentative tract and found it consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision Code and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. Construction Management Plan and Utilities The applicant has submitted a preliminary construction management plan (Attachment No. PC 5) that has been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The plan outlines project implementation including timing, parking management, safety and security, air quality, dust control, noise suppression, and environmental compliance. The i3 plan ensures compatibility with Mariners Elementary School across Mariners Drive by restricting subcontractors and large vehicles from accessing the property via Mariners Drive. Additionally, the Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the submitted water and sewer demand studies and preliminary hydrology study. Existing utilities have been found to be sufficient to accommodate the redevelopment of the site. Alternatives The following alternatives are available: 1. The Planning Commission may require changes to the project to alleviate any concerns related to the design or the ability to make the required findings. If the changes are substantial, the project should be continued to a future meeting to allow the applicant to make the necessary adjustments and to allow staff to prepare a revised resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions. 2. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission should deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in the attached draft resolution for denial (Attachment No. PC 7). Environmental Review This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15302 under Class Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. Class 2 consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The proposed project consists of the demolition of a 114 -unit apartment complex and the construction of 92 multi -family condominium units. The exceptions to this categorical exemption under Section 15300.2 are not applicable. The project does not result in cumulative impacts, does not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, does not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway, is not a hazardous waste site, and is not identified as a historical resource. The environmental setting is further described in the attached environmental information form (Attachment No. PC 6). In Public Notice Notice of this hearing 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. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: Submitted by: Chelsea Crager Jim Campbell Associate Planner Deputy Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Draft Resolution for Approval with Findings and Conditions PC 2 General Plan Policy LU 5.1.9 PC 3 Applicant's Project Description PC 4 Exterior Color Design Narrative PC 5 Preliminary Construction Management Plan PC 6 Environmental Information Form PC 7 Draft Resolution for Denial PC 8 Correspondence PC 9 Project Plans 01/12/18 15 10 Attachment No. PC 1 Draft Resolution for Approval with Findings and Conditions 17 12 RESOLUTION NO. PC2018-019 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. PL2018-001 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2017-005 FOR A 92 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1244 IRVINE AVENUE (PA2017- 248) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Mariner Square 2017, LLC, with respect to property located at 1244 Irvine Avenue, and legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, requesting approval of a Planned Development Permit and a Tentative Tract Map. 2. The applicant proposes the demolition of an existing 114 -unit apartment complex and the construction of a 92 -unit residential condominium development, including private streets and common open space on a 5.76 -acre site. The proposed development complies with development standards including height, site coverage, and parking requirements. One adjustment is requested at the front setback along Irvine Avenue to allow for second and third stories of ten units to project two feet into the required 20 -foot setback. 3. The subject property is designated Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Multi -Unit Residential (RM -6,000) Zoning District. 4. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. A public hearing was held on June 21, 2018, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15302 under Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Class 2 consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The 19 proposed project consists of the demolition of a 114 -unit apartment complex and the construction of 92 multi -family condominium units. 3. The exceptions to this categorical exemption under Section 15300.2 are not applicable. The project does not result in cumulative impacts, does not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, does not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway, is not a hazardous waste site, and is not identified as a historical resource. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.52.060 (Planned Development Permits), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. The proposed development would: a. Include only uses allowed within the base zoning district; b. Be substantially consistent with the purpose, intent, goals, policies, actions, and land use designations of the General Plan, and any applicable specific plan; C. Be substantially consistent with the purpose and intent of the base zoning district; d. Include sustainable improvement standards and protection of environmental resources; and e. Be compatible with other development within the zoning district and general neighborhood of the proposed project. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The subject property is currently zoned Multi -Unit Residential (RM -6,000) which requires a minimum of 92 and allows a maximum of 115 attached or detached dwelling units on this 5.76 -acre site. The proposed 92 -unit multi -family residential development complies with the RM -6,000 Zoning District development standards, except for the requested setback adjustment. 2. The subject property has a General Plan Land Use Element designation of Multiple -Unit Residential ("RM"). This category is intended to provide primarily for multi -family residential development containing attached or detached dwelling units. The General Plan Land Use Element Figure LU10 allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre. The proposed project does not exceed the maximum allowable density of 115 units (5.76 x 20). 3. The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 5.1.9, which requires multi -family dwellings to be designed to convey a high quality architectural character in regards to building elevations, ground floor treatment, roof design, parking, open space, and amenities. Parking is provided as attached garages integrated within the residential structures, with uncovered guest spaces throughout the site. The design is described as 20 contemporary California coastal architecture with comprehensive and cohesive designs. The colors of the materials will include white, beige, blue, green, and gray. Materials will include a combination of board and batten siding, horizontal lap siding, shingle siding, stucco, and metal elements. Any stucco on the building will have a smooth finish. The project is designed with buildings offset from vehicle entrances to create visual interest from the street and prevent long, unarticulated driveway appearances. Canopies over front doors fronting on Irvine Avenue will provide for a pedestrian -oriented development that integrate the project into the surrounding area, and two -foot projections into the 20 - foot front setback on Irvine Avenue will create building articulation and enhance visual interest. 4. The property is not located in a specific plan area. 5. The RM Zoning District is intended to provide for areas appropriate for multi -unit residential units containing attached or detached dwelling units. The proposed project provides 92 multi -family attached dwelling units and is therefore consistent with this designation. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards within NBMC Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts and General Development Standards) regarding density, lot area, lot width, site coverage, open space, and parking. The proposed two -car garages attached to each residential unit provide interior dimensions of 20 feet wide by 20 feet deep, and will also accommodate refuse storage. The minimum size required for narrow lots pursuant to NBMC Section 20.40.090 (Parking Standards for Residential Uses) is 17 -feet 6inches wide by 19 -feet deep. Each residential unit is approximately 21 - feet wide at the ground level; therefore, it is appropriate to apply the narrow lot garage standards. 7. The proposed setbacks are consistent with the purpose and intent of the RM -6,000 Zoning District and the 2 -foot adjustment is allowed with an approved Planned Development Permit. Setbacks between structures ensure adequate light and air to individual dwelling units. The proposed 18 -foot second -story front setback on Irvine Avenue is adequate and, compatible with surrounding uses, and allows for increased articulation in the building fagade. The existing 114 -unit apartment complex features a front setback of 6 to 30 feet on Irvine Avenue, which faces a single-family residential neighborhood of Costa Mesa. The apartments have several parking lots and carport structures also fronting Irvine Avenue. The proposed design, with increased setback to 18 feet and front doors facing Irvine Avenue, creates a more pedestrian -oriented frontage that is compatible with the neighborhood across Irvine Avenue. The proposed design also includes a landscaped parkway and sidewalk along Irvine Avenue. 8. The proposed development is designed to be energy efficient and will allow for the future installation of solar panels. Landscaping will be required to comply with the requirements of the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. 9. The proposed project is designed with an architectural style and scale that are compatible with and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed project is a 21 redevelopment of an aging 114 -unit apartment complex to a 92 -unit condominium development mix. Besides the setback request, the proposed project complies with the development standards of the RM -6,000 Zoning District. The proposed buildings range from 32 feet 8 inches to 33 feet in height. The provision of canopies along the first floor units facing Irvine Avenue provides a more pedestrian -oriented development that helps to ensure that the project is an integrated part of the area. 10. The project site is located to the north of the abutting Westcliff Plaza commercial center, which contains resident -serving uses including a grocery store, food service establishments and a pharmacy, among others. The proposed residential design features a pedestrian access point to the shopping center along the shared property line near Rutland Road to encourage a convenient and harmonious relationship between the residential and commercial uses. Finding: B. The project would produce a development of higher quality and greater excellence of design than that might otherwise result from using the standard development regulations. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed project provides increased common open space compared to the minimum required by the Zoning Code, with 6,900 square feet required and 21,495 square feet provided, including landscaped areas and recreational amenities including a pool and spa, seating and gathering areas, two fireside lounge areas, and an outdoor dining area. The proposed project will provide quality building design through complementary materials, building articulation and modulation, and varied roof planes to provide increased visual interest. Internal streets and walkways allow for separation between buildings and efficient circulation onsite. 2. The project design is described as contemporary California coastal architecture with comprehensive and cohesive designs. The colors of the materials will include white, beige, blue, green, and gray. Materials will include a combination of board and batten siding, horizontal lap siding, shingle siding, stucco, and metal elements. Any stucco on the building will have a smooth finish. The project is designed with buildings offset from vehicle entrances to create visual interest from the street and prevent long, unarticulated driveway appearances. Canopies over front doors fronting on Irvine Avenue provides for a pedestrian -oriented development that integrate the project into the surrounding area. Finding: C. The subject site is adequate in terms of size, shape, topography, and circumstances to accommodate the proposed development. Facts in Support of Finding: 22 1. The subject property is 5.76 acres, only slightly irregular in shape, and is fairly flat. The site is adequate to accommodate the proposed 92 multi -family dwelling units, open space, and landscaping within the minimum and maximum density allowed by the Zoning Code and General Plan. 2. Vehicular site access is being reduced from eight driveways at the existing development to three, with one taking access from Irvine Avenue and two from Rutland Road. 3. Pedestrian access to the abutting Westcliff Plaza commercial center is proposed along the southern property line of the proposed project to encourage a harmonious relationship between the residential condominiums and the commercial uses. The pedestrian access will create a walkable development that provides convenient access to retail and service uses. 4. The Public Works Department and Fire Division have reviewed and approved the proposed project design, including emergency access. Finding: D. The project, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties or allowed uses. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed project provides adequate separation from structures to adjacent properties. The recreational area is located towards the center of the property, which will reduce any potential noise or odor impacts to the neighborhood from surrounding properties. 2. The site has been designed to reduce potential impacts to the dwellings from the adjacent Westcliff Plaza commercial center to the south by designing the floor plans such that interior stairwells are along the southerly boundary to minimize noise intrusion from commercial activities, including the loading dock. The project design also proposes that the existing block wall separating the two properties remain, which ranges in height up to 11.6 feet and further minimizes potential noise impacts to the residential uses. 3. The project site is adjacent to Mariners Elementary School to the north across Mariners Drive. The proposed design includes eliminating two driveways on Mariners Avenue, featuring instead one vehicular entrance from Irvine Avenue and two from Rutland Road. This reduces turning activity on Mariners Drive and provides a safer and more compatible relationship between the proposed residential project and the elementary school. The project also features a 6 -foot landscaped setback along Mariners Drive including five existing trees to be protected in place. 4. Across Rutland Road to the east of the project site are multi -family residences with pedestrian access from Rutland Road. Because these residences have vehicular access from an alley, the proposed two driveways to the proposed project from Rutland Road will 23 not create a traffic hazard. The project also features a 6 -foot landscaped setback along Rutland Road, including eight existing trees to be protected in place. 5. The conditions of approval will ensure compliance with applicable rules and regulations, reduce potential lighting glare impacts, and ensure maintenance of landscaping. Finding: E. The project includes improved quality of life provisions and enhanced amenities, including an additional and appropriate variety of structure placement and orientation opportunities, appropriate mix of structure sizes, high quality architectural design, common open space, landscaping, parking areas, private open space, public art, recreational amenities for adults and/or children, private or separated entrances, sustainable improvement standards (e.g., energy efficient building design, construction, and operation; convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation; water and resource conservation)., etc. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The site design includes a mix of east -west and north -south oriented buildings that provide variety of structure placement to promote visual interest. The proposed dwelling units each have a separate entrance. The units range in size from 1,724 to 2,742 square feet across seven floor plan options. Private open space is provided for each unit by ground level patios and second and third floor decks and balconies. Private open space per unit ranges from 375 to 936 square feet across the seven floor plan options, and the total exceeds the minimum requirement. Each unit includes a 2 -car garage and 47 guest parking spaces are provided throughout the site. 2. A recreational area is provided for the residents for use by both adults and children, including a pool and spa, restroom, seating and lounge areas, a barbeque, deck areas, turf area, short term bicycle parking, and landscaping. Landscaping is proposed throughout the site, with significant plantings along the front, rear and exterior side property lines, along interior streets, at the project entrance, and in the recreational area. 3. The proposed design includes complementary materials, building articulation and modulation, and varied roof planes to provide increased visual interest. The applicant describes the proposed design as contemporary California coastal architecture with traditional clean design. The materials will include a combination of detailed wood -like siding, stucco, and metal elements. The structures are designed to be energy efficient and will include tankless water heaters, energy efficient hearing systems with built-in air conditioning. The project is required to comply with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, and the landscaping pallet for the development will be drought tolerant with an emphasis on low water demands. Finding: M F. The design, location, operating characteristics, and size of the project would be compatible with the existing and future uses in the vicinity, in terms of aesthetic values, character, scale, and view protection. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project is located in the RM -6,000 Zoning District and is compatible with the existing and allowed uses in the area including multiple -unit residential, commercial, and public facility uses. The project meets the minimum and maximum standards of the Zoning Code and General Plan. The use will remain residential. 2. The proposed project provides a reduction in driveways on Irvine Avenue, from three to one driveway, a reduction in driveways on Rutland Road, from three to two driveways, and the elimination of two driveways on Mariners Drive. Driveway placement has been reviewed by the traffic engineer and is designed to promote safe and convenient vehicle entry. 3. The proposed design includes complementary materials, building articulation and modulation, and varied roof planes to provide increased visual interest. The applicant describes the proposed design as contemporary California coastal architecture with traditional clean design. The materials will include a combination of detailed wood -like siding, smooth stucco, and metal elements. 4. No views are compromised by the proposed development, which replaces an aging 114 - unit apartment complex with 92 modern residential condominiums. The project features three distinct elevation styles with variations in color and materials to promote consistency with the variety of housing types in the vicinity, including a single family neighborhood across Irvine Avenue in Costa Mesa and multi -family residences across Rutland Road. The project proposes the protection of existing mature street trees along Rutland Road and Mariners Drive to maintain the appearance of an established residential neighborhood. 5. The proposed design includes three-story building with sloping roofs up to 33 feet in height, the maximum permitted in the RM -6,000 Zoning District. The project replaces a two-story apartment development and maintains compatibility with the scale of the surroundings through building articulation and varied roof planes. In accordance with NBMC Section 19.12.070 [Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps (66412.3, 66473 et seg.)], the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: G. 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 applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code. Facts in Support of Finding: 2.5 The subject property has a General Plan Land Use Element designation of Multiple -Unit Residential (RM). This category is intended to provide primarily for multi -family residential development containing attached or detached dwelling units. The General Plan Land Use Element Figure LU10 allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre. The proposed project does not exceed the maximum allowable density of 115 units. 2. The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 5.1.9, which requires multi -family dwellings to be designed to convey a high quality architectural character in regards to building elevations, ground floor treatment, roof design, parking, open space, and amenities. Parking is provided as attached garages integrated within the residential structures, with the guest spaces throughout the site uncovered. 3. The property is not located in a specific plan area. 4. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed tentative tract map and found it consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision Code (Title 19) and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. Finding: H. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. Fact in Support of Finding: The subject property is 5.76 acres, slightly irregular in shape, and is fairly flat, which is adequate to accommodate the proposed 92 multi -family dwelling units, open space, and landscaping within the minimum and maximum density allowed by the Zoning Code and General Plan. The site is not within a zone deemed to be subject to seismically induced liquefaction potential. A drainage study and sewer demand study have been prepared and reviewed by the Public Works Department to ensure that the storm drain and sewer main are adequate. Finding: 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 in 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 ("CEQA') 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: 20 1. The site is in an urbanized area that does not contain any sensitive vegetation or habitat and is currently a development with a 114 unit apartment complex. 2. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines for the reasons noted in Section 2 of this Resolution. Finding: J. 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: The proposed Tentative Tract Map is for condominium purposes. All construction for the project will comply with all Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious health problems. Public improvements will be required of the developer per NBMC Section 19.28.010 (General Improvement Requirements) and Section 66411 (Local Agencies to Regulate and Control Design of Subdivisions) of the Subdivision Map Act. All ordinances of the City and all Conditions of Approval will be complied with. Finding: K. 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 the 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: The design of the development will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use within the proposed development, because there are no public easements located on the property. Finding: L. That, subject to the 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 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. 27 Facts in Support of Finding: The property is not subject to the Williamson Act because the subject property is not designated as an agricultural preserve and is less than 100 acres in area. Finding: M. That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code: (1) There is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included within the land project, and (2) the decision making body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. Facts 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. Finding: N. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Section 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The Tentative Tract Map includes attached dwelling units with open space, private streets, and walkways separating individual structures. The proposed subdivision design allows for solar access and future passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities. 2. The proposed construction and any future 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 Newport Beach Building Division enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process. Finding: O. 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: M 1. The minimum and maximum residential density allowed for the site will remain unchanged with the project approval. The proposed 92 -unit development is consistent with the minimum 92 units and maximum 115 units allowed on this 5.76 - acre site in the RM -6,000 Zoning District. The site is currently developed with 114 apartment units. The minor reduction of units will not affect the City's ability to meet its regional housing goals. Finding: P. 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 (`RWQCB'). Fact in Support of Finding: 1. The new condominium development is designed so that wastewater discharge into the existing sewer system complies with the RWQCB requirements. Finding: Q. 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. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The subject property is not located in the Coastal Zone. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Planned Development Permit PL2018-001 and Tentative Tract Map No. NT2017-005, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. This action shall become final and effective 10 days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 19 Subdivisions, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2018. AYES: 29 NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Peter Koetting, Chairman BY: Erik Weigand, Secretary 30 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 53, OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED 1N BOOK 1, PAGE 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORD MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 4824, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 173, PAGE 28 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY: THENCE NORTH 50° 11' 06" WEST 645.80 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID TRACT TO THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH; THENCE NORTH 39° 48'54" EAST 538.60 FEET ALONG SAID BOUNDARY TO THE CENTERLINE OF MARINER'S DRIVE 60.00 FEET WIDE THE SOUTHWESTERLY 30.00 FEET BEING DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 4718, PAGE 190 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 50" 11' 06" EAST 305.00 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE THEREIN CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTIIEASTERLY 105.04 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND CENTERLINE THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 200 03' 38" TO THE CENTERLINE OF RUTLAND ROAD AS SHOWN ON A MAP OF TRACT 3606 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 130 PAGES 31 AND 32 OF SAID MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, SAID CENTERLINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1698.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 860 27'43 " EAST, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 53.25 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND CENTERLINE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 47' 49" TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO. 3606. A RADIAL LINE AT SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 84" 39' 54" EAST; THENCE NORTH 84° 39' 54" WEST ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE OF TRACT NO. 3606, 30 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF SAID RUTLAND ROAD. BEING ON A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1668.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 3606, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 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 THE LAND, TOGETHER WITH EXHIBIT A SNIRH:4949349!12 32 THE PERPETUAL RIGHT OF DRILLING, MINING, EXPLORING AND OPERATING THEREFOR AND STORING IN AND REMOVING THE SAME FROM SAID LAND OR ANY OTHER LAND, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO WHIPSTOCK OR DIRECTIONALLY DRILL AND MINE FROM LANDS OTHER THAN THE LAND, OIL OR GAS WELLS, TUNNELS AND SHAFTS INTO, THROUGH OR ACROSS THE SUBSURFACE OF THE 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 THE LAND, AS RESERVED BY THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY GRANT DEED RECORDED MARCH 21, 2013 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2013000171786 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 2: AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AND PARKING AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 24, 1993 MADE BY THE IRVINE COMPANY, A MICHIGAN CORPORATION RECORDED JUNE 30, 1993 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 93-0439383, OFFICIAL RECORDS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: LOTS 1 THROUGH 17, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT NO. 4824, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 173, PAGE 28 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITH THAT CERTAIN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L.L.A. 83-1 RECORDED JANUARY 6, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-007812, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. A PORTION OF SAID LAND IS INCLUDED WITHIN PARCEL I OF A PARCEL MAP AS FILED IN BOOK 46, PAGE 43 OF PARCEL MAPS OF SAID COUNTY. AND PARCELS 1 AND 2 LYING WITH IN THAT CERTAIN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L.L.A. 83-1 RECORDED JANUARY 6, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-007812, OFFICIAL RECORDS, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. APN: 425-061-09 EXHIBIT A SMRH:4M93491 L2 32 EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Project -specific conditions are in italics) PLANNING 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.) Future additions, including enclosing decks, are prohibited. Major changes in building color, materials, or architecture require approval by the Community Development Director. 2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 3. 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 Planned Development Permit. 4. Planned Development Permit No. PL2018-001 and Tentative Tract Map No. TP2017-005 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in NBMC Section 20.91.050, unless an extension is granted. 5. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "B" shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building or grading permits. 6. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit draft Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that are prepared by an authorized professional for review and approval by the Director Community Development, which will be recorded concurrently with the Final Map, and while will generally provide for the maintenance of all common areas and the requirement that garages are to be used for vehicle parking. 7. 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 leasing agent. 8. 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. 9. The project shall maintain setbacks and encroachments consistent with NBMC 20.30.110, with the exception of a two -foot encroachment into the 20 -foot front setback permitted on the second and third floors of the ten residential units facing Irvine Avenue consistent with the approved plans. 33 10. Prior to the issuance of a 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 in compliance with NBMC Chapter 14.17 (Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance). The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. 11.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. 12. All lighting shall conform with the standards of NBMC Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting). The Community Development Director may order the dimming of light sources or other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively illuminated. 13.All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of NBMC Chapter 10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher: 14. Construction activities shall comply with NBMC Section 10.28.040, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays. 15. Building materials shall be high quality, durable, authentic to the architectural style, and applied in a quality fashion. Any stucco on the building shall have a smooth finish. 16. Any portion of the roof that extends beyond 28 feet in height shall have a minimum pitch of 3:12. 17. Building owners and tenants shall keep the building exteriors and facades clean and in good repair. 18. 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 Between the hours of 7:OOAM and 10:OOPM Between the hours of 10:OOPM and 7:OOAM Location Interior Exterior Interior Exterior Residential Property 45dBA 55dBA 40dBA 50dBA Residential Property located within 100 feet of a commercial property 45dBA 60dBA 45dBA 50dBA Mixed Use Property 45dBA 60dBA 45dBA 50dBA Commercial Property N/A 65dBA N/A 60dBA 14. Construction activities shall comply with NBMC Section 10.28.040, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays. 15. Building materials shall be high quality, durable, authentic to the architectural style, and applied in a quality fashion. Any stucco on the building shall have a smooth finish. 16. Any portion of the roof that extends beyond 28 feet in height shall have a minimum pitch of 3:12. 17. Building owners and tenants shall keep the building exteriors and facades clean and in good repair. 18. 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 arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of Mariner Square Planned Development Permit and Tract Map including, but not limited to, Planned Development Permit No. PL2018-001 and Tentative Tract Map No. NT2017-005 (PA2017-248). 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. Public Works Conditions 19.A Tract Map shall be recorded. The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). 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. 20. 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 Sections 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. 21. Prior to the recordation of the Tract Map, a Subdivision Agreement shall be obtained and approved by the City Council. 22. 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 improvement cost, as prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Public Works Director, for each of the following, but not limited to, public and private improvements, street improvements, monumentation, sidewalks, striping, signage, street lights, sewer system, water system, storm drain system, water quality management system, erosion control, landscaping and irrigation within public right of way, common open spaces areas accessible by the public and off-site improvements required as part of the project. S5 23. Warranty bond for a minimum of 10 percent of the engineers cost estimate (final percentage to be determined by the Public Works Director) to be released 1 -year after improvements have been accepted. 24. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right of way. 25.All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance standard STD -110-L. 26. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by the private construction, said damage shall be repaired and/or additional reconstruction within the public right-of-way may be required. 27.All on-site drainage shall comply with the latest City water quality requirements. 28. Reconstruct the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk along the entire Irvine Avenue, Mariners Drive, Rutland Road property frontages, extent to be determined by the Public Works Inspector. 29. Irvine Avenue will be on the City's street -cut moratorium list. Mariners Drive and Rutland Road are currently on the City's Street -cut moratorium list. Any damage to or trenching in said streets shall require moratorium street repair per City Standard. 30. Final Construction Management Plan ("CMP") shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director and City Traffic Engineer prior to building permit issuance. Any proposed changes to the final CMP after permit issuance shall be approved by the Community Development Director and City Traffic Engineer prior to implementation. 31.The on-site water system shall be owned and maintained by the City and constructed per City standards. 32.The on-site sewer system 6 -inch and larger sewer mains shall be owned and maintained by the City of Newport Beach and constructed per City of Newport Beach standards. All sewer mains smaller than 6 -inch and sewer laterals from the sewer main to units shall be privately owned and maintained. 33.An encroachment permit and agreement shall be obtained for all decorative pavement within the public utility easement identifying that the homeowners association is required to maintain and repair. 34. Install accessible complaint curb ramps at the corner of Irvine Avenue/Mariners Drive and Mariners Drive/Rutland Road intersections along the project frontage. 35.All public improvements (i.e. sewer, water, storm drain, street, sidewalk, etc.) within the public right of way or City easement shall be constructed per City standards. Final design shall be approved by the Public Works Department. 36.On-site storm drain system shall be privately owner and maintained. so 37. Five (5) 48" box trees shall be located in the right of way along the project frontage as replacement for removed trees. Replacement trees shall be Sycamore or other species approved by the Municipal Operations Division. Fire Division Conditions 38.An approved fire apparatus access road shall be provided within 150 feet of all portions of the structures measured by an approved route around the exterior of the buildings. California Fire Code ("CFC") Section 503.1.1. Fire Department ("NBFD") Guideline C.01 and C.02 should be utilized to comply with access requirements. 39. Blue hydrant identification markers shall be placed adjacent to fire hydrants. 40.Apparatus access roads must be constructed of a material that provides an all-weather driving surface, capable of supporting 72,000 pounds imposed load for fire -apparatus, and truck outrigger loads of 75 pounds per square inch over a two -foot area. Calculations stamped and signed by a registered professional engineer shall certify that the proposed surface meets the criteria of an all-weather driving surface and is capable of withstanding the weight of 72,000 pounds NBFD Guideline C.01. 41. Fire lanes shall be marked as per NBFD Guideline C.02. 42.As per NBFD Guideline C.01, the minimum width of the street shall be 36 feet, with parking allowed on both sides. The minimum width of the street shall be 32 feet, with parking allowed on one side. The minimum width of the street shall be 20 feet, with no parking on either side. The width shall be increased to 26 feet within 30 feet of a hydrant, no vehicle parking allowed. 43. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. CFC 503.2.5. 44. Fire Flow will be required and must be determined and submitted with the architectural plan check. CFC Sec. 507.3 NBFD Guideline B.01 shall be utilized to complete the fire flow. 45. Fire hydrants (number also depends on fire flow) will be required to be located within 400 feet as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the structure. CFC 507.5.1. 46. Where a portion of the structure is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the structure, on- site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. CFC Sec. 507.5.1. 47. As per CFC Sec. 304.3.3, dumpsters and container with an individual capacity of 1.0 cubic yards (200 gallons) or more shall not be stored in buildings or placed within 5 feet of combustible walls, openings or combustible roof eave lines unless the dumpsters are constructed of noncombustible materials or of combustible materials with a peal rate of heart release not exceeding 300 kW/M2 where tested in accordance with ASTM E1354 at 37 an incident heat flux of 50 kW/M1 in the horizontal orientation. Exception: Storage in a structure shall not be prohibited where the structure is of Type I or IIA construction, location not less than 10 feet from other buildings and used exclusively for dumpster or container storage. 48. Fire appliances such as fireplaces, fire pit tables, or fire features must be a listed appliance. Manufactures specifications, which recommend the distances to combustibles that appliance, must be maintained will be required at the time of the plan review. 49. Buildings shall be provided with approved addresses. The address identifications shall be legible and placed above or immediately adjacent to all doors that allow fire department access. In no case shall the number be less than four inches in height with a one-half inch stroke. Address numbers shall contrast with their background and shall be either internally or externally illuminated to be visible at night. CFC amended Sec. 505.1.1. 50.A fire alarm that activate the occupant notification system shall be installed in Group R-2 occupancies where dwelling units, sleeping units are located three or more stores above the lowest level of exit discharge. 907.2.9. 51.Single or multiple station smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained in Group R-2 occupancies. CFC Section 907..2.11.2. 52. Fire pits must be installed as per the manufactures recommendations and 2016 California Mechanical Code Section 925.1 with regard to distance to combustible etc. 53.Charcoal burners and other open -flame cooking devices shall not be operated on combustible balconies or within 10 feet of combustible construction. CFC Sec. 308.1.4, 54. Fire extinguishers are required and are to be located within 75 feet of all front entrance doors. CFC Sec. 906.1. 55.An automatic sprinkler system (13R) installed in accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group R fire area. CFC Section 903.2.8. 56.The underground fire line will be reviewed by the fire department. A separate submittal is required, which requires an "F" Permit. The underground fire line is a separate submittal (cannot be part of the overhead fire sprinkler plans, nor precise or rough grading plans) and must be designed as per NBFD Guideline F.04 "Private Hydrants and Sprinkler Supply Line Underground Piping." 57.Approved vehicle access for firefighting shall be provided to all construction or demolition sites. Vehicle access shall be provided to within 100 feet of temporary or permanent fire department connections. 58. Proposed fencing cannot obstruct existing water supply (fire hydrants) from the existing and proposed structure. ON Attachment No. PC 2 General Plan Policy LU 5.1.9 39 40 Multi -Family Neighborhoods LU 5.1.9 Character and Quality of Multi -Family Residential Require that multi -family dwellings be designed to convey a high quality architectural character in accordance with the following principles (other than the Newport Center and Airport Area, which are guided by Goals 6.14 and 6.15, respectively, specific to those areas): Building Elevations Treatment of the elevations of buildings facing public streets and pedestrian ways as the principal facades with respect to architectural treatment to achieve the highest level of urban design and neighborhood quality Architectural treatment of building elevations and modulation of mass to convey the character of separate living units or clusters of living units, avoiding the appearance of a singular building volume Provide street- and path -facing elevations with high-quality doors, windows, moldings, metalwork, and finishes Illustrates multi -family residential Infill townhomes, rowhouses, and apartments. Modulation of building volume and heights, articulated elevations, and orientation of residential units to the street. Ground Floor Treatment Where multi -family residential is developed on large parcels such as the Airport Area and West Newport Mesa: Set ground -floor residential uses back from the sidewalk or from the right-of-way, whichever yields the greater setback to provide privacy and a sense of security and to leave room for stoops, porches and landscaping iM Raise ground -floor residential uses above the sidewalk for privacy and security but not so much that pedestrians face blank walls or look into utility or parking spaces Encourage stoops and porches for ground -floor residential units facing public streets and pedestrian ways Where multi -family residential is developed on small parcels, such as the Balboa Peninsula, the unit may be located directly along the sidewalk frontage and entries should be setback or elevated to ensure adequate security (as shown below). illustrates multi -family residential with lobbies and entry gates located on each street and pedestrian -way frontage. Roof Design Modulate roof profiles to reduce the apparent scale of large structures and to provide visual interest and variety. Parkin Design covered and enclosed parking areas to be integral with the architecture of the residential units' architecture. Open Space and Amenity Incorporate usable and functional private open space for each unit. Incorporate common open space that creates a pleasant living environment with opportunities for recreation. (Imp 2.1) Commercial Districts LU 5.2 Commercial centers and districts that are well-designed and planned, exhibit a high level of architectural and landscape quality, and are vital places for shopping and socialization. Pollcle LU 5.2.1 Architecture and Site Design Require that new development within existing commercial districts centers and corridors complement existing uses and exhibit a high level of architectural and site design in consideration of the following principles: Mi Attachment No. PC 3 Applicant's Project Description 4S ME MARINER SQUARE PRODUCT NARRATIVE 11.03.17 The enclave of Mariner Square is envisioned as a collection of 92 upscale three story single family attached homes organized around a central park and pool area. While the land plan has an inward focus at the center, there is a strong outward presentation to the street along the three sides of the peninsula site. Bounded by Irvine Avenue to the Northwest, Mariners Drive along the Northeast and Rutland Road on the Southeast, this centrally located residential oasis promises to be one of Newport Beach's premier addresses. The first of the three product lines offered in this mini master planned community will be "The Islands". A series of halfplexes populating the middle of the project and bounded by the internal loop street and surrounding the centrally located park and pool area. With four plan types offered here, each home has its own unique pairing. Plan 1 and Plan 4 combine to form one halfplex while Plans 2 and 3 are matched to create the other. Plan 1 has 3 bedrooms and 3.5 baths in 2067 sf, Plan 2 has 3 bedrooms and 4 baths in 2354 sf, Plan 3 boasts 5 bedrooms with 5 baths plus a large bonus room, and finally, Plan 4 includes 4 bedrooms plus a den with 4 baths and another large bonus room. Each home includes attached, rear oriented garages loaded off an alley. Our second offering of homes, "The Reefs", are simply the halfplexes described above paired together to achieve a slightly better price point. These fourplexes align Mariners Drive and the Southwestern property line adjacent to a neighborhood commercial center. Lastly, 'The Towns" are offered in 18 plex, 12 plex and 6 plex buildings, each assembled using a 3 plex module mirrored about a central motor court with Plan 3's mostly facing Irvine Avenue. Plan 2's face our internal loop street and Plan 1 is nestled in between gaining light from both the entry court and motor court areas. The three plans included here are the 1724 sf 3 bedroom/2.5 bath Plan 1, the 1908 sf 3 bedroom/3 bath Plan 2, and the 2174 sf 4 bedroom, 4.5 bath Plan 3. Each home has a direct access 2 car garage loaded off the aforementioned motor courts. There are three architectural styles selected for these homes, each a modern interpretation of recognizable sea -side precedents. The A elevation, or Coastal Farmhouse, is an all gable variant with the upper floors clad in Board & Batten siding. Next, the B, or Beach Cottage style wears an oversized horizontal lap siding on those same second and third floors with a gable/hip roof combination. And lastly, our Beach Bungalow, or C style is richly draped with shingle siding on floors two & three with a hip roof topping it all off. Each style will be meticulously detailed and painted with hallmark, beach- front colors while all sitting atop the white plaster first floors, the latter providing a lighter, modern base to the entire composition. Mariner Square LANDSCAPE PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on the Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared by MJS Design Group The Mariner Square residential community, located within a mixed-use neighborhood, will be embraced by a lush landscape setback on its 3 public facing edges. Along Mariners Drive and Rutland Road existing mature trees will be preserved. Homes along Irvine Avenue will enjoy enlarged patios with direct access to the public walkway. Palms, specialty lighting, enhanced paving and project signage will define the main project entry. A central resident amenity area will serve as the heartbeat of the community with resort -like pool, spa, multiple outdoor dining and lounging opportunities and a Great Lawn. Coastal theming and details will create a unique character and image which collectively strengthens the identity of the community. Ease of accessibility and interconnected linkages encourages pedestrian activity, promotes safety and facilitates neighborhood interaction. Water conservation will define the preservation character of the community. Careful use of water for landscaping, low water use plant material and a design approach of green oasis where the highest visual impacts would occur. POOL COURTYARD: Residents and their Guests will have exclusive use of the community Pool and Spa. The entry to this courtyard will be marked by a gated portal which leads visitors into a boutique style space with lush plantings and specimen accent trees. The Pool provides space for 2 lap lanes and is furnished with cabanas, chaise lounges and moveable soft seating. South of the pool building a specimen tree separates an intimate outdoor fireplace from the spa. OUTDOOR DINING & FIRESIDE LOUNGE: East of the Pool Courtyard, two outdoor dining areas and a fireside lounge provide nodes for community interaction and family-oriented activity. The outdoor dining area adjacent the restroom is sheltered and includes a barbecue, sink, TV and moveable tables and chairs. Adjacent, a fireside lounge includes banco seating, moveable furniture and a fire pit under festival lights. A communal dining table and barbecue are provided at the second outdoor dining area. GREAT LAWN: An allee of trees frame the great lawn which is flanked on either side by flowering vines on trellises. 2 benches and festival lighting activate this space which can be used for a number of active and passive recreational activities including picnics, dog walks and outdoor play. PLANT MATERIAL: All proposed plants are CAL -IPC non-invasive and WUCOLS Medium/Low water consumptive varieties for their proposed growing conditions. These proposed plants are water conserving and used for their deep root systems which stabilizes soil and minimizes erosion impacts. 40 Attachment No. PC 4 Exterior Color Design Narrative 47 42 ® MELIA HOMES MARINER SQUARE NEWPORT BEACH, CA EXTERIOR COLOR DESIGN NARRATIVE March 14, 2018 6LL 1 nuGAm 111111 uj ` : 1 Wiel �I Wil Ov • I� i Y 1V'� Y'T¢. Q .�4. _ LU f ILPrl fy _. MELIA W lI O V/ - V1) LL tu "- r � Irl. � s.- y.. ,. _ � &�,• y S Y-n- J - �a.•�, ..ee �, ^..Yi�,/j �ir anners � i".. e...' ••� ,. 'y*.. �. � , O �, , '.'y a 1► ' ;pElementery Sc _ ; ti" ,. _ jo yj _ - �� „h" • - �: - - Marin East 18th Street �& Mariners DriveAV W Mari ner Square "v,y — �. - ►� sH.- ..- - -, _ '.q '�'1•�\� -:�'' _ -� - ' ,� it -_ '" _> ri d � •/' �� Westcliff Plaza _ �� `'o• r ',ti. ,y, , CVS`%1}S*, ` dOlS MELIA HOMES The Color Palette developed for MARINER SQUARE is developed to pay homage to its maritime name, site location & design, architectural characteristics, condominium use and resort -like living. SITE DESIGN & BUILDING TYPES: The site is designed with three different building types and sizes that best work within itself and its contextual surrounding. Based on this site planning, the color palette has been divided into three complementary color stories to best fit the building scale, their adjacencies to the streets, shopping plaza and internal community amenities. These three -color stories are defined as: Jewel Tones, deepest of the color palette, is used on the two large buildings adjacent to Irvine Blvd. with deep chroma to define the main edge of the property, foster the scale of the two large building types, and create a strong portal for the main entry into the property. Earth Tones is used for the 4-plex buildings adjacent to the secondary streets and shopping plaza. This group of colors work best with the scale of these buildings as well as gently harmonize the Jewel Tone buildings with the Pastel colored building in the center of the property. Pastel colors are used in the center of the property adjacent to the community amenity with its pool and passive open spaces. This area is surrounded with the smaller -scale, duplex buildings that call for a softer transition into the amenity core. Thus, the softest of the colors are used in this area to visually open the center of the development and draw attention to its resort -like setting. LOCATION: couple of miles away from MARINER SQUARE lies Newport Bay, Bayside Marina and the Pacific Ocean. This close vicinity to the coast, the sea breezes and bright sunshine organically commands a color palette that borrows from its natural surroundings and speaks to the architectural vernacular and characteristics developed for this property. ARCHITECTURAL VERNACULAR: the seaside architecture is designed purposely with a variety of siding materials, stucco and architectural assets that naturally demands colors, textures and finishes. This complements its physical setting with maritime blues, dune -grass greens, driftwood grays, sandy neutrals and sea -foam whites. The siding textures on the 2nd and 3rd level of the buildings call for the deeper chromas with white used for neutrality on the stucco, the courtyards and the trim of the buildings as the common thread that ties the development as one. CONDOMINIUM USE: each unit is provided a specific body and entry door color from the color palette to visually provide individual ownership, but complement the adjacent units within each building type and color story. CITY of NEWPORT BEACH: most importantly color palette developed for MARINER SQUARE respects the surrounding environment and pays homage to the precedent colors present within the City of Newport Beach with its history, location, climate and beach -loving community. It is widely anticipated that the comprehensive and strategic Color Palette designed for MARINER SQUARE will co -mingle contextually with its current environment as well as manifest into a signature development with the City of Newport Beach that will be rich, lasting and nurturing for all those who live in it and visit its environs. ®© Copyright - AT Design Consulting Inc. www. otdesignconsulting.c o m 5;.14.18 I 4 Attachment No. PC 5 Preliminary Construction Management Plan 153 M. NL_ gsll e� May 31, 2018 PRELIMINARY - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN (CMP) MARINER SQUARE 1244 Irvine Ave., Newport Beach, CA (TTM 18135) Prepared By: sell 180d4t,W, Mariner Square 2017, LLC d0 Allo c/o Melia Homes 8951 Research Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 1N3WdOl3A30 1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION AIINOWW00 dg 03A13016 Project Location The subject property (the "Site") is located at 1244 Irvine Ave_, at corner of Mariners Drive and Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA (APN's: 425-061-09). Project Description The site will include the demolition of the existing 114 apartment homes and ancillary structures for the redevelopment of 92 for sale residential condominium units and amenities. Scope of Work This Preliminary Construction Management Plan is designed to minimize the Project's neighborhood impacts and construction related environmental effects and to foster public safety during Project construction. A final Construction Management Plan is required for review and approval prior to the issuance of any permit issuance. The final CMP will be required to be in substantial conformance with this preliminary CMP. The Project applicant, contractor, and all sub -contractors must adhere to all provisions as stated in this Construction Management Plan. General This is a Preliminary Conceptual Construction Management Plan for proposes of understanding approach. We request, that if necessary, the City Condition this project for a Construction Management Plan as part of entitlement. 2.0 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION Dates of Construction The construction of the proposed Project is expected to occur over approximately 20-27 months. Start date to be determined. 1515 Hours of Construction The howl of construction will be Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m, to 6:30 p.m. and Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., as allowed by City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 10.28.040. No work permitted on City holidays. Work hours in the public right of way may be limited, as determined by the Public Works Department. No construction workers shall arrive earlier than 7:00 am Monday through Friday and earlier than 8:00 am on Saturday. Sequence (Phasine) of Construction Project construction is divided into four phases: I. DEMOLITION -PHASE #1 - Disconnect and cap off utilities. Install temporary power and install temporary water standpipe to the existing water service and meter. Demolish the existing apartments. Personnel vehicles will be required to park within only on-site designated areas. Approximately 10 to 20 personnel on-site daily during this phase and approximately 4 to 8 trucks. Approx. Time: 2 months U. EXCAVATION/GRADING/INFASTRUCTURE-PHASE #2 - Grading, wet and dry utility installation, street improvements and any off-site utility improvements including on-site curb and gutter and base paving. Personnel vehicles will be required to park within only on-site designated areas. Approximately 4 to 20 personnel on site daily during this phase and approximately 4 to 16 cars/trucks. Approx. Time: 3-4 months III. ROUGH TRADES -PHASE #3 — Foundation work/Framing, Plumbing, Electrical and HVAC During Phase #3, metal and wood floor joist systems and stud wall framing will begin on all levels and work up. Integration of rough plumbing, mechanical, and electrical systems will follow after rough framing is in place. Installation of windows, doors and roof structure will also occur during Phase 43. Personnel vehicles will be required to park within only on-site designated areas. Approximately 10 to 20 personnel on site daily during this phase and approximately 8 to 16 cars/trucks. This phase will repeat for multiple building phases. Approx, Time: 5 months each phase IV. BUILDING FINISHES -PHASE 94 - Finishes will be installed during Phase #4. Exterior finishes such as exterior plaster, roofing tile, finish siding and flooring, iron elements and guardrails will be installed. Landscaping and hardscape/paving, planting and irrigation, landscape lighting and drainage systems will also be installed at this time. In addition, interior finishes will be installed, including drywall, painting, cabinetry, stone and tile at counters, walls and flours. Personnel vehicles will be required to park within only on-site designated areas. Approximately 10 to 30 personnel on site daily during this phase and approximately 10 to 20 cars/trucks. This phase will repeat for multiple building phases. Approx. Time: 5 months each phase 50 Note: Final Paving Lift and removals and replacement of any damaged improvements will be completed at each building phase and completed during BUILDING FINISHES -PHASE 94. Personnel vehicles will be required to park within only on-site designated areas. - Noted On-site Staging, Parking, &Storage: On-site Staging, Parking, & Storage designated area will ultimately be appropriately relocated on the project site throughout the phased construction duration. However, at all times shall be limited to appropriate on-site locations and designated ingress and egress points. Total Length of Construction Time: Approx. 20-27 months Construction Equipment Construction equipment will be utilized for die various stages of the project as follows: DEMOLITION -PHASE #I: Bulldozer Demolition Excavator Hauling Trucks Flatbed delivery trucks Loaders EXCAVATION/GRADING PHASE #2: Bulldozes Grading equipment, sewer pipe, water pipe, Excavators Storm drain systems, asphalt and concrete street Scrapers improvements Flatbed delivery trucks Compressor/jackhammer Concrete mixer ROUGH TRADES -PHASE #3: Concrete mixer and pumper Concrete Compressors Placement Scaffolding Wall Framing Flatbed delivery trucks Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Masonry sa-vs/Rotary saws Installation Roto Hammers/Drills Window/ Door installation Shot pin applicators Roofing Small stationary power tools/ hand tools BUILDING FINISHES -PHASE 44: Compressors Exterior and Interior Finishes Flatbed delivery trucks Hardscape Installation Masonry Saws Softscape Installation Roto Hammers Skill Saws/Drills Small Cement Mixer Small hand-held power tools Stucco applicators Small excavators Construction Personnel Trip Generation and Parking 57 The total number of construction personnel at the Site will vary depending on the construction activity and phase. It is expected that there will be an average of 4 to 30 workers daily at the job site. Refer to Section 3.0 below (Parking Management), for a discussion of construction personnel parking during construction. Construction Process Upon permit issuance, existing utilities will be disconnected and capped off in preparation for demolition. Temporary power and temporary water standpipe will be installed on-site and the existing sewer line will be capped. After the existing buildings are demolished, the grading of the entire site will commence with an approximate 3-5' over excavation of natural soils to a minimum depth of 3 feet below existing grade or one foot below the bottom of the proposed foundations, whichever is greater. Followed by infrastructure underground improvements. During demolition and construction hauling related to the site, flagmen will be stationed at the entrance of the job site on Irvine Ave. to monitor security in and out of the gates and to redirect pedestrians. All demolition and construction activities will be approached from Irvine Ave. If a sidewalk/street closure is needed for a short duration to move heavy equipment onto and off of the site or work in the public right of way during the demolition and grading phase, a street and/or sidewalk closure permit will be obtained as required by the City of Newport Beach. Subcontractors will be restricted from accessing the property via Mariners Drive at all times and no large vehicles will be al lowed on Mariners Drive. Any construction vehicles that need to access the subject property will do so via the Irvine Ave access and will need to park entirely on the subject property. The Rutland Road secondary egress is restricted to egress only further restricted to right turn exits only so to avoid traffic conflicts with Mariner School related traffic. This exit will be primarily for personnel vehicles that may exit the site. Occasional use as exit for empty delivery vehicles may be necessary at times and shall be communicated with City Public Works department inspectors. Concrete trucks, hauling and delivery trucks will follow a specific haul route as determined by the City and will be limited to utilizing Irvine Ave ingress/egress. This will be monitored by an onsite management and coordination with City of Newport Beach. The daily number of trucks is dependent on the current phase of construction and specific improvements. A specific haul route as determined by the City is required to be approved through the City and will be limited to utilizing Irvine Ave ingress/egress to be presented as a part of the final Construction Management Plan. Truck hauling will be restricted to times outside of the adjacent Mariner School start and dismissal times. A haul route permit will be required to be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to commencing of hauling. A final anticipated truck haul route shall be presented in the final CMP. 3.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT Carpooling among construction workers will be encouraged throughout the project Construction. Parking on site will be designated. This will be encouraged during contract negotiations and selection by making it clear that off-site parking is not permitted and monitored by the on-site superintendent. Construction workers will be prohibited from parking on Mariners .Drive or Rutland .Road. This will be stipulated in subcontractor contract documents prohibiting off-site parking and is to be monitored by the 5g on-site superintendent. This should help limit disruptions to Mariners Elementary School on Mariners Drive. Compliance with this prohibition will be monitored daily by the construction management team. Carpooling shall also be encouraged among professionals. Construction Trailer, Materials Storage, and Waste Manaeennent A temporary field office will be set up on the Site within the property (see Exhibit "A") and will be equipped with power, phone, computers, and fax. This office will be installed after grading is completed. Temporary toilet facilities will also be provided on the Site. Dedicated storage areas and lockboxes will be provided for each trade to store their tools and materials on-site for the duration of construction. 4.0 SAFETY AND SECURITY Proiect Pencine The Site wil I be temporarily fenced with a 6 -foot -high construction fence prior to the start of grading. Mesh covered chain link fencing will be installed on the property along the property line on three public street sides, behind the sidewalk. One 20 -foot -wide gate on Irvine Avenue will provide access into the Site and will be locked for security. This gate shall open during construction hours and on-site storage will be designated per the site superintendent. One 20 -foot -wide gate on Rutland Rd. will be provided and will be locked for security. The Rutland Road access will be used sparingly as an exit only, as described above in the construction process section and regulated by the site superintendent. Safety and Security Appropriate signage will be posted at the Site indicating "No Trespassing," "Hard Hat Required," "Authorized Personnel Only," and other visitor and delivery information. Daily dobsite safety inspections will be done by the onsite superintendent, A temporary project construction information sign will be posted at the perimeter of the site hvine Ave frontage adjacent to the staging area that will provide a site contact name and telephone number as well as an emergency contact number in order for adjacent residents and the public to notify concerns or noise or issues emanating from the project operations. The sign will periodically be relocated through the construction phases and will be removed prior to the issuance of final certificate of completion, a final inspection sign -off, or the functional equivalent of any of them. 5.0 AIR QUALITY CONTROL, FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL, NOISE SUPPRESSION Emissions/Air Quality Control Construction activities will follow the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) adopted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to reduce air pollution and emissions impact. Puaitiye Dust Control The project shall comply with the Fugitive Dust Emission and Control Plan approved by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (under District Rule 403). Dust will be minimized using water as control. Site and debris watering shall be performed a minimum of three times daily during all demolition activities. During grading activities, any exposed soil areas shall be watered at least four times per day. Stockpiles of crushed cement, debris, dirt or other dusty materials shall be covered or watered three times daily. In �9 addition, trucks carrying soil and debris shall be wetted or covered prior to leaving the Site. On windy days, or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the Site, additional applications of water shall be applied to maintain a minimum 12 percent moisture content as defined by SCAQMD Rule 403. Soil disturbance shall be terminated whenever wind conditions exceed 25 miles per hour, All diesel -powered machinery exceeding ICQ horsepower shall be equipped with soot traps, unless the Contractor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Building Official that it is infeasible. Noise Control Construction activities will adhere to the hours prescribed by the City of Newport Beach's Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 10.28.040). Specifically, construction activities will be restricted to non -holiday weekdays from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., per Section 10.28.040. and Saturday from 8:00 to 6:00 p.m., as allowed by City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 10.28.040. The construction contractor shall provide residents living within 100 feet of the project site with a construction schedule for the project prior to the commencement of construction and shall keep them informed of any material changes to the schedule. The notification shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person with whom to register complaints. Noise Control Consideration Noise from construction activities on this project will be a fimction of the noise generated by individual construction equipment items (as listed in Construction Equipment), the equipment location and the timing and duration of noise -generated activities. it is important to note that all equipment is not generally operated continuously or used simultaneously. The number, type, distribution, and usage of construction equipment will differ from phase to phase. The noise generated is both temporary in nature and limited in hours by the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 10.28.040). 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE/PROTECTION Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared. The SWPPP is designed to comply with California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit) Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by Order No. 2010-0014- DWa (NPDES No. CAS000002) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board on the California Stormwater Quality Association Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook Portal: Construction (CASQA, 2010). In accordance with the General Permit, Section XIV, this SWPPP is designed to address the following: Pollutants and their sources, including sources of sediment associated with construction, construction site erosion and other activities associated with construction activity are controlled; Where not otherwise required to be under a Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) permit, all non-stormwater discharges are identified and either eliminated, controlled, or treated, Site BMPs are effective and result in the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater discharge and authorized non-stormwater discharges from construction activity to the Best Available Technology/Best Control Technology (BAT/BCT) standards; Water Oualily Management Plan 00 A Water Quality Management Pian (WQMP) will be prepared. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the IocalNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of the plan. EXHIBIT A SITE LOCATION AND DETAILS 01 02 Attachment No. PC 6 Environmental Information Form O3 Mariner's Square 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM The proposed project is requesting a Site Development Review, a new Tentative Tract Map and Planned Development Permit to develop a new Duplex (or halfplex) and Townhome residential community consisting of 92 attached homes consistent with the existing RM -6000 Zoning requirements and standards. The project is located at 1244 Irvine Boulevard, the comer of Mariners Drive and Rutland Road, Newport Beach, CA (APN 425-061-09). C. Environmental Setting The subject property is located on the west side of Rutland Road, the southwestern side of Mariners Drive, and the southeastern side of Irvine Avenue within a mixed residential and commercial area of Newport Beach bordering Costa Mesa. The subject property is currently occupied by Mariner Square's Apartments for residential use. On-site operations consist of typical activities associated with multi -family apartment complexes, including the production and disposal of household waste, pool maintenance, and office -related activities. The subject property consists of 13 two-story buildings located throughout the subject property. In addition, 1 two-story leasing office structure is located on the western portion of the subject property. Additional improvements located at the subject property include asphalt paved parking areas with carports, a pool, two hot tubs, a community laundry room (within the leasing office), a maintenance shed, and associated landscaping. The subject property is designated for residential development by the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project qualifies for a CEQA §15302 Class 2 Exemption as further described in Land Use below. 2. Northeast: Mariners Drive, beyond which is Mariners Elementary School and park East: Rutland Road, beyond which are multi -family residential buildings Southwest: Westcliff Plaza Commercial Center Northwest: Irvine Avenue, beyond which are single-family residential buildings (City of Costa Mesa) D. Potential Environmental Effects AESTHETICS - The site is surrounded by Irvine Avenue to the west and Rutland Road to the east with existing adjacent residential apartment/condo structures. To the north is Mariner's School and Park, and to the south is the adjacent Westcliff Plaza commercial center. No views are being compromised by the proposed development. The proposed development is replacing 05 114 apartment units with 92 multi -family for sale units. The buildings have been designed to be consistent with the development standards (RM 6000 zoning designation) for a building height of 33' with a sloped roof and the required front, side and rear setbacks. The project design includes intermittent 2 -foot projections on the second and third levels of the residential structures. The articulation will offer varying planes of the building fagade along the street frontage, thereby creating depth and shadows for a more diversified aesthetic view. No scenic views will be altered, as no scenic vistas are in the immediate vicinity of the site. No impacts to aesthetics will result from project development. II. AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES - Not Applicable. The site is designated for residential development, has been previously developed with apartments, and does not support existing agricultural or forest resources. III. AIR QUALITY - Construction and operational conditions will not result in an exceedance of air quality thresholds. The South Coast Air Quality Management District provides regulatory guidance for minimizing air quality impacts through the application of best management practices. The project will be conditioned to adhere to all such regulations as well as those imposed by the City, including limiting construction activities to specific hours and observing best management practices related to minimizing air quality impacts. A Construction Management Plan will be included in the Project which will restrict construction trips from Mariners Drive. Staging and storage will be to the west portions of the site proximate to the commercial use. Long-term operational impacts are, in large part, the result of traffic trips (mobile source emissions) related to the project. However, the traffic analysis concludes that the project will result in a reduction of trips because the number of residential units will be reduced from 114 to 92. No unique or extraordinary operational emissions will result from project buildout, because the project replaces the same uses with a reduced number of residential units. Emissions will remain substantially the same or reduced for operation of the multi -family residences, as no new or additional uses will be incorporated into the project. In addition, an Air Quality Analysis (Analysis) prepared by Greve & Associates, LLC, dated March 15, 2018, showed that no construction impacts would occur. The Analysis is included in its entirety herein as Appendix A. The Analysis focused attention on the localized effects of air quality in accordance with the SCAQMD Governing Board localized significance threshold (LST) methodology and mass rate look -up tables by Source Receptor Area (SRA). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each SRA. The LST methodology presents mass emission rates for SRA project sizes of 1, 2 and 5 acres and nearest receptor distances of 25, 50, 100, 200 and 500 meters. The project is located in SRA 18. The nearest existing sensitive land use is the residences south of the site, which are about 70 feet (21 meters) from any significant construction area. The thresholds listed in Table 1 are based on a 5 -acre site and a 25 -meter distance. A project with daily emissions rates below the thresholds during construction is considered to have a less than significant effect on local air quality. Table 1 Localized Significance Thresholds at the Nearest Receptors Localized Significance Threshold (lbs./day) Description NOx CO PM10 PM2.e Construction Activities 197 1711 14 9 Temporary impacts were determined using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) version 2016.3.2. The model is a program developed by SCAQMD in conjunction with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and uses the latest EMFAC emissions rates also developed by CARB. Because a construction schedule has not been developed, the defaults in the CaIEEMod were used and considered reasonable. No mitigation was assumed for the analysis. However, SCAQMD Rules and Regulations require that the site be watered three times per day, and the requirement was included in the modeling. Table 2 shows the results of the total emissions calculations for the construction activities related to the Project. All computer printouts are included in the attached Analysis (Appendix A). The projected emissions represent a worst-case scenario. Table 2 Peak Construction Emissions As shown above, the construction emissions are all well below the significance thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Therefore, there will be no regional air quality impacts due to project construction. The on-site construction emissions were calculated using CaIEEMod. The emissions presented in Table 3 below are those that would be emitted from activity within the project site. The total on-site construction emissions are compared to the LSTs discussed above. Table 3 On -Site Emissions by Construction Activity Pollutant Emissions (Pounds per Day) MM ROG NOx CO Sox PM10 PM2.5 Activity Demolition 3.8 42.0 23.9 0.1 4.1 2.1 Site Preparation 4.4 45.6 22.8 0.0 9.6 6.1 Grading 2.7 28.4 16.9 0.0 4.1 2.6 Building Const. 2.8 22.5 20.1 0.0 2.1 1.4 Paving 1.4 14.1 15.2 0.0 0.9 0.7 Architectural Coatings 29.1 1.7 2.3 0.0 0.3 0.2 Construction + Paving + Coatings 33.3 38.3 37.7 0.1 3.3 2.3 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No As shown above, the construction emissions are all well below the significance thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Therefore, there will be no regional air quality impacts due to project construction. The on-site construction emissions were calculated using CaIEEMod. The emissions presented in Table 3 below are those that would be emitted from activity within the project site. The total on-site construction emissions are compared to the LSTs discussed above. Table 3 On -Site Emissions by Construction Activity 07 Dail Emissions (lb day) NOx CO PMm 1 PM2.e Activity Demolition 35.8 22.1 3.5 1.9 Site Preparation 45.6 22.1 9.4 6.1 Grading 28.3 16.3 4.0 2.6 Building Construction 21.1 17.2 1.3 1.2 Paving 14.1 14.7 0.8 0.7 Architectural Coatings 1.7 1.8 0.1 0.1 Construction + Paving + Coatings 36.8 33.6 2.2 2.0 LST Thresholds 197 1711 14 9 Exceed Threshold? No No No No 07 None of the projected construction -related emissions on-site will exceed the LST significance thresholds, and local air quality impacts during construction will be less than significant. In 1998, the CARB identified particulate matter from diesel -fueled engines (DPM) as a Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). It was assumed that the majority of the heavy construction equipment utilized during construction will be diesel fueled and will emit DPM. Impacts from toxic substances are related to cumulative exposure and are assessed over a 70 -year period. Grading for the project, when the peak diesel exhaust emissions would occur, is expected to take less than 1 month with all construction expected to be completed in several months. Because of the relatively short duration of construction compared to a 70 -year lifespan, diesel emissions resulting from the construction of the project, including truck traffic associated with the project, are not expected to result in a significant impact. Therefore, as detailed in the Air Quality Analysis, the project will have a less than significant impact in all areas of project construction, and no mitigation was recommended or required. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - No existing fish or wildlife are present on this site, as the site is fully developed and surrounded by urban development. No special status plants, animals, or habitat occur on the site. New development on the site will preserve the parkway trees along the boundary edges to the fullest extent possible. The fully developed site does not present an opportunity for special status animals to roost, forage, or nest, or for special status plants to thrive due to the urban surroundings and absence of viable open space. There will be no impacts to biological resources resulting from implementation of the proposed project. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES — None, as the site has been previously disturbed and no resources were discovered with construction of the existing development. The site is not identified in the City's General Plan as having cultural or historic resources. However, standard codes and regulations applicable to construction generally will require that, in the unlikely event resources are discovered during the minimal grading that will occur, the construction activities will be required to halt, or a buffer will be created around the area, until a professional is called in to ascertain whether the resources discovered have value and must be preserved. As noted, there will be minimal site grading, and all grading quantities will be balanced on-site with no export or import of grading materials. VI. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Construction and operational emissions will result from demolition and construction. The project proposes the construction of 92 multi -family residences replacing the existing 114 apartment units. Development will be subject to local and state codes and regulations that include compliance with best management practices to reduce potential impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). A Construction Management Plan will be provided which will restrict construction trips from Mariners Drive. Vehicle trips (mobile sources) are generally the main contributor to operational residential development greenhouse gas emissions. The existing development currently generates approximately 834 daily vehicle trips, 52 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 64 of which occur during the evening peak hour. The proposed development will generate approximately 673 daily vehicle trips, 42 of which will occur during the morning peak hour and 51 of which will occur during the evening peak hour. The project will result in 161 fewer daily vehicle trips, with 9 fewer in the morning peak hour and 13 fewer in the evening peak hour, resulting in less GHG mobile source emissions. Additional operational emissions could result from energy consumption, solid waste generation, and water usage. Because the project proposes the same basic uses for the site, replacing the existing development with fewer units would have a lesser or neutral impact to RN GHG emissions. In addition, the project will be required to include construction and energy efficient measures such as dual -paned windows, energy efficient heating/AC equipment, insulation, and LED lighting, among others. These types of measures would be covered through compliance with the current (2016) California CALGreen building standards that the project would be required to meet. Compliance with the required measures will reduce operational emissions significantly compared to the existing development, which was not subject to the same stringent requirements. In addition, due to the small size of the proposed development, GHG will remain below significance thresholds for both construction and operational conditions. The air quality analysis prepared for the project showed that all project construction emissions, including regional emissions and on-site emissions, including diesel particulate matter emissions, are well below significance thresholds, and no construction impacts will occur. VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -The subject property lies within the Orange County Coastal Plain area of the Los Angeles Basin. The plain consists of predominantly alluvial basin -fill material deposited by meandering tributaries of the Santa Ana River system. Surficial geology in the subject property vicinity consists of recent alluvium of gravel, sand, silty sand, and clayey silt with an average thickness of 200 feet. This recent alluvium is underlain by the upper Pleistocene Lakewood formation, which averages 500 feet in thickness and consists of alternating stratigraphic zones of coarse-grained sand and clayey silt. The estimated depth to bedrock is more than 200 feet. The subject property is mapped as marina loamy sand. The Marina soils have grayish brown and brown, slightly and moderately acidic, loamy sand horizons, light brown, moderately and strongly acidic, loamy sand horizons with lamellae and light brown and pink, moderately acidic, sand horizons. The new development will balance the minimal grading on-site, and no export or import of soils is required. A Phase I Environmental Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the project by Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. dated June 16, 2017. The report noted that groundwater is estimated to be approximately 9 to 18 feet below ground surface and flows toward the east- southeast. The assessment concluded that the following did not occur on the project site. As shown below, no impacts will occur related to geology and soils due to development of the Project. • Recognized environmental conditions (REC) — the presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on or at the property that could release to the environment or pose a threat of future release to the environment. • Controlled recognized environmental conditions (CREC) — an REC resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority with such substances allowed to remain in place subject to implementation of required controls. Historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) — past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that occurred in connection with the property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of a regulatory authority without subjecting the property to any required controls. VIIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —None. The site is currently developed with apartments, and no hazardous materials are associated with the existing residential development use. As noted in Geology and Soils above, a Phase I ESA was prepared for the project, and the ESA determined that there was no evidence of RECs, GRECS, or HRECs. However, due to the age of the existing buildings, the ESA noted the potential presence of asbestos and lead-based paints based only on the age of the existing structures. Section 6.3.2 — Lead -Based Paint — in the ESA states: Lead is a highly toxic metal that affects virtually every system of the body. LBP is defined as any paint, varnish, stain, or other applied coating that has 1 mg/cm2 (or 5,000 ug/g or 0.5% by weight) or more of lead. Congress passed the Residential Lead -Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, also known as "Title X", to protect families from exposure to lead from paint, dust, and soil. Under Section 1017 of Title X, intact LBP on most walls and ceilings is not considered a "hazard," although the condition of the paint should be monitored and maintained to ensure that it does not become deteriorated. Further, Section 1018 of this law directed the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the US EPA to require the disclosure of known information on LBP and LBP hazards before the sale or lease of most housing built before 1978. Based on the age of the subject property buildings (pre -1978), there is a potential that LBP is present. Interior and exterior painted surfaces were observed in good condition and therefore not expected to represent a "hazard," although the condition of the paint should be monitored and maintained to ensure that it does not become deteriorated." State and federal regulations require compliance with safe practices if the presence of asbestos or lead-based paint is identified. Specifically, the South Coast Air Quality Management District requires compliance with Rule 1403, which specifies work practice requirements for contractors involved in demolition, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos or lead -containing materials. The Environmental Protection Agency provides general guidance for demolition that includes the presence of lead-based paints. The project will comply with all regulations and best management practices to ensure that no impacts occur. In addition to compliance with local and state regulations, contractors are required to comply with California's lead-based paint work practice requirements, which are separate from EPA's rules. The work practices are based on Title 17, CCR, Div. 1, Ch 8, Accreditation, Certification and Work Practices for Lead -Based Paint and Lead Hazards and SB 460, the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard. The requirements and standards include the following if any amount of known lead-based paint or presumed lead-based paint is found in a structure: • Contain the work area • Use lead safe work practices • Make sure there is no visible dust or debris at the end of the project • Demonstrate compliance with containment and lead safe work practices if asked by the California Department of Public Health or a local enforcement agency The proposed development of 92 multi -family residences will not include the use or storage of hazardous materials. As detailed above, all demolition activities will be required to adhere to existing federal, state, and local regulations, including best management practices to reduce potential impacts during the demolition of existing buildings. No project -specific measures are required, because the site is within a fully urbanized and developed area that is not subject to wildland fires, flooding, or exposure to hazardous materials. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - The existing site is relatively flat, and sheet flows overland in an easterly direction towards Rutland Road. Existing on-site area drains, grate inlet catch basins, and underground storm drain piping collect and convey storm water runoff to an existing City of Newport Beach public underground 30 -inch storm drain system 7o located within the westerly parkway/sidewalk of Rutland Road. Three connections exist connections to the existing 30 -inch storm drain within Rutland Road. Based on a field survey performed by the project engineers, there are no visible existing water quality facilities on- site. The proposed development will match the historic drainage pattern by directing storm water runoff to the easterly direction. A proposed private underground storm drain system will be designed to collect and convey the 25 -year peak flow rate per the Orange County Hydrology Manual and City of Newport Beach requirements. The proposed development has been designed with on-site sump catch basins that convey storm water runoff to two connections to the existing public 30 -inch storm drain system. Each catch basin will be equipped with a diversion system to convey low flows to the proposed biofiltration device for water quality treatment. Overflow will be conveyed within the catch basin and proposed underground storm drain piping. Emergency overflow will be directed through the secondary driveway entrances on Rutland Road. The overall impervious coverages between the pre- and post -developed conditions have decreased, making the overall peak flow rates and volume of storm water runoff decrease. Therefore, no on-site detention or peak flow mitigation will be implemented. Refer to the separately prepared project -specific Preliminary Hydrology and WQMP reports for additional information. Standard best management practices will apply to the project, and impacts will be less than significant. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING - The site is surrounded by Irvine Boulevard to the west and Rutland Road to the east, with existing adjacent residential apartment/condo structures. To the north is Mariner's School and Park, and to the south is the adjacent Westcliff commercial center. No views are being compromised by the proposed development. The proposed development is replacing 114 apartment units with 92 multi -family for sale units. The site is designated Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) in the City's General Plan and Multi -Unit Residential (RM -6000) in the City's Zoning Code. CEQA Class 2 Exemption (§ 15302 — Replacement or Reconstruction) consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The proposed development will be located on the 5.76 -acre site where the 114 apartments currently exist and will result in a reduction of residences to 92 units. The multi- family residential use proposed is identical to existing uses and will be consistent with the City's RM and RM -6000 land use designations. CEQA Guidelines § 15300.2 provides exceptions to Categorical Exemptions. The proposed project does not meet any of the exceptions as detailed below. The project does not qualify under § 15300.2 as an exception to the granting of a Class 2 Exemption. a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located — a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state or local agencies. This exception does not pertain to the Project, as Applicant is requesting a Class 2 Exemption — Replacement or Reconstruction. 72 b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time, is significant. The project vicinity is generally built -out with adjacent existing residential structures, Mariner's School and Park and the Westcliff commercial shopping center to the south. The project will replace existing apartments; however, no new cumulative impact is anticipated, as the use is consistent with the existing use and the number of residential units will be reduced by 22 (from 1] 4 to 92 units). Operational impacts will be less with fewer vehicle trips and more energy efficient building and energy standards than occurred when the existing development was constructed. In addition, the project is consistent with the City's General Plan. No other projects are approved or under construction in the area which, when combined with the proposed project, would create new or more significant impacts. Therefore, this exception does not apply to the Project. c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. There are no unusual circumstances surrounding the re -development of the site from 114 apartment units to 92 multi -family units. Development will be subject to existing codes and regulations, which will minimize potential impacts for short- term construction and long-term operation. There will be no on-site activity associated with the residential nature of the development that will result in significant effects on the environment, and this exception does not apply to the proposed project. d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. Tis does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR. No scenic resources, including designated scenic highways, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources are known to exist either on the site or in near proximity to the site. Therefore, no environmental impacts will occur, and the project is not subject to this exception. e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site has been developed with apartments for many years and is not considered a hazardous waste site per §65962.5 of the California Government Code. Therefore, this exception is not applicable to the proposed project. J) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. There are no known historical resources on the site, which has been developed for many years with apartments. The site is not listed in the City's General Plan as a historical resource site and it is unlikely any such resources will be discovered on 72 the previously graded and disturbed site. Therefore, the project is not subject to this exception. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES - Not applicable, because the project site is not designated as a mineral resource site and no such resources have been discovered during previous site preparation and construction activities. It is unlikely that any such resources will be discovered during construction of the proposed project. XIL NOISE — The City's General Plan and Municipal Code establish acceptable exterior and interior noise levels for construction activities. The project will comply with the days and hours identified in Section 10.28.040 of the City's Municipal Code, which allows construction activities during specific hours on weekdays and Saturdays and no construction on Sundays and federal holidays. Adherence to the regulations will reduce impacts due to project construction. Operational noise for the proposed residential development is not anticipated to be significant. Noise -generating activities will be typical of a residential area and include lawn/landscaping equipment, vehicle noise, mechanical equipment noise, and noise from outdoor recreational activities. Noise levels will be no greater, and likely less, than existing noise from the development on the site. No substantial increase in noise will occur in the operational phase of the development, as no new or different noise -generating components are included in the project. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - The proposed development is replacing 114 apartment units with 92 multi -family for sale units. The decrease in the number of residential units complies with the minimum number of units required by the Zoning Code. The reduction in the number of residential units is anticipated to reduce the number of residents as compared with the number of residents in the existing apartments. Because both the existing development and the proposed development provide multi -family type housing, there is no anticipated increase in the project population that would result in an impact or a substantial change in the City's population generally. The current City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element states that the City has sufficient sites to accommodate its Regional Needs Housing Assessment allocation. The project will not be required to provide affordable or replacement housing. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - The site is currently developed with 114 multi -family residential units that are served by existing public services such as police, fire, and medical emergency services. The reduction in the number of units to be constructed will result in a commensurate reduction in the requirement for public services. Schools are also anticipated to see a reduction in the number of students based on the reduction in housing units. However, the City will require the payment of school fees as required by the Municipal Code to reduce any potential impacts to less than significant. The following table shows the current and projected student generation rates. As shown, the project is anticipated to increase the total on by approximately seven students. 73 Table 4 Student Generation 1 Existing apartments 2 Proposed Project V. RECREATION - The proposed development is replacing 114 apartment units with 92 multi- family for sale units. The proposed development is replacing the current apartment amenities with similar common area amenities. The project proposes on-site amenities such as a pool, a spa, a great lawn for outdoor activities, and an outdoor dining and fireside area including a barbeque, a sink, a television, and tables and chairs. The project significantly exceeds the required outdoor open space area by providing 14,288 square feet where 6,900 square feet is required. XVI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC - The project site currently consists of 114 multi -family residential units, which will be replaced with 92 multi -family residential units. The reduction in the number of residences will result in a commensurate reduction in the number of vehicle trips. Both the existing and proposed uses are similar in terms of multi -family uses; however, trip generation factors are less for condominium uses compared to apartments. Traffic impacts are anticipated to be less than with the current uses on the site due to the reduction of 22 residential units. The project will reduce the number of driveways to access the project site. There will be three points of access with the primary entrance off Irvine Avenue, thereby eliminating several of the existing curb cuts and reducing conflict with vehicles accessing Mariner Elementary School. The three drive aisles will allow easy movement through the site and to amenities. Sidewalks will be located along the interior island area and portions along the side areas of the fourplex buildings, in addition to central paseo walkways throughout the site. A Construction Management Plan will be provided to restrict construction trips from Mariners Drive during construction activities. Staging and storage will be located on the western portion of the site proximate to the commercial use (Westcliff Plaza). As shown in the table below, the existing development currently generates approximately 834 daily vehicle trips, 52 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 64 of which occur during the evening peak hour. The proposed development will generate approximately 673 daily vehicle trips, 42 of which will occur during the morning peak hour and 51 of which will occur during the evening peak hour. The project will result in 161 fewer daily vehicle trips, with 9 fewer in the morning peak hour and 13 fewer in the evening peak hour. This translates to 19.4% fewer daily trips with 18.0% fewer in the morning peak and 20.1 % fewer in the evening peak hours. 74 Student Student Generation' Rate Generation' Rate (114 Multi -Family Existing Project (91 Single Family Proposed Project School Level Units) # of Students Attached Units) # of Students Elementary School (K-6) 0.11 13 0.20 18 Middle School (7-8) 0.03 3 0.04 4 High School (9-12) 0.04 5 0.07 6 Totals 0.60 21 0.31 28 1 Existing apartments 2 Proposed Project V. RECREATION - The proposed development is replacing 114 apartment units with 92 multi- family for sale units. The proposed development is replacing the current apartment amenities with similar common area amenities. The project proposes on-site amenities such as a pool, a spa, a great lawn for outdoor activities, and an outdoor dining and fireside area including a barbeque, a sink, a television, and tables and chairs. The project significantly exceeds the required outdoor open space area by providing 14,288 square feet where 6,900 square feet is required. XVI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC - The project site currently consists of 114 multi -family residential units, which will be replaced with 92 multi -family residential units. The reduction in the number of residences will result in a commensurate reduction in the number of vehicle trips. Both the existing and proposed uses are similar in terms of multi -family uses; however, trip generation factors are less for condominium uses compared to apartments. Traffic impacts are anticipated to be less than with the current uses on the site due to the reduction of 22 residential units. The project will reduce the number of driveways to access the project site. There will be three points of access with the primary entrance off Irvine Avenue, thereby eliminating several of the existing curb cuts and reducing conflict with vehicles accessing Mariner Elementary School. The three drive aisles will allow easy movement through the site and to amenities. Sidewalks will be located along the interior island area and portions along the side areas of the fourplex buildings, in addition to central paseo walkways throughout the site. A Construction Management Plan will be provided to restrict construction trips from Mariners Drive during construction activities. Staging and storage will be located on the western portion of the site proximate to the commercial use (Westcliff Plaza). As shown in the table below, the existing development currently generates approximately 834 daily vehicle trips, 52 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 64 of which occur during the evening peak hour. The proposed development will generate approximately 673 daily vehicle trips, 42 of which will occur during the morning peak hour and 51 of which will occur during the evening peak hour. The project will result in 161 fewer daily vehicle trips, with 9 fewer in the morning peak hour and 13 fewer in the evening peak hour. This translates to 19.4% fewer daily trips with 18.0% fewer in the morning peak and 20.1 % fewer in the evening peak hours. 74 Table 5 Project Trip Generation Comparison XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - The proposed development will be served by an on-site public water system that will be maintained by the City of Newport Beach through a proposed access and utility easement within the private drive aisles. The proposed on-site public water system will connect to the existing offsite public 12 -inch water main within Irvine Avenue, looping through the site and connecting to an existing off-site public 6 -inch water main within Rutland Road. The proposed on-site public water system will supply new public on-site fire hydrants, water meters for each residential unit, irrigation and fire systems, and other necessary appurtenances to support the development and water system design. The proposed development will reutilize an existing on-site 8 -inch sewer main, if condition and location permits, that connects to an existing off-site 8 -inch sewer system located within Rutland Road. Reutilization of the existing on-site sewer main will prevent additional construction under an existing public 30 -inch storm drain system located within Rutland Road. The proposed on-site sanitary sewer system will be private and maintained by the appointed Homeowner's Association (HOA). Two proposed connections to an existing off-site public 30 -inch storm drain system within Rutland Road are proposed to support the development's storm water runoff and drainage mitigation. The estimated schedule construction of these public utilities will be determined at a later date. The proposed development will utilize a gravity -fed sanitary sewer system that will be privately maintained by the appointed HOA. The proposed on-site private sewer system will comprise of 6 -inch and 8 -inch sewer mains, manholes, and cleanouts where applicable based on the development's and City of Newport Beach Sanitary Sewer design standards. On-site sanitary sewer effluent will be conveyed off-site to a public sewer system within Rutland Road. The proposed development is located within the servicing limits of the City of Newport Beach and is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The proposed development will decrease the number of residential units on-site. Will serve letters from the City of Newport Beach for sanitary sewer and local domestic water services have been requested and will be provided at a later date. 715 Peak Hour Morning Evening Number of Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total Land Use Units Daily Trip Generation Rates DU 0.11 0.35 0.46 0.35 0.21 0.56 7.32 Multi -Family Housing (Low -Rise) Existing Development 114 DU 12 40 52 40 24 64 834 Multi -Family Housing (Low -Rise) Proposed Development 92 DU 10 33 43 32 19 51 673 Multi -Family Housing (Low -Rise) Difference -2 -7 -9 -8 -5 -13 -161 Percent Difference -17.1% -18.3% -18.0% -20.4% -19.6% -20.1% -19.4% XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - The proposed development will be served by an on-site public water system that will be maintained by the City of Newport Beach through a proposed access and utility easement within the private drive aisles. The proposed on-site public water system will connect to the existing offsite public 12 -inch water main within Irvine Avenue, looping through the site and connecting to an existing off-site public 6 -inch water main within Rutland Road. The proposed on-site public water system will supply new public on-site fire hydrants, water meters for each residential unit, irrigation and fire systems, and other necessary appurtenances to support the development and water system design. The proposed development will reutilize an existing on-site 8 -inch sewer main, if condition and location permits, that connects to an existing off-site 8 -inch sewer system located within Rutland Road. Reutilization of the existing on-site sewer main will prevent additional construction under an existing public 30 -inch storm drain system located within Rutland Road. The proposed on-site sanitary sewer system will be private and maintained by the appointed Homeowner's Association (HOA). Two proposed connections to an existing off-site public 30 -inch storm drain system within Rutland Road are proposed to support the development's storm water runoff and drainage mitigation. The estimated schedule construction of these public utilities will be determined at a later date. The proposed development will utilize a gravity -fed sanitary sewer system that will be privately maintained by the appointed HOA. The proposed on-site private sewer system will comprise of 6 -inch and 8 -inch sewer mains, manholes, and cleanouts where applicable based on the development's and City of Newport Beach Sanitary Sewer design standards. On-site sanitary sewer effluent will be conveyed off-site to a public sewer system within Rutland Road. The proposed development is located within the servicing limits of the City of Newport Beach and is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The proposed development will decrease the number of residential units on-site. Will serve letters from the City of Newport Beach for sanitary sewer and local domestic water services have been requested and will be provided at a later date. 715 70 Attachment No. PC 7 Draft Resolution for Denial 77 72 RESOLUTION NO. PC2018-019 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA DENYING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. PL2018-001 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2017-005 FOR A 92 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1244 IRVINE AVENUE (PA2017- 248) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Mariner Square 2017, LLC, with respect to property located at 1244 Irvine Avenue, and legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, requesting approval of a Planned Development Permit and a Tentative Tract Map. 2. The applicant proposes the demolition of an existing 114 -unit apartment complex and the construction of a 92 -unit residential condominium development, including private streets and common open space on a 5.76 -acre site. The proposed development complies with development standards including height, site coverage, and parking requirements. One adjustment is requested at the front setback along Irvine Avenue to allow for second and third stories to project two feet into the required 20 -foot setback. 3. The subject property is designated Multiple -Unit Residential (RM) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Multi -Unit Residential (RM -6,000) Zoning District. 4. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. A public hearing was held on June 21, 2018 in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. The Planning Commission may approve a planned development permit only after making each of the required findings set forth in NBMC Section 20.52.060. In this case, the Planning Commission was unable to make the required findings based upon the following: �9 Findings for Planned Development Permit: A. The proposed development would: a. Include only uses allowed within the base zoning district; b. Be substantially consistent with the purpose, intent, goals, policies, actions, and land use designations of the General Plan, and any applicable specific plan; C. Be substantially consistent with the purpose and intent of the base zoning district; d. Include sustainable improvement standards and protection of environmental resources; and Be compatible with other development neighborhood of the proposed project. within the zoning district and general B. The project would produce a development of higher quality and greater excellence of design than that might otherwise result from using the standard development regulations. C. The subject site is adequate in terms of size, shape, topography, and circumstances to accommodate the proposed development. D. The project, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties or allowed uses. E. The project includes improved quality of life provisions and enhanced amenities, including an additional and appropriate variety of structure placement and orientation opportunities, appropriate mix of structure sizes, high quality architectural design, common open space, landscaping, parking areas, private open space, public art, recreational amenities for adults and/or children, private or separated entrances, sustainable improvement standards (e.g., energy efficient building design, construction, and operation; convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation; water and resource conservation), etc. F. The design, location, operating characteristics, and size of the project would be compatible with the existing and future uses in the vicinity, in terms of aesthetic values, character, scale, and view protection. Facts Not in Support of Findings: The Planned Development Permit application for the proposed project's design is not consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code and the findings required by Section 20.52.060 are not supported in this case. The proposed project is not consistent with the applicable criteria and may prove detrimental to the community. The Planning Commission may approve a tentative tract map only after making each of the required findings set forth in NBMC Section 19.12.070. In this case, the Planning Commission was unable to make the required findings based upon the following: M Findings for Tentative Tract Map: G. 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 applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code. H. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. 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 in 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 CEQA Section 21081 that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. J. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. K. 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 the ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgement 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. L. That, subject to the provisions of Section 6674.4 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 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. M. That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code: (1) There is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included within the land project, and (2) the decision making body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. N. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Section 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act. O. 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 NA 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. P. 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. Q. 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. Facts Not in Support of Finding: The Tentative Tract Map is not consistent with the legislative intent of Title 19 of the Municipal Code. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the applicable regulations and may prove detrimental to the community. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies Planned Development Permit PL2018-001 and Tentative Tract Map No. NT2017-005. 2. This action shall become final and effective 10 days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 19 Subdivisions, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2018. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN ABSENT: BY: Peter Koetting, Chairman BY: Erik Weigand, Secretary Attachment No. PC 8 Correspondence es 24 &6ert and9Vlary Finlay 400 9Vlorning Star Gane 9lrewport Beach, CA 92660 May 17, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Avenue Dear Chairman Koetting: ,,.0-OEIVE0 6y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAY 21 2018 CITY OF *V�'ORT BEPO\,\ I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I su ort. Sincerely, cc: Mayor Duffield and Members of the Newport Beach City Council 25 &6in P. Wiight 301 Evening Star Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 May 16, 2018 ,/Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: psCEIVEO ay COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAY 21 2018 CITY OF "I"pORT BEPC11 I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. 9 Robin P. Wright CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council 20 Attachment No. PC 9 Project Plans 27 22 IU_v��yrezf:3 0 TO 10 so 120 2W leer SEak: P= 00'-0' Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans HALF PLEx/4-PLEX: PROJECT DATA .v.N i �. urvrcs LOT AREA: D. rvz \. urvna LOT COVERAGE: Ov�wN 9. Iw YNItS .uN •. iw uNrcs CODE ANALYSIS: DwowR/JtE YNYS TOWN HOMES: RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM: n 1 . 1. uwrs . to z. Iz urvns nnr•s.�.EwnaEeautuz¢r_v� .N a - uNns OPEN SPACE CALCULATION. PARKING SUMMARY: .w \ `� rou. niwmnau \ I1 \ \ I(\may\\/J�w\y^•/\I 1� N"M 29 % Ri;-4 Mala YiINJ IG LO Z O J CL A PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans + \I J CI ID CI 13 I \ I � n ❑ o a o - - J LI \� 1 \ I L. J 9� NOT TO SCALE f � o 1 Li: - \ \ OPEN SPACE: ei.wrz oxen srwce I I ^ \ OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: 01 nuvwre oven srw¢ i f!_. ..7.1 LL \ 111 ��I I �` ` ,� � • �, �\ n .. ...:..:.....d,..,.n, 1 + \I J CI ID CI 13 I \ I � n ❑ o a o - - J LI \� 1 \ I L. J 9� IM_-101rez1:3 11 1 1 1 l 1 11 1 III Icy■■ ��I Mal: 26 T1 CDG' LL, ,Lu _ tL BL 17 LD 20 , BLDG 21 i i USLDG-3 LDG 18 CommunityPool/Spa 'BLDG 23 'I l' BBQArea(s) BLDG 16 ,. ' BLDG TS BLDG 1 ' BLDG 13 p a ID a sl �� 91 �� 81DG6 ! BLD BLDG I I Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans NOT TO SCALE TRASH BINS: BLDG2' } \1 LOG 14 ' 1 \ EDJ1 1 .: ll BLD 1 \ 1� l 0 1 \ CI o BLDG 10Jj _ n LF 92 PA2017-248 1 BLDG 7 1 BLDG 28 ' i 4• BLDG: `3 BLDG2 1 9 € k8LDGI2LDBLOG3 �! Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans NOT TO SCALE f t HALF PLEX/4-PLEX: _ w r Nx.a ve wrr J Bl tL _ I BLDG2 \\� (s) IN♦+pir �•, BLDG 23 BLDG 24 i 1 Iftod 76 i M. BLD 7 - 8LOG7 BLDG? BLDG BLDG 72 • IIS C? A7. -- —_ u_—. .� 10, TOWN HOMES: Tn a - 1.1— wrt T- i x:.or, xoa 93 i TOWN HOMES: Tn a - 1.1— wrt T- i x:.or, xoa 93 PA2017-248 a».wn irucrwa� FIRST FLOOR Rim CI�N�R9e _ � _'� Ilglnipll■ y SECOND FLOOR Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION IHllli� I � uvF 94 W f 0 x a J W< G U W 0 wa A �• Ir cad • Y■ 3'. Mills ftl If � i SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION IHllli� I � uvF 94 W f 0 x a J W< G U W 0 wa r sD T T r X X T mp N Nilmlmirr� u� k i h llirL-!-III1111= 1i PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION THIRD FLOOR 90 U W^ 0 U 1-- �f i r fAn sore �uaceuc[ I II II FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION THIRD FLOOR 90 U W^ 0 U IM_-101rez1:3 im io w T x 0 i m n x C z D 0 f� Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans T X 0 i n 0 N y D D 3 0 0 C N 97 IM_-101rez1:3 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans E :u PLAN 2 / PLAN 3 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1 / PLAN 4 1 i LL -4 IA h 1� PLAN 2 / PLAN 3 PLAN 1 / PLAN 4 SECOND FLOOR SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION PLAN 2 / PLAN 3 PLAN 1 / PLAN 4 THIRD FLOOR 92 U W 0 M SolI file', r LLr LL w loll C®1I An 0 m C) Mow Ll L Eklffl-- Lril i L7r L- L! 11 0 LL ■ L u_�I 6m .�� IF- i u- a IU_-101rez1:3 7 POP OUT OVER -” ... CANOPY PROJECTION THIRD FLOOR Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans JL . 1- � r 1--! t FIRST FLOOR J� •�----5'CANOPY . xrzv„ron.aei PROJECTION V' SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION j Fi3�TC•79SZ11 t 7 POP OUT OVER CANOPY PROJECTION 102 PA2O17-248 Ree, PASEO Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans J w i 0 s a w cW S o LOOP STREET ALLEY o eeee T, B a e LL--� _E u COMMERCIAL EDGE 103 U W n PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans A �. N WW S I T W ill l� 1 :I FIRST FLOOR $'CANOPY 'd Y 5'CANON 9v .fi 5'CANON 16 SCANOPY PROJECTION n..,a.v=. PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION CY ..a .a ' w S- —� SECOND FLOOR 2- POP OUT OVER _ _ 2POP OUT OVER 2' POP OUT OVER 7 POP OUT OVER CANOPY PROJECTION CANOPY PROJECTION CANOPY PROJECTION CANOPY PROJECTION SES E PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION 104 IM_-101rez1:3 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans THIRD FLOOR 7POP OUI OVER --7 POP OUT OVER -- _ -7 POP OUT OVER ,. r, '-7 POP OUT OVER C OPY PROJECRON - ..�.r.' CANOPY PROJECTION �..: C OPY PROJEnON C OFV PROJECIION 105 W n m PA2017-248 » 11L Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans IRVINE AVE Ru ide ENTRY ROAD LOOP STREET SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION gB 11 11 EH.H COMMERCIAL EDGE 100 PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans :.! 2'MPOUTOVER-"- '----7POPOUTOVER CIAOPY PROJECTION TVP ., CANOPY PROJECTION TVP IGIE3•"X 1-U U W' 0' SEE PROJECT DETAIL SECTION FOR MORE INFORMATION m 102 ALT f TI TTI;■S■:.i� W�] LU Li MEN III I dL'- li� �rn� IL 1111 101 211 PA2017-248 MARINER'S ELEMENTARY MARINERS DRIVE 1 MOIOHCO'[IHI ! dec a5vereChlcuts, paving + IRNINI lINOE FMNNiOF • street heesin ApArkay + 1 • d'"atk,eey • Inshplanting o rpmEM SIGNAGE777 2J, y PROJECTENTRY •malchingietght patens • festival lights 4k_ • el tehdubr paring i PRNAIE PATIOS • see sheets LA&L5 i o. ! �. Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans ■ W i O Q EXISTING TREES to RETAIN W enhan � enP es MAII BOX �i n 9 y s n p REST. 7 Vs��+ n POO'[ CNONYAR'[I • seesheet[3 ADJACENT COMMERCIAL r / ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL IM • enhanced ping = tl • dectrative pAttery 110 rT-1 LJ r � - OL = S -will Irmarr M, _ | � � � - i .#:. :� »� /� � � \ : \ � _ . a■�E\�`�\2\,\\\,%y Cis WwMV /\� Imo_ 4fJVApZIJQ Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans IPVINE nvE 1w 113 r PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans MASRNRYWALLTO.....,.,... ..._. _..................... ,.,,..,....,,...,,...,_,.,....... MATCH PLANE TREES Ta 6e ARCHITECTURE, TYP. PROTECTED IN PLACE LONDON PLANE TREES MASONAYWAI L TO PAPER PROTECTED IN PLACE ARCHITECTURE, TYP 115 "LO6 Imo_ Q$JVApZf:3 7 7 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans w WATER CONSERVATION FEATURES: THEFOLLDOINo MCACHRE wiu PE ICOORDINATED INTO THE PROJECT TO Cox SERGE WRITER LLnTI ON OF AUTOMATIC'EMAIL 'I NEPAL ION CONI ROLLER oo IT N NOR CERIOR AGO ER TRACK ELAN 11ACt ..III GAVEEwv METER. CON IIII 8 FAIL AGENDI I TO A8HP F CHIP 'OIL RATHI RETENTION 7 MULCHING IN THE LANDSCAPE ARE ACM AT THE BASE OF TRECE CITY of NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE 14.17 WATER ORDINANCE NOTE T E IF C PUTION SUSTEM CIA REST FIRED M MEET LIFE RECUR EMENTS mTHE Cm 6T N1`NPNII RECATH, VUHI FINAL ILL_La T YVATEP ELF CIEN r T 'NOS APE ORDINANCE J``�� SCAPE ORDINANCE TIr =.. 101NmERR60.T ON 67 ZmLL-Ie o�OO F All � 110 ,rcLT11 u IM_-101rez1:3 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans D 10- grow4OW ir a � to - _ � s17 0 VI PA2017-248 N49'21'25"w 305.01' MARINERS DRIVE I , Li La 1=�A I �� �� • I I I C -'" • � � � I I I ❑=� I 0 0 I1 .A&A I� 1 I I Z 1 I I i w - ' W vv w II I i Of 1 II � I I 1 TE �o Q = I I U BIW-�-I M l I - �o 1I31- tIF �°❑ I o I lak go a WF I ' 11 Fin 0 FT I M O ,° I �� /AC A I I � I I I I I T Tvv — .. — ....—.. —.-.. —. . -a-� II . A A AA 0D 0A AA AA I LF I I I I I I 1 i i i i i ' vv Vp DD I I T771 11 1 N=20'03'36„ 8.300 00 Attachment No. PC 9 - SCALE PARKING SUMMARY: GARAGE PARKING - 184 SPACES HEAD IN PARKING - 8 SPACES PARALLEL PARKING - 39 SPACES 231 SPACES (2.51:1) NORTH Ln W I 0 Q W U V� z z J d W W� U W r LL Imo_ QfJrdZE:3 MILE REPORT x m¢uwm,[��rc uww+� wonw�p+ EASE) E ri�e�rt vo.„,.,,. eomwmAAn Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET INDEX: LEGEND IT ern SYMBO S o�r�a oe �i V ICNIIT MAP OWNER: �w CIVIL ENGINEER: DEVELOPER: riwliu� m° u�si nm m.[ Nm � rt<�n emim a w.w 'an°"Zmitln ¢ s ARCHITECT: woo SITE AOORESS: w�°'°��.wu °ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE : a rr m.cwxv _ r,�siw ryi tl4" aTa m�B.e�mm rv.-wmvm L°wrz io: -T. ma° SHEET INDEX: LEGEND IT ern SYMBO S o�r�a oe �i V ICNIIT MAP OWNER: �w CIVIL ENGINEER: DEVELOPER: riwliu� m° u�si nm m.[ Nm � rt<�n emim a w.w 'an°"Zmitln ¢ s ARCHITECT: woo SITE AOORESS: w�°'°��.wu °ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE : L IM PURVEYORS: rr m.cwxv _ r,�siw ryi tl4" GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: m�B.e�mm rv.-wmvm L°wrz io: -T. ma° w� EWOO ZONE INFORMATION CURRENTZONINGINFORMATION, . —1.LAND ARU —1„ -w. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: BENCHMARK STATEMENT: REVISIONS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ® N0. 18135 CGXRVLTMGIXC. TITLE MEET wm .r�...� CM OF NEWPORT BEACH 119 IJ_-211re'ZIf:1 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 p9 a rtauPswl 1� �� ��-• �vwwn.m Psw) �wv�l��sa+l EMSIXG WENENT NGRG' pue0m WNEW uns pp uv ois�vivn w�ross 120 PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA � Y v � v, MARINERS DRIVE ------------ Li t ns_ IV 11111 1 �\ I I�4 � I — ..4�li-&i1L �,I� � • ee � „�� �t{� � e I@ ,�,� ,� M I ' t. mp�� \'6� \ ��\ �� . a� M1� 8vi URI 'Aiial ago I •,�. (��� Ali ;��� '!� si—�� _ `� � �� I � $ »� f: 1� .fib" 6 g } 1 e-NG�L .-�d• _ �i� I�I s - ���. hflH Yfnrll}1.114 � W,� _� ���d.L I�� xw.3�A$',a.,A � ♦a i� � � 1�_ ��— I � �A� ���x iR y n F _ 3 •d. @ SHEETa4 Q s m°.alnnw.u.+mnE am cwn meo-m..rzane.m REVISIONS nv�o o-., TENTATIVE TRACT MAP } stIIluw�oo-an<.�.e mwo..ze.ana..n,.a.w.a�cr -- ® N0. I8196 e coxsuDiwe, ixe. % MNCBPIULL GRADING k DRUNAGB PIdN o- } oe e / xo•u nam xT. nn a rnrcvm CITY OF NEWPORT BEACNry 121 PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET 3 5 � W P d 1W h WAY II .Y o-0 3Al A��� f 9 ssrrt ri � a B -------- ---- I IIF ,+, wr L 7 R ro a I oMM ' EgG t �i\5 01 P N I i pp pp p pp p p I_� _ II °i'r, u Y x.14 4 • .h li I I S r 1. i � I� I 'L �� l` � � Iii _S� 1' ii P.T. © I m ma s REVISIONS ' TENTATRACT MAP NO. i �$ N0. 10196 -- � mH °•gm•. g� MNUMAL GPADING�k DR IG8 PW a < oe e J. UUXSU.NEERI �. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 122 iLT_Y,Z$IVAVZ :3 sErnm �-s iXaxc XanwE x� =nM X—XxWRIXEn DWE ww .nr i m n s[cnox C— XM1XX X D 7-1 F -F 2r IMMOR COURT 0. SIpPPX4 CFNIE'uxovno[ & w mnh uaE � r . w9.x A Ra scnm� o -o xxr t SErnm H -H 2e mire A= Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans 123 PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans 124 MNE w uuo wuw Ruluxo WNE aw Fw: awe mo.aw: �.� ,RrcxuE WNU wr ...� mw aw � n R�w� 3 �R� oR as Ruruxo .r. +r< mr.eWW w. mp eu muren rtOx ow. m. mow mv.�w w.r'srt npq'"W MSWmn wu.e sM mP x� �nA mr uw ----- QVMR FL S---- YYIXFPS OMW R61E m 111 fC ORryE -- T � I ��� n" mrx . o"� ` _s r.�w E wm�e. REVfS10NS TENTAT TRACT' MAP I ® N0. SED SECTIONS AND ND DETABS 6 wA Coxe �LiMO,�,xc.%- m CITY OF NEEPORT BEACH 124 IJ_v-2iyre'Z1f:1 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WATER NOTE sEwCPiNOTE : 125 PA2017-248 Attachment No. PC 9 - Project Plans TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 18135 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1 y y 1 21 e MEI E E' SAY DRIVE Also' it X11 . I �I ar aM ,I s nDx c_c. a DRIVE AIM E it "�� � w � • a. I VIII MAP REQUIRED FIRE FLOW SUMMARY wry , me 1 f �'m.J nwo IF - v 1 SECTION —1 31'mHAD RSL ,o ' l f{ E — Ili �r fm I_4 N 2 BECTON X—N 30 DRIVE ABLE 1' amm I 1 J 1 �41 1� L� �I 'I� VIII MAP REQUIRED FIRE FLOW SUMMARY wry , me 1 f �'m.J nwo ,Q_' - v 1 \St\�� PSP PRti c. ."�-A-sr-��>3 'a: s+.unca V J < •-- � h-+"� �t e e a "—E- SUBDIVIDER ADDRESS FREWS2 DENEFAL FEERT T o�wuxmupv.v[mnY,¢t¢uuatmeµ v[m�L[[.uwerrz -NGE s[mrar n[ i//• a E w. 120 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From To: Subject: FW: lune 21, 2018 - Planning Commission Staff Report and Agenda - PA2017-248 Date: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 10:13:55 AM Attachments: imace002.ong Image004 png Swomt Mariners Scuare - 6-15-18 Combined.odf SPON Agenda - Correspondence cif Hi Brittany, Can this be included as additional materials? CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccraaerlanewportbeachco.aov 949-644-3227 From: Crager, Chelsea Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 12:38 PM To: Ramirez, Brittany <bramirez@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: FW: June 21, 2018 - Planning Commission Staff Report and Agenda - PA2017-248 Chelsea Crager ; Assistant Planner City of Newport Beach ;Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive ; Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949)644-3227;(949)644-3020(FAX); ccrager(mnewportbeachca.gov From: Chad Brown [mailto:chad(@melia-homes.com] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 12:33 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager(dinewportbeachca.eov> Subject: RE: June 21, 2018 - Planning Commission Staff Report and Agenda - PA2017-248 Hi Chelsea— Thank you for sending this SR link I am reviewing this afternoon. I want to provide you with additional letters of support of the project from the community. Please see attached. There is only one duplicate (Finlay) to what you received directly. These others were directed to me for this transmittal. In addition I have provided a copy of the SPON agenda and follow up correspondence we received from A. Lingle of SPON. Please forward to the Planning Commissioners. I will be in contact if I have any questions regarding the report and conditions. Thankyou- Chad Brown Vice President of Planning & Development © MELIA HOMES 8951 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Main (949)759-4367, Ext. 264 Cell(949)468-9430 Please Note: This message may contain confidential information and is intended only for the named addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please delete it from your system. Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Crager, Chelsea <ccrageriSnewportbeachca.gov> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 11:02 AM To: Chad Brown <chadPmelia-homes.com>; Chris Harmon <chris(camelia-homes.com> Subject: June 21, 2018 - Planning Commission Staff Report and Agenda - PA2017-248 Good morning Chad and Christine, Below you will find a link to the Planning Commission information page where the agenda and staff report for the next scheduled meeting will be posted. The agenda and report are typically posted to the website on Friday of this week between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Additionally, the agenda and reports are usually delivered to Commissioners Friday afternoon, so please give the Commissioners the courtesy and opportunity to read the report before you contact them (if you feel a need to). Please contact me if you have any questions, concerns, or thoughts about staff's recommendation and/or meeting procedures. Lastly, please let me know if you have any special requests regarding your presentation. See you at the meeting. Here is the link to the Planning Commission information page: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx? page=1325 Here is a link to the staff report: htto://www.newl2ortbeachca.Qov/Pln/PC TEMP LINK/MarinerSquareResidentialCondominiums PA2017 248.odf Thank you, CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner 949-644-3227 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay B, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachcasov Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Ro6ert and9blary Fin(ay 400 91orning Star Gane Newport Beach, CA 92660 May 17, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Robert Finlay cc: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) ,john and_7uCut .�fouten 499 E. 1816 Street Costa Wesa, C.2192627 5/16/2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. Although I do not reside in Costa Mesa, my home is one of the closest homes to the new development. We are in favor of a project that reduces density and consequently traffic generation as well as updates this segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design that turns transient residents into permanent residents is a desirable redevelopment that we strongly support. Sincerely, John R. Houten CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) (Drew 960even 3 Cape Andover Newport Beach, CA 92660 5/21/18 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Pely,oeven CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) TredandWary Comwelf 2107 WindwardGane Newport Beach, '1 92660 June 5, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: We are writing to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. We are long-time residents of this area of Newport Beach and are in favor of the project which will reduce density and, consequently, traffic generation around Mariners Elementary School and the adjoining park. In addition, we believe the proposed modern Contemporary California Coastal design of the multi -family for sale homes will provide a much- needed update to the architecture of the existing apartment complex, thereby beautifying our neighborhood. Lastly, the proposed housing project will have the beneficial effect of turning transient residents into permanent residents. For these reasons, we strongly support the Mariner Square development project. Sin Cornwell CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Karen 9KcSunas 1814toff Drive Newport Beach, CA 92625 June 12, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE -6 Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your,:colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Karen McSunas CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Russell Gannaway 2527 Bunya Street Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 13, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: 1 am writing you to show my support for the Mariner Square redevelopment project. As a ten- year resident of Newport Beach, who has seen many positive changes, I am in favor of any project that will enhance the appeal of our town and attract quality neighbors. I am very impressed with the standard of design and construction proposed. I feel it will set a high bar for future projects which will ideally be positive additions to Newport Beach. Sincerely, 112, Russell Gannaway CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Timothy M. Blackburn 1814 Port Charles P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 6/13/2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. I feel this project will set a high bar for future projects which will only improve our changing neighborhood. Thank you for including my support in your considerations and anticipate your agreement that this is going to be a positive addition to our city. Sincerely, 4-� VA. T9 Timothy M. Blackburn CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Gregory R. Richardson 1301 Marian Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 15, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to acknowledge my support and backing of the Mariner Square redevelopment project. The proposed redevelopment will benefit the people of Newport Beach through traffic and density reduction. Additionally, the project will bring the city up to date with a beautiful costal architecture of which the current subject property is badly lacking. This segment of the city will reap dividends through the approval and professional execution of such a high-quality sale housing project that I support. I have lived in the Westcliff -Dover Shores community for nearly 20 years and look forward to a quality redevelopment at the subject site. Sincere Regards, Gregory R. Richardson CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach June 16`h, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Lower Density Entitlements Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing this letter in favor of the Mariners Square Redevelopment Project. This project will reduce housing density and traffic generation, as well as, improve that area of the city. A well designed for sale housing project is desirable for our young families who want to be in the Newport Mesa School District and send their kids to the local public schools. Please support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. Sincerely, FYI Gr cry M. Hansen 11 0 Ebbtide Rd Corona del Mar, CA 92625 gregmhansen@gmail.com CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Peter J Wall Jr. 402 40th Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 June 14, 2018 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment located at 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting, I have been a resident of Newport Beach for 40 years and I am in favor of the Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment Project located Irvine Avenue and Mariners Drive. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as enhances our neighborhood. The proposed site and architecture design as a for sale housing project will create an attractive neighborhood environment while updating this segment of the city in which I support. I urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square Redevelopment Project. Thank you for your consideration and support. Sincerely, Peter J. Wall Jr. 949-285-8641 peterjwall@yahoo.com CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Wark,llcGifvray 26 the GrandValTee Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 14, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of this project which reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates this segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. a Sincerely, a Mark McGilvray CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Scott G. Watson 411 Rigel Circle Ne1fpO1-tBeW,b, CA 926619 June 14, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing to encourage you to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density on site and helps with traffic impacts in the neighborhood. Such a project would be a great addition to our community. As a long time Newport Beach resident, I fully support the for -sale project and I am hopeful that the project will move forward. Sincerely, Scott G. Watson CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council from the office of Todd R. Meyer 2 Torrey Pines Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 14, 2018 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials ReWd Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment, 1244 Irvine Ave. Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing to request you and your colleagues support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. It -appears to me this project will not only reduce density and traffic generation, but also update this segment of the city. In my opinion, a for sale housing project of quality design such as this, is a desirable redevelopment. Therefore, I am in favor of and support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. Sincerely, 4?�M veirWI c: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Receid Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-2 8) Kevin Polley 3641 Daffodil Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 6-13-22018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, 1&�- "7 Kevin Polley CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Adam Cooper 519 3616 Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 June 14, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. This project will be a welcomed addition to the entire community. Sincerely, Adam Cooper CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) SPON Monthly Meeting Agenda 15 May 2018 Home of Andy Lingle 2024 Diana lane NB 6:30 PM Call for last-minute items from the floor Approval of 17 Apr. minutes • Mariners Square developer presentation • SPON GP Advisory Committee - Kraus • Newport Crossings - Kraus • City Manager Recruitment - Kraus Planning Department Meeting - Baker AirFair report FAA Quick climb - Beek NB city webpage committee - Beek Treasurer's report and budget - D. Baker Fundraising Campaign standing item • Annual meeting 2 June • LITS PAC report standing item - Koll Center Residences -------------next Board meeting 17 July ---------------- ------- ------- will -----------------------------will include election of officers----------- Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3a Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Chad Brown From: Andy Lingle <andylingle@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 6:49 AM To: Chris Harmon Subject: SPON Board presentation Hi Chris, Your presentation was informative and well done. We are especially impressed that you haven't asked for variances and exceptions and are staying within the guidelines of the General Plan. Thank you also for preserving the sycamores along Rutland and for designing a sensitive landscape plan that avoids acres of asphalt parking. Good luck with your project. Andy Lingle for SPON. Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: FW: Planning Commission Presentation Date: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 4:45:35 PM Attachments: imaae002 ono imagep_04.onq Manner Sauare Support Letters -only new comb ned 6-19-18.pd Hi Brittany, Attached are additional letters submitted by the applicant for PA2017-248. Thanks, CHELSEA CRAGER Associate Planner Community Development Department I Planning Division :LL•II:LLS:fYi/ NEWPORTCITY OF From: Chad Brown fmailto:chad@melia-homes.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 4:41 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeach ca. gov> Subject: RE: Planning Commission Presentation Chelsea — I have uploaded the Power Point as requested. Please confirm loaded and let me know it is there. File is titled: Present PC - MARINER SQUARE No Video 6-21-18 labeled as: Mariner Square S Also attached here are 20 additional letters of support —these are new and not duplicates of those already sent. Many of whom reside in the immediate vicinity and took the time to provide a letter. You will see some of these get more in depth and I placed them toward the front of the PDF package. I see on Next door that people are stating there should be less units, so it may be important for staff to stress that the zoning requires a minimum of 92 units. Just FYI. Thank you - Chad Brown Vice President of Planning & Development aMEL1A HOMES 8951 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Main (949)759-4367, Ext. 264 Cell (949)468-9430 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Please Note: This message may contain confidential information and is intended only for the named addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please delete it from your system. From: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager n)newportbeachca.gov> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 8:02 AM To: Chad Brown <chad(@melia-homes.com> Subject: Planning Commission Presentation Hi Chad, We are not able to accept thumb drives for your presentation at Council Chambers. If it is too large to email, you can upload your files here: httosi//apr)s.newportbeachca.gov/uipload There you can upload .PDF, .JPG, .PNG, .Word Doc (DOCX), Powerpoint (PPTX) and Excel(XLSX), and .MDB. Let me know if you have questions CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccrooerna newnortbeochm.aov 949-644-3227 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay B, Newport Beach, Caiifomia 92660 I newportbeachca.gov Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 16, 2018 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Dr. Newport Beach, ca 92660 Re: Proposed redevelopment of Mariners Square Apartments To whom it may concern, I am in support of building single family residences on the apartment project site next to the Mariners school to provide moderate costing detached homes to Newport Beach and Orange County. The new homes being approved, and/or applying for approval are very rare around this side of the bay. The focus has been in Fashion Island and the airport area to build hi rise condominiums and very hi density expensive apartments in huge numbers. We desperately need to provide a full range of housing in Newport. As a 40 year resident of this area I have witnessed the tremendous growth of the residential environs including apartments, single family residences and condominiums, as well as the huge increase in pricing of rentals and selling prices. It seems to me that adding additional ownership housing AKA supply will temper the "un -affordability' of housing for our current and :Future generations. All communities need to have a blended mix of ownership housing for our children and grandchildren. Good planning. Our City needs to balance the goals of affordability, home ownership, rentals, affordable housing, senior housing, et al. I believe this location is a good place for the needed for rejuvenation of a tired old site. The proposed decrease in site density will decrease traffic significantly, be environmentally fruitful, and allow more home ownership, all good things. The small lot development offers opportunity for new approaches to building houses meeting the needs of middle income families and buyers desiring Newport and Orange County residential options. These homes likely will appeal to younger homebuyers, which is a good thing! Approval of the Mariners Square project is a rear opportunity in Newport to add critically needed new SFD housing. Please approve the project. Sincexe 11 t' I� Riley F. Joh sot - 1307 Keel r. Corona del Mar 92625 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Kimberlee Belli 375 Vista Baya Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 18, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Support of Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Avenue Dear Chairman Koetting: I have been a resident of the City of Newport Beach for 38 years and I would like to request and encourage you to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I currently live off Irvine Avenue near the potential new reconstruction site. I fully support a project that will modernize and update our city, while reducing the effects of high density in the neighborhood. Along with being a beautiful design, there will be less units and more open space. Sincerely, Kimberlee Belli cc: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Andrew Nahin I933 Tradewinds Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 Peter Koetring & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach I00 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 18, 20I8 LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT — MARINERS SQUARE APARTMENTS Dear Mr. Koetting: As a 30 year old real estate agent who grew up in Dover Shores, I have a keen interest in the proposed development project of the Mariners Square Apartment project. Many of my contemporaries (and clients are looking for entry level homes in Newport Beach, but due to the high costs of homes in the area, many of these young families are forced to look elsewhere (Huntington, Irvine, San Clemente, etc. I think that the local area would benefit greatly from turning a somewhat run-down apartment complex into a bunch of new, more affordable homes that would appeal to the area's young families. I hope that you and the planning commission see the benefit of the proposed project for the local real estate market and local families. Many thanks. Best, Andrew Nahin Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 18, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am highly in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic in the surrounding neighborhood as well as beautifies our segment of the city. I definitely support the redevelopment of Mariners Square to a for sale housing project. Sincerely, 1515 Priscilla Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Tom Linovitz 464 Serra Dr Corona IDeOdar, (,A 92625 6/13/18 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: As a local resident and business owner in our great city for the past 14 years I am writing to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. There is a huge shortage of available for sale housing that our town desperately needs. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Tom Linovitz CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 13, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment (1244 Irvine Ave) Dear Chairman Koetting: I am a 40 year resident of Newport Beach and currently live in Newport Heights. I am in favor of the proposed redevelopment of Mariner Square Apartments to a lower density project which will reduce traffic along Irvine Ave, which as many of us know, has become a traffic nightmare during peak hours. I encourage you to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. This is an opportunity to upgrade an aging facility to a newer, lower density project with many benefits. Best, Arash Kashani 546 San Bernardino Ave Newport Beach, CA 92663 CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) John Gooding 1905 E. Balboa Blvd Newport Beach, CA 92660 6/18/2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Project Dear Chairman Koetting: I wanted to write you a note to express my support for the redevelopment project up for your consideration of the Mariners Square Apartment buildings on Irvine Ave. Being a real estate investor and broker, I think that there is a huge need for affordable homes in the greater Newport Beach area. Many young families (mine included) would love to make a home in Newport Beach, but are currently priced out of the market. I think that this project would bring much needed housing supply to the local market at an affordable price point. Further, contrary to other developments, this would actually lower the density and traffic impacts, so it is a win- win for the local community. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 4 � �. John Gooding CC: Mayor Duffield Councilmember Diane Dixon Councilmember Brad Avery Councilmember Kevin Muldoon Councilmember Jeff Herdman Councilmember Scott Peotter Councilmember Will O'Neill Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 16, 2018 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: Proposed redevelopment of Mariner's Square apartments To Whom it May Concern: I am writing in support of the redevelopment project on the present site of Mariner's Square apartments. The proposed plan will lower density and reduce traffic. The new plan calls for a contemporary California coastal design with 7 proposed floor plans ranging from 1724 square feet to 2742 square feet. This is the type of project that should be approved, unlike the high density projects proposed for Fashion Island and the airport area. This single family homes project will enhance the integrity of the neighborhood. As a 40 year resident of the area, I encourage the approval of this project. Thank you, a Loring Christine C from the office of Todd R. Meyer 2 Torrey Pines Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 14, 2018 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials ReWd Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment, 1244 Irvine Ave. Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing to request you and your colleagues support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. It -appears to me this project will not only reduce density and traffic generation, but also update this segment of the city. In my opinion, a for sale housing project of quality design such as this, is a desirable redevelopment. Therefore, I am in favor of and support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. Sincerely, Todd c: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council V 0 Olt REAL ESTATE SERVICES June 13, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach Dear Chairman Koetting: Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Real People. Real Solutions.-' 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 750 Anaheim, CA 92806 PH (714) 978-7880 FX (714)978-8329 Lic. #01333376 voitco.com I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. 3T STATE SERV' e Da np Executiv e President 714.935.2376 Direct SDavenr)ort@voitco.com Lic#01413387 cc: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council TASeIhlWadp=ssing$.13.18 Nmpal BEach Planning Ccmmiss*n - Leller dux Anaheim I Inland Empire I Irvine I Los Angeles I San Diego Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Adam Cooper 519 36tf, Street Newport Beach, C.O. 92663 June 14, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. This project will be a welcomed addition to the entire community. Sincerely, Adam Cooper CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Steven C. hones 600 East Ocean Front 9Vewport Beach, ("'.5192661 June 19, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Steven C.1 es CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) (Dominic S Ricca6ona 520,5 Marguerite Ave Corona de( Mar, CA 92625 June 14, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. G Domini . Riccabona CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Matt Foster 2307 Laurel Place Newport Beach, CA 92663 June 18, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Matt Foster CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 14, 2018 2715 Bayshore Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 RE: Mariners Square — Proposed Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach As a 40+ year resident of Newport Beach, I amlen aced to learn that this proposed new project that will actually reduce density and traffic in our city. The ever growing mid rise residential/condo buildings around Newport Beach and even Irvine, are creating more traffic, gridlock and inviting more residents to our town and neighboring cities. Therefore, I applaud this project and urge your support and approval of the proposed redevelopment. Sincerely yours, 1a -P 6_._C\ ,.. Charles B. Caldwell Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 18, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am highly in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic in the surrounding neighborhood as well as beautifies our segment of the city. I definitely support the redevelopment of Mariners Square to a for sale housing project. Sincerely, 1515 Priscilla Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Michael Hollern 1724 Tradewinds Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 6/19/2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Michael Hollern CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) William Cord 572 Seaward Wpad Corona deOlar, C„0 92625 June 20, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I have lived in this great city for my entire life. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. This is the type of project we should be approving, not the high density sites like proposed for fashion island and the by the airport. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, ) William James Cord CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 1911, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Project - 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: My name is Bret Rosol and I am a resident of Newport Beach. I am writing to voice my support of the Mariner Square redevelopment on Irvine Avenue. This project is a win/win for residents, in that it both improves and updates the area, and also reduces density and traffic generation. This is exactly the type of sensible forward -thinking project that Newport needs, and I strongly encourage you to approve this development. Sincerely, Bret Rosol 69 Ebb Tide Circle Newport Beach, CA 92663 CC: Mayor and Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Christian Swart 125 33rd St. Newport Beach, CA 92663 June 19, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you this letter to encourage you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. As someone who drives down Irvine Ave. every day to and from work, I am highly in favor of the project. The lower density will translate to less traffic and the newer product will provide a much more aesthetically enjoyable commute. Again I will reiterate that I am in full support of the redevelopment into a for sale housing project. Cinr =rcly CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea 7o: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: RN: New condos on Irvine Ave Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 9:02:59 AM Brittany, Another public comment for PA2017-248. Thanks! CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccrager@newportbeachca.gov 949-644-3227 -----Original Message ----- From: Joyce Kelner [mailto,iUkelner&icloud.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 6:33 AM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: New condos on irvine Ave Hello As an owner of a condo across the street on Rutland, I have one big concern and this the foreseeable lack of parking on Rutland. The apartments already have addedto the severe lack of available parking and although there are less condo to be built, the simple mathematics of additional bedrooms per unit and projection of possible cars per family will make parking on Rutland even more challenging. Every one of the Rutland units only has l designated space and 98% of those are occupied by two adults which equals two cars. Please have the developers redesign added parking in their development so as not to impact the existing owners. Best regards, Joyce Kelner 1242 Rutland Rd #1 Newport Beach Sent from my iPhone Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: FW: Mariners Square Development Proposal Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 9:59:43 AM PA2017-248 Public Comment CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccrager@newportbeachca.gov 949-644-3227 -----Original Message ----- From: Jason Perrin [mailtojason&jasonperrin.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 9:57 AM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Mariners Square Development Proposal Dear Ms. Crager: As a Newport Beach resident who lives about three blocks from the proposed development and who has a child attending Mariners Elementary School, I would like you to know that I am in full support of the proposal. While there will be short term disruption, new for -sale housing stock will enhance the value and quality of this area of our community. Regards, Jason Perrin Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: FW: Planning Commission Presentation Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:28:15 AM Attachments: imaae002 ono imagep03.1)nq Mariner Sauare Support Letter - 6-20-18 odf Brittany, Another public comment for PA2017-248. CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccroaerra7newoortbecchco. oov 949-644-3227 From: Chad Brown [mailto:chad@melia-homes.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:15 AM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: RE: Planning Commission Presentation Chelsea — Is the power point verified — please confirm. Also — please find 3 more support letters sent to me. Chad Brown Vice President of Planning & Development aMELIA HOMES 8951 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Main (949)759-4367, Ext. 264 Cell (949)468-9430 Please Note: This message may contain confidential information and is intended only for the named addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please delete it from your system. From: Chad Brown Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 4:41 PM To:'Crager, Chelsea' <ccrager(d)newportbeachca.gov> Subject: RE: Planning Commission Presentation Chelsea — I have uploaded the Power Point as requested. Please confirm loaded and let me know it is there. File is titled: Present PC- MARINER SQUARE No Video 6-21-18 labeled as: Mariner Square S Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Also attached here are 20 additional letters of support —these are new and not duplicates of those already sent. Many of whom reside in the immediate vicinity and took the time to provide a letter. You will see some of these get more in depth and I placed them toward the front of the PDF package. I see on Next door that people are stating there should be less units, so it may be important for staff to stress that the zoning requires a minimum of 92 units. Just FYI. Thank you - Chad Brown Vice President of Planning & Development aMELIA HOMES 8951 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Main (949)759-4367, Ext. 264 Cell (949)468-9430 Please Note: This message may contain confidential information and is intended only for the named addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not distribute or copy this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail by mistake please delete it from your system. From: Crager, Chelsea <ccragerCcpnewportbeachca.gov> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 8:02 AM To: Chad Brown <chad(@melia-homes.com> Subject: Planning Commission Presentation Hi Chad, We are not able to accept thumb drives for your presentation at Council Chambers. If it is too large to email, you can upload your files here: httos://apCs. newportbeachca.og v/uto cad/ There you can upload .PDF, .JPG, .PNG, .Word Doc (DOCX), Powerpoint (PPTX) and Excel(XLSX), and .MDB. Let me know if you have questions CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccraaer(Onewnortbeachco. aov 949-644-3227 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay B, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachca.gov Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Gina Polley 3641 Daffodil Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 6-20-2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square Residential Redevelopment 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor of a project that reduces density and traffic generation as well as updates our segment of the city. A for sale housing project of quality design is a desirable redevelopment that I support. Sincerely, Gina Polley CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Peter Watson 1500 Highland Drive, Newport Beach, CA June 20, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Support for Mariner Square -1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing to support the Mariner Square project. I was born and raised in Newport Beach and believe this project will be a significant improvement for the City. Not only will it lower the overall traffic and density in the area, the newly developed for -sale homes will create value for homeowners in the area and for the City in general. Simply stated, converting this old apartment complex to a for -sale quality housing project is a concept that 1 support. With the foregoing in mind, l respectfully ask you and your colleagues to support and approve the Mariner Square Project. Thank you and your colleagues for your consideration. Respectfully, i Peter Watson CC: Mayor Duffield & Members of the Newport Beach City Council Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) June 1911, 2018 Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Mariner Square Project - Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting: I am writing you to ask that you and your colleagues to support the Mariner Square redevelopment project. I am in favor this project as it reduces the traffic impacts and reduces the overall density of the site. This development will be a big upgrade over the current use and I look forward to seeing this move forward. I respectfully ask that you approve this project. Sincerely, Arik Mykletun 270 CagneyLane Newport Beach, CA 92663 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: FW: 92 - THREE STORY CONDOS PROPOSED TO REPLACE EXISTING MARINERS APARTMENTS (1244 Irvine) - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY JUNE 21 - Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:53:55 AM CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccrager@newportbeachca.gov 949-644-3227 -----Original Message ----- From.: Daniel Hamm [maiho:danielham n outlook.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:53 AM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: 92 - THREE STORY CONDOS PROPOSED TO REPLACE EXISTING MARINERS APARTMENTS (1244 Irvine) - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY JUNE 21 - Hi Chelsea, I am a Newport Beach Resident in Dover shores. I completely support the three story condos. The current apartments are run down and ugly and an eyesore to the neighborhood. The current apartments already have roofs that go up to the height of 3 stories, so the new proposal is not a change relative to what is there already. The 92 units will decrease the density in that are as well. Also, bringing actual homeowners to the neighborhood instead of renters who arent vested is always a good thing. I fully support this proposal. Please support bringing fresh new condos that will be up to todays building and safety standards and up to par with our great city of Newport Beach. Daniel Hamm 2101 Leeward Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 Sincerely, Daniel Hamm Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez, Brittanv Subject: FW: Mariner"s Square Residential Condominiums Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 11:57:54 AM Attachments: imaae0nl ono CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccraaerCJnewaortbeachco.00v 949-644-3227 From: Susan Minton [mailto:ssminton@outlook.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 11:45 AM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Mariner's Square Residential Condominiums Chelsea, My name is Susie Minton, and I live at 1800 Westcliff Dr, Apt 15, in Newport Beach. I am a Newport Beach native, born at Hoag and raised in Westcliff on Sussex Lane. Currently, I split my time between Newport, where I work, and Truckee, CA where I spend most of my leisure time. I left Newport Beach in June of 1988 to enter the United States Naval Academy, shortly after graduating from Newport Harbor High School. I spent the next 20 years as a Naval Officer and business professional, living on the East Coast and loving whenever I came "home" to Newport to see my family. Four years ago, I had the opportunity to take a job here in Southern California. With aging parents, I wanted to be nearby. At about the same time, my sister returned to Newport Beach too. We now all live within a few blocks of each other in Westcliff. Newport has always been developer centered... it's always been a rip and replace town, less concerned with a town and community center and rather keeping things new and interesting, building it's center as a global destination. It's that part of Newport that doesn't fit me, never has. I am still connected to many of the families that have been here for generations. Interestingly, many of my generation that grew up here, don't live here today. We graduated college during a terrible recession. As aerospace and real commercial real estate crashed, jobs were sparse. We went where the work was and have only trickled back as means permitted. Others that stayed have done so, many living in family owned residences. I've been a homeowner in Truckee for many years... I had envisioned retiring there. While 1 loved Newport, it had grown too big and transient for my liking, especially for retirement. However, with what I've seen happen in my mountain community over the past decade, I'm not sure my vision still holds true. My message here today, regarding the Mariner's Square Residential Condominiums is based on this experience... of wanting to keep our Newport community as a viable full time residential community and not a vacation town. Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Tahoe and Newport are not that much different... a place where people around the world love to visit, surrounded by natural beauty, and community filled with shall we say the have's and have-not's. The mistake Truckee made was not around affordable housing per se but rather losing track of the need for median housing, as the community grew. When our community's professionals can't live and work nearby, we will lose them, especially as opportunities grow outside the area. Also, our community elders... what happens to them when they no longer want to live in their large homes and in the case of Truckee don't want to shovel snow each winter? I can tell you what happens, they leave. In the case of Truckee, this has been incredibly detrimental on the town's finances. It was this aging population that has means but can't find a place to live. I see the same thing happening in Newport, and it's sad. Let's get to the specific points about the Mariner's Square Residential Condominiums that cause the most concern to me... Replacement of affordable housing, really what would be defined as median housing... it's hard to believe that an Irvine Co apartment is affordable, but it is. I live in a Westcliff are apartment, because I choose to. I can afford to buy property in Newport but why, when I can rent a reasonable place to live for a fraction of the cost, enabling me to keep a second residence elsewhere. However, many of the neighbors that I've met since in my apartment cannot. From the elderly to teacher's families... great folks that will leave our community if these apartments didn't exist. I am not for rent control but believe that the City of Newport Beach should strive to replace lost units like these with similarly priced rental units within the city, when they remove them. At the same time, we have also lost another apartment building on Westcliff Dr, which will likely be leveled with similar property types built. This is important because when our professional workers can't live in our community, they leave. They might commute for a little while, but as those expanded areas grow and family needs require more attention, they'll choose to work in their own community. Examples include teachers, police, town staff, and tradesman. Also, those who commute in don't have the same commitment to town success. Eventually, these critical professional positions become difficult to fill. We have experienced this in Truckee. When these professionals disappear, the quality of community life and community safety suffer. A second example are the aging. Older populations, especially those who have been in Newport their entire life, built this community. Don't we at least owe them the opportunity to age in place... is it really appropriate to ask them to move out of the city, when they no longer want to care for a large or multi -story home? This connects back to the previous example as well. It's getting harder and harder to find people to help you at home. Aging in place is becoming less of an option, as tending to the existing home is both difficult and expensive. I'm not advocating that we don't build. I'm not even advocating that this particular community not be built. I'm just asking that the community consider that the loss of residential units like Mariner's Square negatively impact our community and it's residences. There are all types of options, including building on this same property with regular condos that have single -level living and in sizes and finishes that are priced in the median market. The Mariner's Square apartments rent from $2500-$4000 a month (this was the pricing before the development was sold and now has an uncertain future... prices have fallen 30% since the sale). This is far from traditional "affordable" housing but becomes affordable for our market and critical to our median professional and aging residents. Density... this project is not less dense than the existing property. The new property has significantly more bedrooms and square footage per unit. As we've learned in Truckee, current residential density models are not accurately predicting real occupancy. An increase in Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) multi -generational living, ease of renting rooms, and the expanded short-term rental market, top occupancy is actually well over 100%. In natural risk areas like Truckee, this has created great safety concerns. In places like Newport, it's ensuring that there is truly an understanding that occupancy of these high-density dwellings will exceed 100% and will impact wear on the city, whether it be schools, medical, and of course parking and traffic. Specifically, I would require a project like this to have very specific rules around total occupancy, in terms of the number of adults and with regards to short term rentals. Parking... the current apartment community has ample on-site parking for residents and guests. The new development will likely only have garage and driveway parking for each unit. Rentals If you've been around some of these similar new developments in Costa Mesa, you know that there is not enough parking for both residents and guests. Have you driven our Westcliff residential streets lately, even away from the apartments... my parents live in a single family home in the area, and cars constantly block the curb in front of their house even though they have a lot of frontage. Why... because multiple generations are living in homes as well as room renters and multi -car families. There is no way these new homes will survive with only parking in the unit garage and driveway. Just take a look around and see how well it's working at other similar sites through the area. This location is even more difficult because of no available street parking for the overload. I promise you that room renters will exist and will be required to street park. Just take a look around some of these developments in Costa Mesa. This is exactly what's going on. A combination of nearby apartment density, the school, and commercial center mitigate residential street parking for this particular property. The many Westcliff area apartments count on the Rutland street parking, as most only have one assigned spot in their carport or garage. Most homes today also have more than one driver. Rip and Replace mentality generally doesn't support existing residents... this project will displace long time residents, who likely won't find replaceable housing within the zip code, with new residents likely from out of the area. Why do we insist as a community that new is always better? Having grown up in a Westcliff home built 60 years ago and living part-time in an equally aged apartment, I happen to disagree... have you tried to get a wifi signal through the solid plaster walls of one of those homes;) I guess what I'm trying to say is that we can create improved spaces, without leveling them. I would also like to see the city focus on things that supports existing residents vs bringing in what they feel are new, higher value ones. I would also like to challenge Newport Beach, especially as it grows, to make decisions that help build community. We have no town center. Fashion Island is not a "downtown". I'd like to see Newport do more to help preserve what is essentially our neighborhood downtowns... Westcliff, Corona del Mar, Eastbluff, Balboa Island, and West Newport. These areas are important to visitors as well. Thank you for your time and consideration. If you would like to speak with me further on any of these topics, please do not hesitate to call me at 949.887.5165. Regards, Susie Susan Minton ssmintongoutlook. com Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From: Craaer. Chelsea To: Ramirez. Brittanv Subject: FW: PA2017-248 comments Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 1:09:17 PM Attachments: imaae001 Dna CHELSEA CRAGER Community Development Department Associate Planner ccrooer(@newoortbeochco.aov 949-644-3227 From: Brian Benoit [mailto:briantbenoit@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 12:11 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: PA2017-248 comments Hello - I wanted to submit the following comments for the department to consider regarding the Marines Square Condo project: 1) SetBacks. I understand the developer is asking for a 2 foot setback variance along Irvine Ave. These days, it seems like every new project requests and obtains variances. The setbacks are in place for a reason, and I believe Planning should be judicious in granting variances for extreme cases showing hardship. This project is on a 6 acre rectangular lot. There is no justification for a variance. 2) Population, Public Services, Traffic. The Staffs report makes the linear argument that decreasing the total DU's from 114 to 92 will lead to a corresponding reduction in the number of residents and traffic. This might be true if the replacement property was the same product and configuration of the existing property. However, the 114 existing units are 1-3 bedroom vintage apartments, whereas the new units are 3-5 bedroom condos. Certainly, there will be more people living in a 5 bed, 2700 sq ft condo than a 1 bedroom apartment. A more appropriate analysis would compare the total sq It and total bedrooms of the replacement product vs. the existing product. To my knowledge, this information is not in the Staffs report. Also, the report should take into account all the new support staff and tradespeople (nannies, housekeepers, etc) that will be visiting the property on a regular basis. I would like to see the Staffs report contain a more realistic analysis of population and traffic, I think the current version falls way short. 3) Aesthetics. I acknowledge there is a high degree of subjectivity in design but I do not think this 3 story, high-density development fits this part of town. There are no buildings 3 stories or taller north of 17th St / Westcliff that I can think of Even the Ralph's market appears significantly shorter than 33 feet. Specifically, I think the building span along Irvine Ave (a straight wall of attached units, except one small break for vehicle entry) looks unattractive. It resembles a city block, not a residential neighborhood. The project overall looks a lot like the developments found along Jamboree in Irvine and W 17th St Costa Mesa, which are not held in high regard by our community. There is so much potential with this 6 acre site, I think we could do better from a design perspective. Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Respectfully, Brian Benoit Warwick Ln Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) To: Crager, Chelsea Subject: RE: New Community Planned for Mariners Square Apt. Homes From: MsAnastasiaSvoboda [mailto:msanastasiasvoboda@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 3:20 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: New Community Planned for Mariners Square Apt. Homes Hi Ms. Crager, I am completely against rebuilding the residential neighborhood that is currently Mariners Square. I am extremely concerned about the safety of the children at Mariners Elementary. I remember a child died last year by being hit by a trash truck and killed because the driver did not see the little boy. There are a lot of children that walk to and from Mariners, Ensign, and Newport Harbor down Irvine Avenue and Rutland. Who will be watching them so they are not ran over by a vehicle and killed? With the close proximity to a school, library and park, will all of the workers on the construction crew be screened as sexual predators? I have read a lot about two homeless men and even one Newport Physician that are guilty of sexual misconduct and rape that are next to our schools. How will the elementary children in kindergarten be able to breathe clean air? For four years I lived in the Mariners Apartments and left on March 30, 2018 because of the proposed building. My address was 2137 Mariners Drive. I know how close the Kindergarten Recess and lunch yard is to the apartments. Will their be a fund for the children who develop lung problems? What about the children that already have asthma? The current owners of Mariners Square have been lying to their residents and when I was offered to renew my lease there was not a clause in their about new construction. When I inquired I was told, "We have decided not to tear -down the community." I had a neighbor that still lives there today and she is elderly. She has lived in the same apartment since 1967. She is survived by one sister that lives in New Zealand. The apartments are not giving any of the tenants notice, in fact, they are telling the residents, 'Not to worry.". I am also very concerned about the traffic in the mornings for the parents that do take their children to school and the bus stop on Mariners Drive. In addition to the noise of yelling, whistling, and large equipment to the residents on Rutland. Building a newer residence that does not mesh with the current neighborhood is going to be an eyesore. The current apartments are quiet and bode well in the neighborhood. Respectfully, Anastasia Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) To: Crager, Chelsea Subject: RE: Project file no PA2017-248 From: Cyndi Adler [mailto:4cadler@sbcalobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 3:36 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccraeer@newportbeachca.eov> Subject: Project file no PA2017-248 Thank you in advance for taking the time to read my email . We moved to Mariners Square Apts just over a year ago , after we sold our home in the area & when the Irvine Co still owned the property . They were not forthcoming & transparent with the situation they knew was taking place I stated to the then manager from Irvine Company that I was moving my 97 yr old Mom in with me and was intending to stay long term & wanting stability for us ie: not to have to stress my mother by moving her again, never dreaming this would happen here ! This was what I believed I was getting when we signed our lease . There was no disclosure of the property on the market for sale. I realize they had no legal obligation to disclose but heartless none the less . Then approx 7 months later we find out the property is in escrow & telling the tenants the property was being sold to another Apartment property owner Alliance 1 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Residential Company, never mentioning Melia Homes. It wasn't until an article published within a day of our notice , in the OC Business Journal that stated the truth about Melia Homes purchasing were we live and our home and their intent to tear down our homes and build condos. That article came out only days after Irvine Co notice to the tenants of Alliance being our new "owners " & it didn't sit well . There was secrecy and as a long term Newport Beach resident , not the kind of character & integrity I want to see in a community member. The management here at Mariners Square under the guidance of Riena Mann has been very open and forthcoming with the information available to her company at any given time . My opinion is they have done a great job in the middle of a difficult situation. I realize this company is not the owner of the property, Melia homes doesn't have the decency to face us . It is my hope that this project by Melia is rejected by the city council. Newport Beach has been my home since childhood and I have owned a home in Newport Beach and we have had business's in Newport Beach and was a board member of the Chamber of Commerce in CdM . Besides being a 2 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) native and also active in the sailing community and our family being members of one of the local yacht clubs. The availability of reasonable rental units with the long standing quality of Mariners Square and within proximity to the schools and 17th street shopping is sorely needed and to lose this community for more condos? Mariners Square is not considered low-income , these are considered affordable , there is a big difference. Some people are also more frugal with their money and that may be the motive behind being wanting affordable and fiscally responsible housing costs . Aren't there enough condos going up on the westside? Or the problems in Eastside Costa Mesa with the density of converting a single home property into a series small houses with only minimal distance between them down a long easement ? They final realized that mistake . I believe a moratorium is being considered for building of this type in Eastside CM. Also take a look at the property going up on Tustin Ave only blocks outside NB city limit, maybe it will be stunning on the interior but tell that to the home owners who have to look at a giant wall that looks like the back of an office building ! How did that one get by? It's too late now ! And it sets a bad precedent. We, Newport Beach, need a balance within our city for all to be able to live and work here . Many residents aren't 3 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) multi -millionaires and they are vital to the small business community that need employees who live & work within our community & can also attend our schools . I hope the condo project is not approved and that Mariners Square Apartments will continue to be a vitally important community member in Newport Beach. The issues of parking will be a problem, believe me it already is ! When I have friends over to visit and school is in session, parking is a nightmare ! Also one comment I read was " All growth is good", I beg to differ. There is plenty of research & statistics to show not all growth and change is good, some is and some is not. We need to be discerning on which is which and to whom does this benefit , the whole community or just a few . I'm not naive about increased revenues with property taxes etc and it costs a bundle to keep our community my home) top notch. Yet there is more to a community than just the dollars to be made . Balance ! Thank you for your time in listening and I truly hope you decide to leave this new project alone and let Mariners Square stay as is . Thank you Cyndi Adler GI Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3b Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) From my Posting on Nextdoor Thank you Susie too . I've just spent time writing my email to the city planning office, My mother ( 99 on the 4th of July ) and our family have been long time residents & I'm a native Californian growing up right here , before the 405 Fwy and when orange groves and the smell of orange blossoms filled our communities . I've always been been for responsible growth yet no where near a socialist !! We have owned a home and business in the city of Newport Beach , board member of Chamber of Commerce CdM , active at our yacht club in sailing . A full fledged long term community member.. this is my home. We sold our home last year and my mother and I moved into Mariners Square choosing an affordable and a long standing complex . ( Believing when we signed our lease here /Irvine Co and my expressing the desire to be a long term , responsible tenants , no disclosure of the pending sale and our need to again move ) and since I'm frugal and responsible with our resources , this place fit the bill and I would never want to have to leave living where I grew up and invested my life and where my son went to school & now granddaughters go ( Ensign & NHHS ) Now as a retired person , I give my time to caring for them , as both my son & granddaughter work hard to live here . Our family has stayed here !Also I help those in need through my church , St Andrews . I feel I have been and am still a valuable part of our community & proud to be . As one person stated .. I guess I'm supposed to move to Riverside ? really ?? Riverside may be a lovely place for some but it's not my home and where I grew up and my family lives . Again there needs to be balance within a community .. Mariners is not a blight to the city and does not need to be torn down for a few more condos and displace many who call Newport Beach area home! Sent from my iPhone 1.1 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3c Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) To: Crager, Chelsea Subject: RE: 1244 Irvine Blvd ----Original Message ----- From: Karen Hyson [mailto:karen.hyson@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 4:56 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: 1244 Irvine Blvd Good day, I would just like to say that there are many many very unhappy people with the proposal of another stacked 3 story, high room density project, and particularly in this location. It appears that not only is it a 3 story building with up to 5 bedrooms(who needs that) it's also built right out to the street with minimal setbacks. Based on the room count it will only make traffic and parking worse as well. The development is completely out of character for the artistic, beachy low density nature of 17th street. It has been an enjoyable place to shop and eat please don't destroy that by building high density stacked condos there. The city is being destroyed by these ugly high rises as it is.l seriously hate going to Trader Joe's on 17th now because this type of housing has already spread through that area. Looks like government housing projects. Sent from myiPhone Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3c Additional Materials Received Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) To: Crager, Chelsea Cc: Ramirez, Brittany Subject: RE: Proposed Mariners Square project From: Kelli Smith[mailto:kellireneesmith@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 4:40 PM To: Crager, Chelsea <ccrager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Proposed Mariners Square project Ms. Crager, As I was informed by some others in the neighborhood, I understand that you are the person to whom concerns about the proposed development at Mariners Square can be received. I live in the Westcliff neighborhood, in a rental on Bedford. I have previously resided at Mariners Square as well. As a renter in the neighborhood, I am very concerned about the ramifications of a large condo complex being built. It will undoubtedly change the dynamic of this neighborhood, and severely impact the rental market. As someone who has rented in this small corner of the community for the last 6 years, I am concerned about the demand for rental properties with the loss of so many units at Mariners Square, and how that will drive up rental prices in the neighborhood. I have a child who is just competing kindergarten at Mariners Elementary. I am very worried about how the decrease in rental units may drive prices in the neighborhood too high for families like mine to stay, and how difficult that would be for my son to have to change schools, as there are so very few options for rentals within the school boundaries. It is actually a bit shocking to see the disparity in population between Mariners Elem and other district schools, and the loss of so many rentals is only going to heighten those differences. We have a unique situation which gives cause for my child to actually be retained in kindergarten for next year, but a lot of the benefits to that will be completely lost if we are forced to change his schools. Of course a project like this would never be halted for the case of one child, but I am sure there are other parents in the area who are struggling similarly. I hope the city is really taking into consideration the gross change that this building development will cause in the footprint of our community. Thank you for your time, Kelli Smith 1728 Bedford Lane #10 Newport Beach, CA 92660 949-304-8682 Susan. J. Sampson 487 Magnolia Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 June 18, 2018 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3d Additional Materials Received After Deadline Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) DECEIVED e), COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JUN 21 2018 City Council of Newport Beach CITY OF Planning Commission EpG� �OR7 6 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Reference: MARINER SQUARE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS (PA2017-248) Site Location: 1244 Irvine Avenue Dear City Council & Planning Commission, I am opposed to the above referenced project. The site plan does not offer enough parking creating a problem for the surrounding neighborhood, which already lacks adequate parking. In addition, three stories is out of scope for the rest of the neighborhood. I am opposed to this project. Very truly, t Susan J. Sa Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3d Additional Materials Received After Deadline Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Jim & Eva Palmer 495 E 18`h Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 June 21, 2018 Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach RE: Qualified Support for the Mariners Square development 1244 Irvine Ave Dear Chairman Koetting I am writing you to urge you and your colleagues to further scrutinize the Mariners Square redevelopment project prior to approval. Although I reside in Costa Mesa, my home is one of the closest to the new development and I have consistently used that stretch of Irvine Ave since the subject property was a dirt lot in the 1960's. While I support the proposed development in concept, I wish to express my concerns and request the City review additional information before extending support. I am concerned that the proposed structures facing Irvine Ave will be seen as a community eyesore given that the rear side of the 18-plex, 12-plex and 6-plex homes facing Irvine Avenue will effectively create a 32Ft+ high barrier along the entire block (Irvine Ave from the alleyway behind Westcliff Plaza to the intersection of Irvine Ave and Mariners Drive) except for a 61ft break between in the structures for a 36ft wide drive aisle for community ingress/egress. Further, my concern is if/when built, the development will face a backlash from community residents wondering "how did the city ever allow that to be built". I have seen the site plan and elevations of the project along with photographs of supposedly similar three-story homes, however none of them are 18-plex structures. I respectively request the city request and review a 3D rendering illustration of the project before approval to further understand the aesthetic impact this development will have on the neighborhood as there is nothing even remotely similar in the area. To help illustrate my concern and request for a formal rendering review, attached please find example renderings that I pieced together using my phone -camera that demonstrate the incompatibility to the neighborhood for the subject row of two adjacent three-story complexes facing Irvine Ave. Sincerely, Jim Palmer cc: Planning Commission Members & Chelsea Crager, Associate Planner Mariners Square Rendering 2 of 2 Irvine Ave at Mariners Dr View of NW corner looking in a SE direction Before After Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3d Additional Materials Received After Deadline Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) I t'A . WIN 3 Mariners Square Rendering 1 of 2 Irvine Ave at Alley behind Westcliff Plaza View of SW corner looking in a NE direction Before After Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3d Additional Materials Received After Deadline Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Mariner Square Residential Condominiums r 1, '. rr A '40, \} ' = L Planning Commission Public Hearing June 21, 2o18 Gf 4 ,f Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials P At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Cond 017-248) Project Setting IN t; c h 1� r O e r: Q Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials P At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Cond 017-248) Mariner Square Apartment Homes- i tYY Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials P At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Cond 017-248) Mariner Square Apartment Homes- 4 ww. t4 lox .1 1 1 -7 S`, .` .• .,fit ti. '�^ 4 ww. t4 lox .1 1 1 Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials P At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Cond 017-248) Mariner Square Apartment Homes - z. , I AW V l 1 hL 0 a --�-- Fri 7 } Development Permit Tract Map D2 Units _ot coverage: 34% Community Development Department- Planning Division 6 o6/zi/zoi8 IIIIM [II I' • niFaxed eNia • :; [umelevslkwry I BO% �w 'k I .-A Community Development Department- Planning Division 9 7 Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Landscape and Common Areas R �. Floor Plans rwm Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) C I w r= r Mi,61 C dOPV p 'IOP. 0 0 ■ ■ 0 0 5 CANOPY - L rROJECTION I -C Z a o 5' CANOPY L .5 PROJECTION P4; Floor area; 1,724-2,172 SF Open Space: 93-375 SF o6/21/2oi8 Community Development Department- Planning Division v' �L__� it )VFR 7POP OlR OVFR _ 12, POP Ol li OYPR Floor area; 1,724-2,172 SF Open Space: 93-375 SF o6/21/2oi8 Community Development Department- Planning Division j st 7 POP Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Floor Plans a ' '. 'Y P_I1_1& .o��o'.�'.':_-.r j Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Elevations ii ,Iq 4 j Elevations I- r 0 I�IIIFH Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) iIT ill J -=III ulsjoill1sJill T'�; o6/zi/zois A LLJI CA 11 a n n 184 garage g �parking spaces o_ _ v o i 1 t z . 47 guest parking spaces 3 driveways Community Development Department- Planning Division Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Setback Adjustment i sit J Monday -Friday 7am-6:30pm, Saturdays 8am- 6pm ■ Irvine Avenue: Primary access ■ Rutland Road: Secondary egress only, right turn only Mariners Drive: No large vehicles, no subcontractor access Construction parking: onsite only o6/zi/zoi8 Community Development Department- Planning Division 17 quare Residential Cond ( } Class 2: Replacement or reconstruction Substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced o6/zi/zoi8 Community Development Department- Planning Division I k • Ab } C • Conduct a public hearing; • Find the project exempt from CEQA; and Approve Planned Development Permit and Tentative Tract Map o6/zi/zoi8 Community Development Department- Planning Division 1 For more information contact: Chelsea Crager 949-644-3227 ccrgaer@a newportbeachca.gov www.newport�eachca.gov Planning. Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3e Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) MARINER SQUARE .94 + f. Aw lie i,�1Q'V•\Lh. : ••may �. ^. ? i c _ / ,�,, - `�. _ - �. is •�, !/ ! / / / • / � V � T 41 � 4 MARINER $ ELEMENTARY MARINERS DRIVE —146 mv �I nPFCF _ F APtO'i'nPR b. Yal:i��A': i.2 1 I RULTZIM PMM am . m:rnMneYpls - PfY.A_PG VP.tx-/.if pbilq vr�xrL rAa[; e aPr _.•_6 � mAftmlwi��N gYlvsl•`� t a �Po0LwECJRrYA3] �"� :vm.3 ADJACENT COMMERCIAL ,i- r Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) ADJACENT `r;IDENTIAL • aeearnvP,.nnery .'�i�/� 1 I11 I li._. �� �• :sir, � ''4 z,, • Buffer the internal protect and residential beyond from Irvine Ave. • Buffer design to commercial center. • Internal stairwells in buffer western loading dock area. • Irvine Ave Frontage active with entries and patio spaces. D18 ting 48) 'ng C66imission - i s�n' 20t i. or,I p V I eria s dow it 6� M%A IAK • Open flow of Frontage for interface with adjacent Residential uses • Preserve existing Rutland Street Trees • Differentiation of setbacks creates interest Ivw� Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) .J . a • ♦• '�, ;�•, y>. _ .moi`.. k�i1 n � Rutland Road fronta Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Additional Materials Presented At Meeting NOT Tesidential Condominiums (PA2017-248) kce, iv.�s ores sr�ce �w..pa orer. s�wc�. Hosuus .CE CALCULATION: i[dQ sysuem = +.mxn �_ •man 65 Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) WIMMINGPCOL I'42 CINENEO'HEME cwNA CFMCN DINING IRE9O LNNGE •zm age •hildr and Cnalrs •Nre pit • CaWms on wooddi • menadtraNis • Larcnseating • day Wds with ummnlas • WfiFt,e • t>; nal Igms • C421ouagn PODL ENIPY • paal on defaratne gate . woratne tae paring Povery • fimpxe . pmrsmpeagaag • onttsmling • daybeds on wwddeeA • spximennee • wall mcamedpaper tiatulp • tam table • nine low Wrnewe . fP1:al 11i", . _ — Entrance from Irvine Ave AliEned with ExistinLj mel Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. Y Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) ry 4t- MARINER $ ELEMENTARY MARINERS DRIVE —146 mv �I nPFCF _ F APtO'i'nPR b. Yal:i��A': i.2 1 I RULTZIM PMM am . m:rnMneYpls - PfY.A_PG VP.tx-/.if pbilq vr�xrL rAa[; e aPr _.•_6 � mAftmlwi��N gYlvsl•`� t a �Po0LwECJRrYA3] �"� :vm.3 ADJACENT COMMERCIAL ,i- r Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) ADJACENT `r;IDENTIAL • aeearnvP,.nnery Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Play Video Simulation Planning Commission - June 21, 2018 Item No. 3f Additional Materials Presented At Meeting Mariner Square Residential Condominiums (PA2017-248) Community Outreach THAN K YOU J MELIA HOMES