HomeMy WebLinkAboutAMEND NO 765_NEWPORTER NORTHIII III III I IIIIII I IIII III III II
Amend No 765
FINAL
(Adopted by the City Council August 24, 1992)
EXHIBIT "A"
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 148
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 82
AMENDMENT NO. 763
AMENDMENT NO.764
AMENDMENT NO. 765
AMENDMENT NO. 766
AMENDMENT NO. 767
AMENDMENT NO. 768
AMENDMENT NO. 769
AMENDMENT NO. 770
A Environmental Impact Report No. 148
Findings•
1. That a Program Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines and City Policy.
2. That all potential significant environmental effects which could result from the
project have been identified and analyzed in the EIR.
3. That based upon the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report,
mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project to reduce
potentially significant environmental effects to a level of insignificance, except in the
areas of Aesthetics/Light and Glare, Biology, and Public Services and Utilities, and
that the remaining environmental effects are significant only on a cumulative basis.
Further, that the economic and social benefits to the community override the
remaining significant environmental effect anticipated as a result of the project.
4. That the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report has been
considered in the various decisions made relative to this project.
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 1
4
U @ 1 V3M-
1. In conjunction with site plan review, the project proponent shall prepare a detailed
temporary grading and landscape plan for the bluff top setback area for the purpose
of minimizing bluff erosion. If graded slopes from a development area extend into
the bluff top setback area, as proposed by the PC Text, the project proponent shall
prepare detailed final grading and landscape plans for the bluff top setback area.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department, Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Building
Department.
2. The City shall prepare a circulation improvement monitoring program to direct
expenditures of funds received under the Development Agreement to make
improvements and to monitor the status of those improvements. The list of
improvements to be implemented shall initially be based on those identified on Table
V, with prioritization established based on technical need and ability to implement
them in a timely manner. Flexibility to add of delete projects on the list should be
maintained to respond to actual changes in traffic volumes and the ability of the City
to accomplish improvements so long as the projected Net Benefit to the circulation
system is maintained. Thereafter, a review of the improvements' priority and
implementation status shall be done in conjunction with the City's annual Congestion
Management Program and Growth Management Program analysis and the annual
review of the Development Agreement,
3. The applicant or successor in interest shall construct or post bond for all frontage
improvements identified in the Development Agreement and listed in Table B of the
Program EIR.
4. All grading related to the project shall be conducted in accordance with SCAQMD
Rule 403. This mitigation measure shall be made a condition of all grading permits
related to the project.
5. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations while construction
activities are being conducted, fugitive dust emission shall be controlled using the
following procedures:
• Graded sections of the project that will not be further disturbed or worked on
for long periods of time (three months or more) shall be seeded and watered
or covered with plastic sheeting to retard wind erosion.
Final Fndinp and Conditlom • CIOSA
Pala 2
n
U
• Graded sections of the project which are undergoing further disturbance or
construction activities shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related
to the project.
6. During grading and construction activities, the applicant shall further control fugitive
dust emissions using the following measures:
• On -site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.
Entrances to all on -site roads shall be posted with a sign indicating the
maximum speed limits on all unpaved roads.
• All areas with vehicle traffic shall be periodically watered.
• Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept as needed to remove silt
which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent
accumulations of excessive amounts of dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related
to the project.
7. Office and commercial development on the Corporate Plaza West and Bay View
Landing site shall also participate in the Centerride program currently in operation
in the Newport Center area. Evidence of intent to participate shall be provided to
the City of Newport Beach Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy
permit.
8. Bicycle racks shall be required in accordance with the City of Newport Beach
Transportation Demand Ordinance.
9. Construction of related frontage improvements shall include bus turnouts and shelters
if determined to be necessary and desirable by the Orange County Transit District
and/or the City of Newport Beach. Prior to final design and construction of any
frontage improvements, the City of Newport Beach shall contact the Orange County
Transit District to determine if any bus turnouts or shelters will be required.
10. All development shall include street and security lighting (in parking lots and
pedestrian walkway areas) which is energy conserving. A lighting plan shall be
submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure.
The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the
Department of Public Works.
11. Residential, commercial and office development shall be landscaped with an
emphasis on drought resistant plant species which will shade buildings and reduce
Final Findings and Conditions - C[OSA
Page 3
water and energy consumption during the summer. A landscape plan shall be
submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure.
The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of an occupancy permit.
12. The applicant shall ensure that all residential lots and dwellings are sound attenuated
against present and projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the
project, so as not to exceed an exterior standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor living
areas and an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms. Evidence
shall be prepared under the supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant which
demonstrates that these standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with
applicable zoning regulations and submitted as follows:
A. Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map or prior to the issuance
of Grading Permits, at the sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis
Report shall be submitted to the City's Advance Planning Manager for
approval. The report shall describe in detail the exterior noise environment
and preliminary mitigation measures. Acoustical design features to achieve
interior noise standards may be included in the report in which case it may
also satisfy "B" below.
B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acoustical analysis report
describing the acoustical design features of the structures required to satisfy
the exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Advance
Planning Manager for approval along with satisfactory evidence which
indicates that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved
acoustical report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the project.
C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all freestanding acoustical
barriers must be shown on the projects plot plan illustrating height, location
and construction in a manner meeting the approval of the City's Advance
Planning Manager.
D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field testing
in accordance with Title 25 regulations may be required by the Planning
Director to verify compliance with STC and IIC design standards.
13. All non-residential structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact
of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior
noise criteria as specified in the Noise Element.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence shall be prepared under the
supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant that these standards will be
satisfied and shall be submitted to the Manager, Advance Planning in the form of an
Final Flndlnp and Conditions . CIOSA
Pap 4
6
Acoustical Analysis Report describing in detail the exterior noise environment and
the acoustical design features required to achieve the interior noise standard and
which indicate that the sound attenuation measures specified have been incorporated
into the design of the project.
14. All freestanding acoustical barriers shall be a berm, wall or combination berm and
wall. Walls shall not contain holes or gaps. Walls shall be constructed of slumpstone
or other masonry material. Final acoustical barrier heights and locations shall be
determined when final grading plans are developed showing lot locations,
house/building setbacks and precise pad elevation.
Biological Resources
15. Pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the State of California Fish and Game Code, the
California Department of Fish and Game shall be notified of any alterations to
streambed habitats. The applicant or any successors in interest shall be responsible
for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to
residential development and associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South,
Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites which would
alter streambed habitats. The applicant or any successor in interest shall notify the
Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permit prior to the issuance
of a grading permit. Copies of proper notification and necessary permits shall be
provided to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and
Game regarding any grading related to any public improvements (e.g. trails,
recreational facilities, roads, drainage facilities, etc.) in areas designated for open
space, public facilities, and/or parks which would alter streambed habitats. The City
of Newport Beach shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and obtain any
necessary permits prior to commencement of any grading which could alter the
streambed habitat. The permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 may require additional mitigation measures deemed
necessary by the Department.
16. Wetland delineation studies in accordance and conjunction with the California
Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitting
processes shall be performed for any wetland which will be impacted by grading and
construction activities. The applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible
for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by residential
development or associated improvements on the Newporter North and Upper
Castaways sites. If residential development or associated improvements on the San
Diego Creek South or Freeway Reservation sites encroach into the Bonita Creek
wetland, the applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting
the wetland delineation study. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for
conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by any public
improvements/facilities in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or
parks which will encroach into wetlands. The studies shall occur at the time specific
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 5
site plans and grading plans are available and prior to issuance of any grading
permits or commencement of grading activities in areas containing wetland habitat.
17. Public use and related facility development for areas proposed for natural open space
and passive park uses within the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Newporter
Knoll, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation, and Jamboree/MacArthur sites shall
be designed to be sensitive to existing biological resources. To this end, facility plans
and public uses for these areas shall be prepared In consultation with a qualified
biologist who shall determine that such plans and uses do not adversely impact
sensitive resources identified on these sites (e.g. wetlands, coastal sage scrub, etc.).
If necessary, additional environmental documentation shall be prepared at the time
facility plans are prepared to determine if significant adverse impacts beyond those
anticipated in this Program EIR will occur. If new significant adverse impacts are
identified, additional mitigation measures shall be adopted.
18. Grading, earthmoving, and any related construction activities related to residential
development and associated improvements on the Upper Castaways, San Diego
Creek South, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites shall be restricted as
follows: Upper Castaways and Newporter North - No grading (except that necessary
for trail establishment and improvements, erosion control or bluff stabilization),
stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall take place within the bluff top
setback area established by the Bluff Top setback Ordinance. San Diego Creek
South - No grading, stockpiling of soils, or operation of equipment shall encroach
into the area of Bonita Creek beyond the existing 15 foot elevation contour.
Newporter North - No grading, stockpiling of soils or operation of equipment shall
take place below the existing 60 foot elevation contour surrounding the John Wayne
Gulch freshwater marsh. Bay View Landing - no grading, stockpiling of soil or
operation of equipment shall encroach into the hillside above the 25-foot contour of
the lower development area.
19. Prior to grading and/or constructing any public facility on the San Diego Creek
North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the City of Newport
Beach (or other public agency responsible for development of the public facility)
shall approve and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of
wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal
agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by
either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an
existing freshwater marsh in or near the San Diego Creek and Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve.
20. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential development or associated
improvement on the Upper Castaways site which will encroach into the on -site
freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin
implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall
reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction
over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new
Final Findings and Condition - CIOSA
Page 6
freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh
in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all
related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of
a grading permit.
21. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential development or associated
improvement on the Newporter North site which will encroach into the on -site
freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin
implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall
reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction
over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new
freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh
in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all
related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of
a grading permit.
22. Development on the San Diego Creek South site shall be designed so as to reduce
the amount of light and glare which could potentially spill over into the wetland
habitats of Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek. This can be achieved by a variety
of means including a combination of sensitive siting of lighted buildings; use of
lighting systems which conceal the light source and minimize light spillage and glare;
screening walls/berms; and dense landscaping along the edge of the development.
Any landscaped edge screening shall include non-invasive trees and shrubs. The
plant palette for the screening vegetation shall consist of dense, evergreen species
which, when mixed, achieve canopy and understory of elements to provide as much
screening as possible. The site plan and landscape plan for this edge shall be
prepared in consultation with a City -approved, qualified biologist. The site plan and
landscape plan shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance
of building permits.
23. Prior to commencing grading, all wetlands habitat in areas intended for preservation
shall be temporarily fenced. This measure shall pertain only when grading, stock-
piling, or other construction activities are proposed within 100 feet of the boundaries
of the wetland area. A plan identifying the wetland area and the location of the
fencing shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of any
grading permit.
24. This measure shall apply to the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View
Landing, Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South and San Diego Creek North
sites. Revegetation of cut and fill slopes, bluff stabilization/remediation areas, fuel
modification zones and other graded areas adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas
(e.g. at the edge of development of residential, public facilities, or recreational areas)
shall be accomplished with plant palettes containing predominantly native species.
Steeper slopes (greater than 2:1) shall be revegetated with a mixture of coastal sage
scrub species including California sage brush which now dominates coastal sage scrub
used by California gnatcatchers. Portions of more level areas shall be revegetated
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 7
0 0
with species of native perennial grasses in an attempt to establish native grassland.
An expert in landscape revegetation, who is knowledgeable and qualified in native
plant mixtures shall provide consultation into the preparation of landscape plans to
ensure that this measure is complied with. Landscape plans shall be approved by the
City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits for private
development or commencement of grading for public facilities and public recreation-
al uses.
25. All non -emergency grading related to bluff stabilization/remediation on the
Newporter North and Bay View Landing sites shall occur during the non -breeding
season for the California gnatcatcber. The non -breeding season is from August 1 to
January 31.
Faulting and Seismicity
26. Buildings four stories in height or higher shall be designed in accordance with
requirements for seismic zone 4 as outlined in Chapter 23 of the Uniform Building
Code and/or with the benefit of a site specific seismic ground response spectrum
study which would be prepared by the project geotechnical consultant and structural
engineer to allow matching of building period with site period. The structural plans
and/or ground response study shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building
Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
27. Buildings less than four stories in height shall be designed by a Structural Engineer
in accordance with UBC Chapter 23 requirements for Seismic Zone 4. Non -critical
structures shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking that may accompany
a maximum probable earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Critical
structures (i.e., hospitals, fire/police facilities, schools, etc.) shall be designed to
withstand strong ground shaking associated with a maximum credible earthquake on
the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Structural plans, 'including seismic design calctila-
tions/parameters, shall be approved by the City Building Department prior to
issuance of building permits.
28. Habitable buildings shall not be placed adjacent to (above or below) slopes or bluffs
where seismic induced slope or bluff failure could occur. Though the City has
established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -of -bluff (Develop-
ment Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21, 1991, and
Newport Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not
necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope
instability during an earthquake. Areas potentially prone to such failures shall be
identified and further evaluated by the project Gbotechnical Consultant during the
Tentative Tract Map review and Grading Plan review stage. The evaluation shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to the issuance of
Final Findin8a and Conditions - CIOHA
Page 8
grading permits. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of
the evaluation to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
29. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, a Registered
Geologist shall further evaluate and make recommendations regarding the potential
for ground surface rupture effecting proposed development on -sites where
"Potentially Active Faults" have been identified (Bay View Landing and Freeway
Reservation sites) or on any other of the sites where Potentially Active Faults are
identified in the future. The study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City
Building Department and shall be prepared prior to approval of a tentative tract map
or grading permit whichever comes first. Grading and building plans shall reflect the
recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
Liquefaction
30. Sites where the potential for liquefaction has been identified, or any other site where
the potential for liquefaction may be encountered during subsequent investigations,
shall be further evaluated by a geotechnical consultant. The evaluation shall include
subsurface investigation with standard penetration testing or other appropriate means
of analysis for liquefaction potential. The project geotechnical consultant shall
provide a statement concerning the potential for liquefaction and its possible impact
on proposed development. If necessary, the geotechnical consultant shall provide
mitigation measures which could include mechanical densification of liquefiable
layers, dewatering, fill surcharging or other appropriate measures. The Geotechnical
Consultant's report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a
Registered Civil Engineer and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building
Department prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Grading and building plans shall
reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building
Department.
Erosion
31. Any necessary diversion devices, catchment devices, or velocity reducers shall be
incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Grading Engineer prior
to issuance of grading permits. Berms or other catchment devices shall be
incorporated into the grading plans to divert sheet flow runoff away from areas which
have been stripped of natural vegetation. Velocity reducers shall be incorporated
into the design, especially where drainage devices exit to natural ground.
32. All fill slopes shall be properly compacted during grading in conformance with the
City Grading Code and verified by the project Geotechnical Consultant. Slopes shall
be planted with vegetation upon completion of grading. Conformance with this
measure shall be verified by the City Grading Engineer prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits.
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 9
33. Berms and brow ditches shall be constructed to the satisfaction and approval of the
City Grading Engineer. Water shall not be allowed to drain over any manufactured
slope face. Top -of -slope soil berms shall be incorporated into grading plans to
prevent surface runoff from draining over future fill slopes. Brow ditches shall be
incorporated into grading plans to divert surficial runoff from ungraded natural areas
around future cut slopes. The design of berms and brow ditches shall be approved
by the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
34. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, appropriate artificial substances shall be
recommended by the project landscape architect and approved by the City Grading
Engineer for use in reducing surface erosion until permanent landscaping is well
established. Upon completion of grading, stripped areas shall be covered with
artificial substances approved by the City Grading Engineer.
35. Drainage of both surface and subsurface water over or toward the bluffs on the
Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites shall be minimized. Though some
drainage of rainwater over the bluff face cannot be avoided, drainage control devices
shall be designed to direct excess water from site improvements away from the bluff
face. Irrigation shall be controlled to prevent excessive infiltration into the
subsurface. The project Civil Engineer shall design grading plans to minimize surface
runoff over the bluff faces. The project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide
recommendations to minimize subsurface water migration toward the bluff faces
prior to approval of Tentative Tract traps or site plans. All design criteria for the
control of surficial and subsurface water shall be completed to the satisfaction of the
City Grading Engineer.
Bluff and Slope Instability
36. The project geotechnical consultant shall review the tentative tract map and grading
plan for each site and prepare a report addressing all salient geotechnical issues
related to bluff and slope stability of any existing bluff or slopes. These reports sball
include:1) detailed analysis of field data including surface and subsurface geological
mapping; 2) laboratory testing results; 3) stability analysis of existing bluffs and
proposed slopes as illustrated on the tentative tract map or rough grading plan; 4)
conclusions; 5) recommendations for mitigation of any identified unstable bluffs or
slopes and/or for additional investigation. These reports shall be signed by a
Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a
grading permit.
37. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project geotechnical consultant and/or
civil engineer shall make written recommendations for manufactured slope
stabilization including, but not limited to, buttressing, rock bolting, grouting, slope
gradient laybacks, or retaining walls. All necessary recommendations shall be
included in the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Pap 10
38. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -
of -bluff (Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January
21,1991, and Newport Beach Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum
setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning
bluff/slope instability. Prior to issuance of grading permits, appropriate safe bluff top
setback recommendations shall be determined by the project Geotechnical
Consultant based on the evaluation required by Mitigation Measure 3 to the
satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
39. During grading a geotechnical consultant shall monitor grading operations to ensure
that recommendations for slope instability mitigation are implemented. Additionally,
the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate slopes as they are graded through geologic
mapping and analysis to ensure that no unanticipated conditions are present. Slope
stability mitigation recommendations may require modification during grading.
Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Building Department.
40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the geotechnical consultant shall prepare a
Rough Grading Report and As -Graded Geotechnical Map for each graded site at the
completion of grading of that site. The Report shall summarize and document
compliance with all mitigation measures. The Rough Grading Report shall include
a statement regarding the adequacy of the manufactured slopes for their intended use
and a statement regarding the adequacy of the recommended bluff setbacks. The
report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil
Engineer and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Compressible/Collapsible Soil
41. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, written recommendations for the mitigation
of compressible/collapsible soil potential for each site shall be provided by the
geotechnical consultant. Foundation recommendations shall be included. Recom-
mendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the site -specific
tentative tract maps and grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Grading
Engineer. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping,
laboratory testing and analysis. Mitigation, if necessary, could include: removal and
recompaction of identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill surcharging and
settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, or foundation design which utilizes deep
piles, or other recommended measures. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific
reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil
Engineer, and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Expansive/Corrosive Soil
42. Written recommendations for the mitigation of expansive and corrosive soil potential
for each site, shall be provided by the project corrosion consultant, geotechnical
consultant and/or Civil engineer. Foundation recommendations shall be included.
Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory
Final Findings and Conditions - aOSA
Page 11
0 0
testing and analysis and shall be incorporated into final building plans prior to
issuance of building permits. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall
be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered City Engineer, and
shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Near Surface Groundwater
43. The project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall prepare written site -
specific reviews of the tentative tract maps and grading plans addressing all salient
geotechnical issues, including groundwater. These reports shall provide findings,
conclusions and recommendations regarding near -surface groundwater and the
potential for artificially induced groundwater as a result of future development, and
the effects groundwater may have on existing or future bluffs, slopes and structures.
The reports shall also address the potential for ground subsidence on the sites and
properties adjacent to the sites if dewatering is recommended. The geotechnical
consultant and/or civil engineer's reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering
Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to the satisfaction
of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Water Quality
44, Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide to the Building
and Public Works Departments haul route plans that include a description of haul
routes, access points to the sites and watering and sweeping program designed to
minimize impacts of the haul operation. These plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Public Works Department. Copies of the plans shall be submitted to the
City's Planning Department,
45. Prior to the issuance of grading permits,, the applicant shall incorporate the following
erosion control methods into grading plans and operations to the satisfaction of the
City Grading Engineer and Building Department.
a. An approved material such as straw, wood chips, plastic or similar materials
shall be used to stabilize graded areas prior to revegetation or construction.
b. Air -borne and vehicle -borne sediment shall be controlled during construction
by: the regular sprinkling of exposed soils; and the moistening of vehicles
loads.
C. As approved material such as rip rap (a ground cover of large, loose, angular
stones) shall be used to stabilize any slopes with seepage problems to protect
the top soils in areas of concentrated runoff.
Final I Indinp and Condittonc- CIOSA
Pan 12
d. During the period of construction activity, existing vegetation which will be
retained on -site shall be protected from traffic by the use of fences. If
appropriate, buffer strips or vegetative filter strips, such as tall stands of grass,
can be used as an alternative and/or supplementary method to protect against
sediment buildup.
46. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project geotechnical consultant and/or
civil engineer shall develop a plan for the diversion of stormwater away from any
exposed slopes during grading and construction activities. The plan shall include the
use of temporary right-of-way diversions (i.e., berms or swales) located at disturbed
areas or graded right-of-ways. The plan will be approved by the City Engineer and
Building Departments and implemented during grading and construction activities.
47. The applicant shall provide a temporary gravel entrance located at every construction
site entrance. The location of this entrance shall be incorporated into grading plans
prior to the issuance of grading permits. To reduce or eliminate mud and sediment
carried by vehicles or runoff onto public rights -of -way, the gravel shall cover the
entire width of the entrance, and its length shall be no less than fifty feet. The
entrance plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Grading
Engineer concurrent with review and approval of grading plans.
48. The applicant shall construct filter berms or other approved device for the temporary
gravel entrance. The berms shall consist of a ridge of gravel placed across graded
right-of-ways to decrease and filter runoff levels while permitting construction traffic
to continue. The location of berms shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to
the issuance of grading permits. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Grading Engineer.
49. During grading and construction, the applicant shall provide a temporary sediment
basin located at the point of greatest runoff from any construction area. The location
of this basin shall be incorporated into grading plans. It shall consist of an
embankment of compacted soils across a drainage. The basin shall not be located
in an area where its failure would lead to a loss of life or the loss of service of public
utilities or roads. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading
Engineer.
Drainage Patterns
50. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the master plans of water, sewer and storm
drain facilities shall be approved by the City Engineer. Any systems shown to be
required by the review shall be the responsibility of the developer, unless otherwise
provided for through an agreement with the property owner or serving Agency.
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 13
E
r�
Archaeology
ALL PROJECr MISS
51. All sites shall be mitigated pursuant to Council Policy K-5. Where further testing or
salvage is required, the applicant shall select a City -approved qualified archaeologist
to excavate a sample of the site. All testing and salvage shall be conducted prior to
issuance of grading permits or use of an area for recreational purposes. A written
report summarizing the findings of the testing and data recovery program shall be
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of the completed data recovery
program.
52. The applicant shall donate all archaeological material, historic, or prehistoric,
recovered during the project, to a local institution which has the proper facilities for
curation, display and study by qualified scholars. All material shall be transferred to
the approved facility after laboratory analysis and a report have been completed.
The appropriate local institution shall be approved by the Planning Department
based on a recommendation from the qualified archaeologist.
53. Any excavation of a site located within the Coastal zone of more than two surface
meters of dirt shall require a coastal development permit prior to commencing the
excavation. All provisions of the California Coastal Commission guidelines shall be
complied with.
UPPER CASMAYS
54. Prior to any grading related to development of the bluff trail system, open space uses
or bluff stabilization which could impact CA Ora-49 and CA Ora-186 on the Upper
Castaways site, the sites shall be subjected to test excavations by a City approved
archaeologist (experienced in both historic and pre -historic archaeology) to determine
site integrity, extent and significance. The methodology of the test excavation shall
reflect the recommendations contained in the Cultural Resources report prepared for
this Program MR. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and recommen-
dations and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
BAY VIM LANDING
55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, CA-Ora-1098 shall be surface collected and
subjected to test excavations by a City approved archaeologist to determine site
integrity, extent and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings
and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
Pinsl Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Pap 14
0
56. Prior to grading for the new park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved
archaeologist to conduct a surface collection and subsurface test excavation of CA-
Ora-66 to determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report shallbe
prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90
days of completing test excavations.
57. Prior to grading for the view park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved
archaeologist to place a test unit on top of the knoll on the Bay View Landing site
in the area containing shell scatter, to determine if the shell is representative of a
subsurface archaeological deposit. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings
and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the test
excavation.
NEWPORTER NORTH
58. Prior to the use or development of the open space areas for passive recreational
uses, CA-Ora-51 and CA-Ora-518 on the Newporter North site shall be surface
collected and subjected to test excavations to determine site extent and significance.
A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning
Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall conduct a surface
collection of the eastern extension of CA-Ora-100 which would be impacted by
grading and/or development of residential uses. The surface collection shall be
conducted by a city approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings of the surface collection and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing the surface collection.
60. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall conduct a data recovery
of program CA-Ora-64 on the Newporter North site. The program shall be
conducted by a City approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the
data recovery program.
61. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential development or any bluff
stabilization, a qualified archaeologist shall review grading and drainage plans to
determine if there are any indirect or direct impacts to CA-Ora-51, 52 and 518. If
impacts are identified, test excavations shall be conducted to determine site extent,
integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
NEWPORTER KNOLL
62. Prior to any, grading or use of the site, the City shall conduct a surface collection of
archaeological material present on the top of the hill of the Newporter Knoll, with
test units placed on the hill to determine site significance and boundaries. One unit
shall be placed in the recorded area of CA-Ora-50 to determine if a portion of the
Final Findings and Conditions - CIOSA
Page 15
0
site still exists. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the
Planning Department within 90 days of completing surface collection test excavation.
63. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a qualified City approved archaeologist shall
conduct a surface collection of CA-Ora-136 on the Block 800 site and subject the site
to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A test unit shall also
be placed in the northern portions of the parcel to determine if a sub -surface midden
is under the asphalt and trash. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
CORPORATE PLAZA WEST
64. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a City approved qualified archaeologist
shall dig post holes in the areas containing surface shell on the Corporate Plaza West
site to determine if the shell represents sub -surface archaeological deposits. A report
shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department
within 90 days of completing sub -surface testing.
65. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the surface near the southern section of the
property shall be examined by a City approved qualified archaeologist after removal
of brush and prior to any ground disturbance. A report shall be prepared detailing
all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing
the surface examination.
FREEWAY RESERVATION
66. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the northern development area (Lot 2), a
City approved qualified archaeologist shall examine the surface of areas previously
identified as CA Ora-216. The examination shall be conducted after removal of
brush but prior to grading. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface
examination.
Paleontology
67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a collection plan shall be prepared and
implemented by a City approved, qualified paleontological monitor for known
exposed fossil localities on Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Upper
Castaways. Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units,
matrix samples shall be collected for processing through fine mesh screens. The
collection plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall make provisions for the
preparation and curation of all fossils possibly recovered from the sites during
Final Findings and Condigons - CIOSA
Page 16
grading. This shall be done in a manner approved by the City's Planning Depart-
ment.
69. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall identify a repository
approved by the City s Planning Department which shall receive all fossils collected
from the sites.
70. Cliff faces along Upper Newport Bay that have served as a reference section for
micro -paleontological studies should be protected from alteration. If bluffs along
Newport Bay need to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed measured
sections and samples shall be made before and after alteration. Samples shall be
prepared and analyzed as part of these efforts. The City of Newport Beach shall be
responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist to conduct the comparative study
and sampling. A report shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 90
days.
Law Enforcement
71. The project proponent shall work in conjunction with the City of Newport Beach
Police Department to ensure that crime prevention features are included in building
design and construction. The City of Newport Beach Police Department shall review
all site plans and access plans.
Water
72. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the development sites, the applicant shall be
responsible for preparation of a Master Plan of Utilities. - The Master Plan of
Utilities will determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any modifica-
tions, upgrades or extensions to the existing water systems resulting from this project.
All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water
systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer,
unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
Wastewater
73. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer will provide a Master Plan of
Utilities facilities for the on -site development in order to determine the exact
necessary modifications or extensions to the existing sewer systems, if needed. All
necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water
systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer,
unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The Plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
Final Findings and Conditions - C[OSA
Page 17
0
1. That the Development Agreement is in compliance with California Government
Code Section 65864 et seq. and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45.
2. That adoption of the Development Agreement would not preclude the City from
conducting future discretionary reviews in connection with the project, nor would it
prevent the City from imposing conditions or requirements to mitigate significant
impacts identified in such reviews provided that the measures do not render the
project infeasible.
1. Once every 12 months from the date of execution of the Development Agreement,
the project proponent or his successor in interest shall prepare and submit for review
by the City Council a report demonstrating compliance with the terms of the
Agreement, as required by Section 15.45.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
•
Findings:
1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed
project on the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic and circulation system in
accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City
Council Policy S-1.
2. That the project is a comprehensive phased land use development and circulation
system improvement plan with construction of all phases not anticipated to be
completed within 60 months of project approval.
3. That the project is the subject of a development agreement which requires the
construction of major improvements early in the development program.
4. That the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan
are not made inconsistent by the impact of traffic generated by the project in thatthe
projectproposed eliminates certain planned and anticipated development through the
dedication of certain sites for permanent open space, and the other development sites
are to be developed consistent with or less than that allowed by the General Plan.
5. That an unsatisfactory level of service will not be caused or made worse at any
intersection for which there is an identified improvement,
Final Findings and Condition - CIGSA
Page Is
6. That the benefits to the circulation system resulting from the major improvements
substantially outweigh the increased traffic at impacted but unimproved intersections.
7. That there is an overall reduction in ICU at impacted intersections, taking into
account peak hour traffic volumes at those intersections, and that the reduction is
caused by the improvements associated with the project.
Conditions:
1. That the Irvine Company shall make available to the City the monies specified for
circulation system improvements consistent with the provisions of Development
Agreement No. 6.
2. That the City of Newport Beach shall utilize the monies provided by The Irvine
Company to construct in as timely manner as possible major circulation system
improvements. These improvements shall be designed to insure that the anticipated
overall improvement in ICU anticipated in the traffic study is achieved.
D. Amendment No. 763
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
763.
E. Amendment No. 764
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
764.
F. Amendment No. 765
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
765.
G. Amendment No. 766
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
766.
H. Amendment No. 767
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
767.
Final Findings and Conditions - C[OSA
Page 19
Adopt Resolution No. _recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
768.
N 0-faqUiRaTif
Adopt Resolution No. _recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
769.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
770.
P \...\JOHN•n\ClOSA\m Nu..Pa c
Final Pindln;s and Conditions - C(OSA
Pale 20
0- i
ORDINANCE NO. 92-37
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT RAGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR NEWPORTER NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach DOES ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The subject property is the following real property in the City
of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California:
That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as recorded in
Book 1, Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps of the County of
Orange.
as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" and hereinafter referred to as "Property".
SECTION 2. Development of the property, which is zoned P-C, shall be as
specified in the Planned' Community District Regulations and Development Plan which is
approved and adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, and which specifies the permitted land
uses, intensity and density limits and development standards and regulations for the property
as set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
SECTION 3. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby
instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan to the Property as described herein; the same shall be
in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
SECTION 4, The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper
of the City within fifteen (15) days of its adoption. The Ordinance shall be effective thirty
days after the date of its adoption.
LL
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach, held on the 24th day of August • 1992, and was adopted on the
14thday of Sent. , 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
ATTEST:
I, , ✓�,��
Attachments:
Exhibits "A" & 'B"
PLT:,.\CC\DA\A765.ORD
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS HEDGES, WATT,
TURNER, SANSONE HART COX, PLUMMER
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NONE
2
F
t
sm
ESl.
' v-1S
117--�
In�ivAsA
Iprcmff
is 7
IRVINE GAO
DOE. u7-71
O
� RS if•M
*41AC
EWPORT
TUNES
RSA-JI
o-4
NOTE • ASMS=S KOCK i
►AILS VMASERS
131
�
OL
inc
.Nac
rarr,scu
a
As+Ior$
ttwa
r Qi
BAY.
+S
�slAt
1
`
.It
i
N
AA2'�
AA2
s
ASSESSOR'S AW
ROOK4A0IAGE 13
r�
9
L
►l
Exhibit 8
NZWPORTER FORTE
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904
Adopted , 1992
Planned Community District Regulations for Newporter North
ordinance No.
Beach City Council on
adopted by the City of Newport
12/31/91
0
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
1
Section
I
General Notes
4
Section
II
Definitions
8
Section
III
Residential Development Standards
9
Permitted Uses
9
Site Density
9
Maximum Building Height
9
Setbacks From Major Streets
9
Setbacks
9
Coastal Bluff Setbacks
10
Streets
10
Landscaping
11
Parking
11
Fences, Hedges and Walls
12
Section
IV
Parks
15
Section
V
Signs
16
Section
VI
Site Plan Review
17
List of Fiaures
Figure I General Site Location
Figure II Land Use Plan
Figure III Statistical Analysis
Figure IV Bluff Setback Exhibit
2
3
7
14
12/31/91
70
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The Newporter North Planned Community (P-C) District Regulations
have been developed in compliance with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan. This P-C has also been developed pursuant to
Chapter 20.51 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
The purpose of these District Regulations is to provide for the
development of the site as a coordinated, comprehensive project.
This will take advantage of the superior environment which
results from community planning.
Whenever the regulations contained conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained
herein shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate
this development when such regulations are not provided within
these District Regulations. All development within the Planned
Community boundaries shall comply with all provisions of the
Uniform Building Code and various mechanical codes City Standards
and Policies related thereto.
INTENT
It is the intent of this P-C District to permit the development
of the Newporter North site for residential dwellings and
associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space.
The units will be located in close proximity to Newport Center
and will provide additional housing opportunities within the
City.
LOCATION
Newporter North is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road to the
north, John Wayne Gulch to the southwest, Jamboree Road'to the
east, and the Upper Newport Bay to the northwest.
1
06/10/92
7!
• 6
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT q2t2
qti
QQ.
Ee
P-11
RESIDENTIAL
PARK
OPEN SPACE/NATURAL AREAS
0
LAND USE PLAN
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
3
•
0AOUIN
DR.
NOT TO SCALE
„VSA..
„9,92 13
0
SECTION I
Park dedication requirements shall be in accordance with the
adopted Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
Water within the Planned Community will be furnished by the
City of Newport Beach.
Sewage disposal facilities within the Planned Community will
be provided by the City of Newport Beach and Orange County
Sanitation District No. 5. Prior to the issuance of any
building permits; it shall be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Utilities Department
that adequate sewer facilities will be available. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure, it shall be further
demonstrated that adequate sewer facilities exist.
Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in
accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach
Grading ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by
the Building and Planning Departments.
Building pads adjacent to slope or bluff areas may be raised
to an elevation not to exceed ten (10) feet above natural
grade. This provision does not preclude raising pad
elevations above 10 feet on interior portion of site.
Manufactured slopes, if any, shall be stabilized as soon as
possible to reduce erosion.
If mechanical appurtenances are to be built on building
rooftops, they shall be screened from street level view in a
manner compatible with the building materials.
06/10/92
?I
ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the sites shall be
examined to determine the existence and extent of
archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance
with adopted City policies.
A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade
meetings to inform the developer and grading contractors of
the results of the study. In addition, an archaeologist
shall be present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant
cultural resources are uncovered; the archaeologist shall
have the authority to stop or temporarily divert
construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess
the significance of the finds.
In the event that significant archaeological remains are
uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall
stop in that area of the subject property until an
appropriate data recovery program can be developed and
implemented. The cost of such a recovery program shall be
the responsibility of the landowner and/or developer.
A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner
and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform
inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be
allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific
area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
7. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
The final design of public on -site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation serving viewpark and coastal bluffs shall be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department;
Planning Department; and Parks, Beaches and Recreation.
8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing provisions shall be consistent with City
standards. Affordable housing requirements may be satisfied
off -site.
9. NOISE
Detailed noise studies shall be conducted for the
residential development for on -site impacts. Residential
development shall comply with the standard of 45 dBA CNEL
for interior noise levels and 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor living
areas. Noise mitigation programs shall be based upon the
recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in
acoustics and be approved by the Planning Department.
5 12/31/91
�5
0
10. STREETS
Streets within the development may be either public or
private. Public or private streets shall most City
standards. The Newporter North development may be a private
(gate guarded) community with secured access surrounding the
development.
a. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually
screened from access streets and adjacent property from
street level views. Said screening shall form a
complete opaque screen and shall not interfere with
site distance from streets unless otherwise approved by
the City Traffic Engineer.
b. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City
of Newport Beach approval.
All "on -site" gas lines, electrical lines, and telephone
lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal
equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets
and adjacent properties from street level views.
13. LIGHTING
Lighting systems shall be designed and maintained in such a
manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light
spillage and glare to adjacent properties. The plans shall
be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,
with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his
opinion, this requirement has been not. Lighting systems
for any publicly maintained areas shall use city standard
fixtures approved by the Utilities Department.
14. FIRE ACCESS
Fire equipment access shall be approved by the Fire
Department.
N
06/10/92
FIGURE III
Newporter North
Type
Residential
View Park
Open Space,
Natural Areas
and Future Roadway
Right -of -Way
Total
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Acreage
Area (Net) Du/Ac Du
1 30.0 7.1 212
2 4.0 0
3 55.2
89.2
7
0 0
212
12/31/91
• 9
SECTION II
1. Streets - Reference to streets within the Newporter North
development shall mean either public or private streets.
Design of streets shall meet City of Newport Beach standards
or as specified herein.
2. Bluff - As used in this document, "bluff" is any natural
landform having an average slope of 26.6 degrees (50%) or
greater, with a vertical rise of twenty-five (25) feet or
greater.
3.yiewoark - For purposes herein, a viewpark represents an
area of natural character with provision of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway and passive viewing areas.
8
12/31/91
Mr
E
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. PERMITTED USES
2.
3.
4.
5.
a. Townhouses
b. Condominiums
C. Apartments
d. Single-family detached units.
e. Model homes and sales offices
f. Recreational uses ancillary to residential uses.
SITE DENSITY
Residential development area shall not exceed thirty (30)
acres with allowance for 212 dwelling units.
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
All buildings shall comply with the height restrictions
established by the City for this area. The maximum height
of all buildings shall be twenty-four (24) feet measured in
accordance with the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and
determined from the grade approved in the site plan review
and subdivision approval. 'The maximum height of buildings
may be increased to thirty-two (32) feet upon review and
approval of the Planning commission and/or City Council.
SETBACKS FROM MAJOR STREETS
Street
Jamboree Road
San Joacuin Hills Road
SETBACKS
a. Front yard
Setback from Ultimate
Right -of -Way Line
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
From any public or private street the minimum building
setback shall be ten (10) feet from right-of-way or
curb, whichever is greater.
Garages with direct access shall be setback from five
(5) to seven (7) feet average or a minimum average of
twenty (20) feet measured from back of curb, or in the
event that sidewalks are constructed, from back of
sidewalk. A minimum of eighteen (18) feet measured
from back of curb, or in the event that sidewalks are
constructed, from back of sidewalk shall be permitted
with roll -up or other type garage doors approved by the
City Traffic Engineer. If five (5) foot setbacks are
proposed at corner units or lots on curves, adequate
sight distance shall be provided unless otherwise
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
_�9
9 06/10/92
0
0
b. Side Yard
Where property lines are created a minimum five (5)
foot side yard setback shall be required.
Architectural projections may be permitted subject to
the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Zero (0) foot
setback will be permitted where a minimum ten (10) feet
building to building setback is provided. At side
yards adjacent to streets a minimum five (5) foot
setback shall be maintained.
c. Rear yard
Where property lines are created a minimum of ten (10)
feet rear yard setback shall be required. Structures,
other than walls and fences, along the public bluff top
area shall be setback A minimum distance of twenty (20)
feet from property line. Architectural projections may
be permitted subject to the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. Decks and balconies greater than IV above grade
may extend into the rear yard setback up to 3 feet.
The property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be
located no closer to the edge of the bluff than the point at
which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn
from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 26.6 degrees
to the horizontal. in no case shall a property line be
located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of a bluff
or any eroded area of the bluff unless the area is restored.
U,14-9
Private streets within residential development shall be a
minimum of thirty-two (32) feet in width with parking
allowed on one side. Through the Site Plan Review process,
the following modifications to this standard may be
approved:
a. The minimum width may be reduced to 26 feet for access
drives serving no more than 16 dwelling units.
b. The minimum width may be reduced to 20 feet for access
drives serving no more than 4 dwelling units.
c. The minimum width may be reduced to 16 feet for access
drives serving a single dwelling unit.
10
06/10/92
M
Mp
10.
11.
d. Drives of 20 or 16 feet as provided for the above shall
be increased to a minimum width -of 26 feet if serving a
common parking area.
e. Unless otherwise defined in this text, private streets
shall be designed in compliance with the private street
standards of the City of Newport Beach.
PUBLIC STREETS
Public streets within the Planned Community District shall
conform to the current criteria as specified by the City of
Newport Beach "Design Criteria for Public Works
Construction".
SITE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Residential development shall be designed to provide
adequate sight distance (25 MPH), at the intersection of all
private streets and drives, and along curves unless
otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
LANDSCAPING
Project landscape concepts are intended to allow for
maximization of views from residential areas. Interior
greenbelt concepts are encouraged. A landscape concept plan
shall be submitted as a part of site plan review and
subdivision approval.
PARKING
standards shall provide for:
a. Condominiums and Townhomes
Dwelling units less than or equal to 1500 square feet
shall provide a minimum of 2 parking spaces per unit,
including one covered space. In addition, guest
parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of 0.5
space per unit. Guest parking may be provided on
street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons (minimum
20 feet in depth or 18 feet where roll up garage doors
are provided), in a manner acceptable to the City
Traffic Engineer. 50% of the guest spaces may be
provided on driveways.
11 06/10/92 `
GUt
Dwelling units greater than 1500 square feet shall
provide a minimum of 2 covered spaces per unit. in
addition, guest parking shall be provided at a minimum
rate of one (1) space per unit. Guest parking may be
provided on street, in parking bays, or on driveway
aprons (minimum 20 feet in depth or 18 feet where roll
up garage doors are provided), in a manner acceptable
to the City Traffic Engineer. Fifty percent (50%) of
the guest spaces may be provided on driveways.
ice#MWUTMTMM
The size of open and enclosed parking spaces and areas
shall be as specified by the residential parking
standards contained in the Newport Beach Municipal
Code,with the exception that common parking areas which
are not curbside shall most the universal parking stall
size of 8 1/2 feet in width by 17 feet in depth.
A minimum of two (2) garage parking spaces shall be
provided per unit. In addition, guest parking shall be
provided within the development at a minimum rate of
two (2) spaces per unit. Guest parking may be provided
on street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons
(minimum 20 feet in depth), in a manner acceptable to
the City Traffic Engineer. One of the guest spaces may
be provided on the driveway.
The project shall be designed so as to provide for adequate
non -vehicular circulation from residential units to common
recreation and amenity areas as well as from residential
units to external parks and roadways. This circulation can
be provided via sidewalks adjacent to streets in combination
with walkways provided through greenbelt and common areas.
Main circulation drives shall have a sidewalk on at least
one side. Sidewalks adjacent to curbs shall be a minimum of
five (5) feet in width. Sidewalks adjacent to a 3 to 4 foot
wide parkway shall be a minimum of four (4) feet in width.
12
06/10/92
13. FENCES HEDGES AND WALLS
Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight (8)
feet, measured from finished grade. Where the fence is
required to protect a swimming pool, the fence shall be
constructed so as to meet the requirements of the Uniform
Building Code for pool safety. Wing walls', where an
extension of a residential or accessory structure, may be
six (6) feet in height. At street intersections (to include
driveway intersections with streets), no such appurtenance
shall exceed thirty (30) inches in height above street
pavement grade within the triangle bounded by the right-of-
way lines and a connecting line drawn between points thirty
(30) feet distant from the intersection of the right-of-way
lines prolonged. Landscape plans shall be'designed to
provide adequate sight distance (25 MPH) unless otherwise
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
13
06/10/92
GREATER DISTANCE OF TWO
CASES WELL APPLY
Apt[ PROPERTY LINE SETBACK
Mk PRO►pEATY LOW SETBACK
TAP OF ELLFF
TOE OF BLUFF /
MR SULD/NG
LIVE SETBACK
1
BLUFF SETBACK CRITERIA
JANUARY 29 1991
'-1
40
r
SECTION IV
PARKS
The Newport North view park is intended to be passive in nature,
characterized by low intensity usage such as hiking, bicycling
and informal recreation. Minimal grading for trail connections
to San Joaquin Hills Drive and Back Bay Road will be allowed. It
is intended that the physical nature of the view park be a
natural setting with unobtrusive additions and minimal lighting.
Some low level lighting may be allowed, pursuant to City review,
for security purposes.
I
15 06/10/92
95
0
0
BECTIOX v
A sign program for Newporter North, approved by the Irvine
Company shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
FU
06/10/92
02
SECTION VI. SITE PLAN REVIEW
A. Purpose
The effect of this section is to establish a Site Plan
Review procedure for Newporter North to insure that the
project conforms to the objectives of the General Plan.
B. Findings
The Site Plan Review procedures contained in this section
promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
community by ensuring that:
(1) Development of Newporter North will not preclude
implementation of specific General Plan objectives and
policies.
(2) The value of property is protected by preventing
development characterized by inadequate and poorly
planned landscaping, excessive building bulk,
inappropriate placement of structures and failure to
preserve where feasible natural landscape features.
C. Application
Site Plan Review approval shall be obtained prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit or a Building Permit for any
new structure, including fences, and the establishment of
grade by the Planning Commission or the City Council in
accordance with Section 20.02.026.
D. Plans and Diagrams to be Submitted
The following plans and diagrams shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval:
(i) A plot plan, drawn to scale, showing the arrangement of
buildings, driveways, pedestrian ways, off-street
parking, landscaped areas, signs, fences and walks.
The plot plan -shall show the location of entrances and
exits, and the direction of traffic flow into and out
of off-street parking areas, the location of each
parking space, and areas for turning and maneuvering
vehicles. The plot plan shall indicate how utility and
drainage are to be provided.
(2) A landscape plan, drawn to scale, showing the locations
of existing trees proposed to be removed and proposed
to be retained; and indicating the amount, type, and
location of landscaped areas, planting beds and plant
materials with adequate provisions for irrigation.
17
06/10/92
E.
F.
(3) Grading plans to ensure development properly related to
the site and to surrounding properties and structures.
(4) Scale drawings of exterior lighting showing size,
location, materials, intensity and relationship to
adjacent streets and properties.
(5) Architectural drawings, renderings or sketches, drawn
to scale, showing all elevations of the proposed
buildings and structures as they will appear upon
completion.
(6) Any other plans, diagrams, drawings or additional
information necessary to adequately consider the
proposed development and to determine compliance with
the purposes of this chapter.
hm-
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution
of the City Council to the city with each application for
Site Plan Review under Chapter 20.01.070. (Ord. 1686, S 11
1976)
Standards
The Site Plan Review procedures established for Newporter
North shall be applied according to and in compliance with
the following standards:
(1) Sites subject to Site Plan Review under the provisions
of this section shall be graded and developed with due
regard for the aesthetic qualities of the natural
terrain, Upper Newport Bay, and landscape, giving
special consideration to waterfront resources and
unique landforms such as coastal bluffs or other sloped
areas; trees and shrubs shall not be indiscriminately
destroyed;
(2) No'structures shall be permitted in areas of potential
geologic hazard unless specific mitigation measures are
adopted which will reduce adverse impacts to an
acceptable level or the Planning Commission or City
Council, on review or appeal, finds that the benefits
outweigh the adverse impacts;
(3) Residential development shall be permitted in areas
subject to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL only where
specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels
in exterior areas to less than 65 CNEL and reduce noise
levels in the interior of residences to 45 CNEL or
less;
18 06/10/92
Me
(4). Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas,
pedestrian and vehicular access ways., and other site
features shall give proper consideration to functional
aspects of site development;
(5) Development shall be consistent with specific General
Plan policies and objectives, the adopted Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement, and shall not
preclude the implementation of those policies and
objectives;
(6) Development.shall be physically compatible with the
development'site, taking into consideration site
characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes,
and sensitive resources;
(7) Archaeological and historical resources shall be
protected to the extent feasible or appropriate
mitigation measures shall be implemented.
G. Procedures regarding Public Hearing notification and
Planning Commission and City Council actions shall be
pursuant to Chapter 20.01.00.
t
MW
it
06/10/92
Ottachment No. 4
ORDINANCE NO. 92-38
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT
REZONING THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYVIEW LANDING FROM THE U DISTRICT TO THE
P-C (PLANNED COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOFr
ING PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIO
AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BAYVIEW LAND O
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach 1)6ES ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The subject property is the following real property in the City
of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State o/,Page
:
That portion of Blod a 55 ande's Subdivision, as
shown on a map recorded In Bo8 of Miscellaneous
Maps, Records of Orange Counia.
as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" and ereinafter referred to as "Property". Title 20 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Cate is reby amended to rezone all of the above described
Property from U District to the PI ed Community (P-C) District, designate said Property
as the Bayview Landing Plann mmunity.
SECTION 2 a Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby
instructed and dueled change Districting Map 37, referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the
Newport Beach M cipal Cale, and by such reference is made a part of Title 20, to reflect
said change as d 'bed in Section 1 hereof and shown in the attached Exhibit "B", and
when said Dis cling Maps have been so amended, the same shall be in full force and effect
and be a p of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
SECTION 3. Development of the property, which is rezoned P-C pursuant to
Ordinance, shall be as specified in the Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan which is also approved and adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, and
4'
• ITY OF NEUORT BEACH
4 � ra•..
September 14, 1992
MINUTES
ff �a
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-36, beings
Ord'92-36
Zoning
(94)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR UPPER
PCA 764
CASTAWAYS (PLANNING COMMISSION
AFIF MENT N0. 764) .
Request to adopt Planned Community
District Regulations and. Development
Plan for Upper Castaways. This request
would provide for the construction of
151 dwelling units and senior citizen
housing; property located at 900 Dover
Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between Westcliff Drive and
West Coast Highway;
• AND
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-37, being,
Ord 92-37
Zoning
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
(94)
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
ar.,
;••a4,:,'t DISTRICT REGIILATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR NEWPORTER
PCA 765
NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL [PL&MING_
—COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO 765).
.Request to adopt Planned Community
District Regulations and Development
Plan for Newporter North/Newporter
Knoll. This request would provide for
the construction of 212 dwelling units
on Newporter North and open space on
Newporter Knoll; property located at
1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly
side of Jamboree Road between San
Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort;
AND
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-38,•being,
Ord 92-38
Zoning
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
(94)
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT REZONING
THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYVIEW LANDING FROM THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CA 767
FOR BAYVIEW LANDING (PLANNING
COMMISSION AMENDMENT No. 767).
Request to amend a ' portion of
Districting Map No. 37 so as 'to
reclassify property from the U
(Unclassified) District to the F-C
District. Also requested is the
adoption of Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan for
Bayview Landing. This request
would provide for active and passive
recreational uses on the site; property
located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the
northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between Back Bay Drive and East Coast
Highway, across from the Villa Point
Planned Community.
Volume 46 - Page 308
* c I r of NEwpo T Bnc*
.t
MINUTES
IR
Motion
All Ayee
Motion
All Ayei
Motion
All Aye
Motion
All Ayes
611
x
x
x
September 14. 1992
As a result of the adopted recom-
mendations on Public Nearing No. 1,
notion was made that Ordinance Nos. 92-
36 and 92-38 be reintroduced, as
revised, and passed to second reading on
September 28, 1992 (refer to P-C texts
and the supplemental report from
Planning Department, and Ordinance Non.
92-35 and 92- 37 be adopted.
CURRENT BUSINESS
19. Report from Public Works/Traffic
Engineering concerning PARK BENCHES ON
\(Distri
ST HIGHWAY IN CORONA DEL MAR.
summary, the City Manager, stated
the City staff feels this is an
e that should be addressed by taking
omprehensive look at benches in the
t-of-way, and this is reflected in
proposed agenda action.
Noon was made to direct staff to
re a Council Policy regulating the
e ant of park benches on sidewalks,
RO QVALITT AFFAIRS CITIZENS
ISOR COMMITTEE VACANCY:
ion we made to accept, with regret,
ter of signation from Cheryl Jaffe,
(Distri t 4) Mayor Pro Tom Turner's
intment deferred to September 28,
to _. i he unexpired term ending
21. Report from a Finance Director
concerning B DGIT AMENDMENTS
I!D'LEMENTING RBDU IONS IIf THE FISCAL
YEAR 1992-93 B
The City Manager adv sd that the above
supplemental agenda tam deals with
amending the budgget and formally
implementing raductions in the City's
Interim Budget in the ar a of Salaries
and Benefits, Maint nanca and
OpsraiiAs, Capital Outla and Capital
Improvements, as a result oT the State
Legislature's adopted budget
Notion was made to adopt Resoliktion no.
92-101, approving Budget Amendabut Mos.
005 and 006, formally implementkyls'ed
reductions, and adopting the budget for the 1992-93 f scal yo
Meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m., in maJack Brooks, Park i Trea Main
Superintendent, who passed away on
September 4, 1992.
Volume 46 - Page 309
(74)
CAC
FY 92-93
(40)
92-101
....... ....
•ITY OF NEWPORT BEACH •
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\3y\
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
x
x
MINUTES
September 14, 1992
8.
7, to
Change to n/8d
read: Two at -embers
with ' broadmunity
experience e=ably
residing outsstud
area;
9.
Change to numbo r d:
The City Manad ityAttorney......
As there
were no objeco therevisions,
the motion wason andcarried.
10. Report to
the City Managardingactions
taken by the Plannmission
on August
20, 1992.
Motion was made that Mo fication Nos.
Moauica-
4039 and 4040 be ached ed for public
tion Nos.
hearing on September 28 1992; remaining
4039/4040
items in the report to the City Manager
from the Planning D artment received
and filed.
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
17. pr4o*ed ORDINAN NO. 92-42. being,
Ord 92-42
Trfc/Green
AN ORDIN CE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Crb Mrkgs
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
(85)
AMEND SECTION 12.48.040(D) OF
THE ORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
PERT ING TO THE MEANING OF GREEN
CURB MARKING IN PARKING METER
ZO S.
Recycle report dated August 10, 1992
from the Public Works/Traffic
Engin Bring Department.
The ity Manager briefly stated that the
an act ordinance is the result of
d cussion at a previous study session
b members of the Council to permit
arking time limits in the green zones
of less than 30 minutes, and
specifically in response to Council
request to allow two 15 metered spaces
near the Dory Fleet to accommodate a
request of the Dory Fleet. ,
Motion was made to adopt Ordinance No.
92-42.
18: Report from the Planning Department
regarding:
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-35, being;
Ord 92-35
The Irvine
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Co. Dev
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Agm No. 6
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT'
C-2925
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AND THE IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE
(38)
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN
SPACE AGREEMENT (DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT No. 6).
Request to adopt a Development Agreement
for the Circulation Improvement and Open
Space Agreement for eleven sites in the
City of Newport Beach;
AND
Volume 46 - Page 307
n
9
COUNCIL MEMBERS
6CITY OF MWORT BEACH
Vp ,
MINUTES
:tom
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
x
x
September 14, 1992
13. WATER MAIN RELINING PROGRAM (CONTRACT
90. 2734) - Accept the work, and
authorize the City Clerk to file a
Notice of Completion and release the
bonds 35 days after the Notice of
Completion has been recorded in
accordance with applicable portions of
the Civil Code. [Report from the Public
Works Devartmentt
Wtr Mn Ring
Prg
C-2784
(38)
14. APPLICATION OF MR. AND MRS. HASKELL TO Permit/Crb
CONSTRUCT TWO CURB CUTS AT 255 EVENING cuts
CANYON, SNORE CLIFFS DEVELOPMENT IN Haskell
CORONA DEL MAX - Uphold staffrs
recommendation to approve subject (65)
application. [Report from the Public
Works Department]
15. HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 124-3400 - Harbor
Uphold staff s recommendation to Permit
approve request of Duncan McIntosh to Ap#124-
temporarily revise the commercial docks 3400
bayward of LIDO VILLAGE AT 3366 VIA
LIDO, subject to conditions in the staff (51)
report. [Report from the Marine
Department]
16. SPECIAL EVENTS APPLICATION - Uphold Special
` staffs recommendation to approve the Events
following application, subject to Ap1192-310
conditions in the staff report from the
Revenue Manager: (27)
Application No. 92-310 - 19th
Annual McIntosh Fall Boat Show,
for September 23 - 27, 1992, in
the Lido Marina Village.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Aaenda Item No.
9. Report 'from the City Attorney CAty/CNS
racommanding that the Mayor and City Tidelnds
Clark execute a 49 year lease of City Lease
tidelands bayward of 36 Harbor Island, (31)
the lease to be consistent with that
approved,. -by the State Lands Commission
for Couti'cy tidelands on Harbor Island.
Notion was made�to defer action for two
weeks; in the meantime, staff directed
to review the proposed 49 year lease of
City tidelands bayward of 36 Harbor
Island and address Council questions.
5. Proposed resolution establishing the Ad
W/Npt
Hoc Executive Steering Committee for the
Comprehen-
VEST NEWPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
sive Pln/
Notion was made to adopt Resolution No.
Ad Hoc
92-100 with the following revisions as
CAC
follows:
Res 92-100
(24)
1. Mayor as an am-officio
member;
4. Delete all of the items
after ,..study area..;
5. Delete in its entirety;
Volume 46 - Page 306
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
ZONE:
LOCATION:
City Council Meeting September 14. 1992
Agenda Item No.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Mayor and Members of the City Council
IU.
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation Im-
provement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the City of
Newport Beach.
I.r0
B. Ordinance No 92-36 (Amendment No. 764)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would provide
for the construction of 151 dwelling units and senior citizen housing.
Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between Westcliff Drive and West Coast Highway-
P-C
" ►tD
C. Ordinance No 92-37 (Amendment No. 765)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort.
ZONE: P-C
TO: City Council - 2.
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview landing. This
request would provide for active and passive recreational uses on the
site.
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Drive and East Coast Highway,
across from the Villa Point Planned Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
The various applications under consideration are part of the Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement (CIOSA). These ordinances were re -introduced as a result of the
changes to the project made by the City Council and the applicant subsequent to the intial
introduction on 1 - . Regulations regarding the adoption of Development Agreements
are contained in Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Regulations
regarding Amendments are in Chapter 20.84, and procedures for the adoption and
amendment of Planned Communities are in Chapter 20.51 of the Code.
L
A. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-35 . being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE-
TWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND THE
IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE CIRCULATION IMPROVE-
MENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT
(DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.6)
B. Adopt Ordinance No. 9136, being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR UPPER CASTAWAYS
(PL•ANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.764)
TO: Ci Council - 3. It
C. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-37 . being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR NEWPORTER NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.765)
D. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-38 . being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT
RE -ZONING THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYVIEW LANDING FROM THE U DISTRICT TO THE
P-C (PLANNED'COMMUNTTY) DISTRICT AND ADOPT-
ING PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BAYVIEW LANDING
,(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.767)
Background
On August 24, 1992, the City Council took a number of actions related to the approval of
the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement. Four of the Ordinances involved
were re -introduced at that time as a result of changes by the City Council, staff and
applicant.
Respectfully submitted,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
Byi.
Patricia L. Temple
Advance Planning Manager
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. 92-35 - Development Agreement No. 6
2. Ordinance No. 92-36 - Amendment No. 764 - Upper Castaways PC
3. Ordinance No. 92-37 - Amendment No. 765 - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll PC
4. Ordinance No. 92-38 - Amendment No. 767 - Bayview Landing PC
PLT:CC\DA\DA6.SR5
tachment No. 1
ORDINANCE NO, 92-35
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND THB
IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE CIRCULATION
IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT
(DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6)
The City Council of the -City of Newport Beach DOES ORDAIN
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and declares thatt
a. The State Legislature and the City Council ave determined that the
lack of certainty in the approval of. development projects can sult in it waste of resources,
escalate the cost of housing and other development t the consumer, and discourage
investment in and commitment to comprehensive pl ' g which would make maximum
efficient utilization of resources at the least econ c cost to the public; and
b. Assurance that an applica may proceed with a project in accordance
with, existing policies, rules and regulatio and subject to conditions of approval, will
strengthen the public planning process ncourage private participation in comprehensive
planning, and reduce the economic osts of development; and
C. California overnment Code Section 65864 et seq. authorizes cities to
enter into development agre ents with any person having a legal or equitable interest in
real property for the dev opment of the property; and
d. apter 15,45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides
requirements and rocedures for the adoption of development agreements; and
Development Agreement No. 6 has been prepared in compliance with
state law d the Newport Beach Municipal Code; and
f. In compliance with state law and city ordinance, duly noticed' public
he ings were held by the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider
Development Agreement No. 6; and
g. The City Council finds that said Development Agreement is in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines promulgated
thereunder; and
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
10-41MV \\\ August 24, 1992
MINUTES
li >2
RVLL \.f1LL
_
3. Mayor Sansone opened the public hearing
The Irvine
on the application of The Irvine Company
Company
for a series of approvals related to the
Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement - Development Agreement No. 6.
Site specific approvals are also
included, as follows:
General Plan Amendment 92-2(C): Request
GPA 92-2(C)
to amend the Land Use Element of the
(45)
Newport Beach General Plan to allow for
an optional permitted land use of
affordable senior citizen housing on the
Bayview Landing site in association with
the transfer of 30,000 sq.ft. of retail
commercial entitlement to Fashion Island
in Newport Center. The proposal also
includes the acceptance of an
environmental document;
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 28:
LCPA No. 28
Request to amend the Local Coastal
Program, Land Use Plan to allow for an
optional permitted land use of
affordable senior citizen housing on the
Bayview Landing site in association with
the transfer of 30,000 sq.ft. of retail
commercial entitlement to Fashion Island
in Newport Center;
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-35, being,
Ord 92-35
Dev Agm
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
No. 6
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AND THE IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN
SPACE AGREEMENT (Development
Agreement No. 6);
Traffic Study No. 82: Request to
Trfc Study
approve a traffic study consistent with
No. 82
the provisions of Chapter 15.40 of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven
sites addressed in the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
Planning Commission Amendment No. 763 -
PCA 763
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills
Planned Community District Regulations
and Development Plan so as to allow for
the construction of 48 additional
dwelling units; property located at 1501
Ford Road, adjacent to the easterly side
of MacArthur Boulevard, between Ford
Road and San Joaquin Hills Road, in the
Harbor View Hills Planned Community;
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-36, being
Ord 92-36
Upr Casta-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ways
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR UPPER
CASTAWAYS (PLANNING COMMISSION
PCA 764
AMENDMENT NO. 764);
Request would provide for the
construction of 151 dwelling units;
property located at 900 Dover Drive, on
the southeasterly side of Dover Drive
between Westcliff Drive and West Coast
Highway;
Volume 46 - Page 262
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACR*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
1 August 24, 1992
Proposed ORDINANCE 110. 92-37, being, Ord 92-37
Newporter
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL North
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR NBWPORTER
NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL (PLANNING
COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 765), PCA 765
Requaat to provide for the construction
of 212 dwelling units on Newport North
and open space on Newporter Knoll;
property located at 1501 Jamboree Road,
on the northwesterly side of Jamboree
Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and
the Newporter Resort;
PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 766 - PCA 766
Request to amend the North Ford Planned
Community District Regulations and
Development Plan so as to allow for the
construction of 300 additional dwelling
units, property located at 3200
University Drive on the northeasterly
corner of Jamboree Road and University
Drive South, in the North Ford Planned
Community;
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-38, being, Ord 92-38
Bayview
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Landing
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RH-ZONING
THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYIVIEW LANDING FROM THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN pCA 767
FOR BAYVIEW LANDING (PLANNING
COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 767),
Request to amend a portion of
Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U
(Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is the
adoption of Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan for
Bayview Landing. This request would
provide for the construction of either
a 10,000 sq.ft. restaurant or a 40,000
sq.ft. athletic club; property located
at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the
northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between Back Bay Drive and East Coast
Highway, across from the Villa Point
Planned Community.
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-39, being, Ord 92-39
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL ego
Cre
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Creek No,
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RE -ZONING
THE PROPERTIES COMMONLY KNOWN AS
SAN DIEGO CREEK NORTH AND
JAMBOREE/NACARTHUR FROM THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR SAN DIEGO GREEK NORTH -JAMBOREE PCA 768
MACARTHUR (PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDMENT NO. 768);
Volume 46 - Page 263
* CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS
\N\%\A\*\1bf\\ August 24, 1992
Request to amend portions of Districting
Maps No. 44 and 66 so as to reclassify
property from the U (Unclassified)
District to the P-C (Planned Community)
District. The proposal also includes a
request to adopt Planned Community
District Regulations and Development
Plan so as to provide for open space and
public facility use of the subject
property; property located at 3600
Jamboree Road, bounded by Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and SR 73, and
property known as San Diego Creek North
located at 3500 Jamboree Road, bounded
by the San Diego Creek, Jamboree Road
and SR 73;
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT DO. 769 - P.CA 769
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned
Community District Regulations and
Development Plan so as to allow the
construction of 245 dwelling units or
senior citizen housing; property located
at 855 San Clemente Drive, on the
southeasterly corner of San Clemente
Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block
800 of Newport Center;
Proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-40, being,
Ord 92-40
Corp Plaza
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
West
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RE -ZONING
THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
CORPORATE PLAZA WEST FROM THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CORPORATE PLAZA WEST (PLANNING
COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 770);
PCA 770
Request to amend a portion of
Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the 0-S (Open
Space) and Unclassified Districts to the
P-C District. Also requested is the
adoption of Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan for the
Corporate Plaza West Planned Community.
This request would allow for the
construction of an additional 94,000
sq.ft, of office development (115,000
sq.ft. total); property located at 1050
Newport Center Drive, on the
northwesterly corner of East Coast
Highway and Newport Center Drive, across
from the Corporate Plaza Planned
Community.
Report from the Planning Department.
Letters of concern about the subject
agreement from Newport Harbor Lutheran
Church, Leon J. and Audrey E. Misiolek,
Brad and Michelle A. Hanford, Betty C.
M. Messmer, Fred H. Joyner (dba Tide
Office Supply, Inc.), Grace Rosengren,
Lynne L. 0. Prechel, Cully Sutherland,
Joseph E. and Florence Stasch, Nancy
Kerr, Betren I. and Viola M. Smith,
Cathleen Himel, Paul T. and Virginia L.
Hawker, E. P. Benson, and H.R. Pearson.
Volume 46 - Page 264
0 CITY OF NEIIPORT BEACIP
\. Y7y 1:V
MINUTES
August 24, 1992
Letters in support from Citizens for a I GPA 92-2(C)
Better Newport, and W. Lee Spencer.
Letters expressing support for the City
to purchase the Open Space: Kimberly
Jansma, Nancy Rayl, M. Garncoa, Lester
Packard, J. Coates, S. Carlson, Shirley
Packard, Priscilla M. Groth, Doris D.
Conroy, Richard Knox, Jenell Wales, Mary
Sanders, Catherine S. Wales, J. E.
Groth, Henrietta Fletcher, Louis Ballas,
Niki Kinkel, and Louise R. Day.
The City Clerk advised that after the
agenda was printed, additional letters
were received concerning the subject
proposal:
Support - (telephone message) Bob Cooper
Concern/Opposition - Mr. and Mrs. Arthur
Courteau, Patricia Fonkalsrud (telephone
message), Alan Blum, David Williams,
George M. Crall (FAX), Shelley Spurgeon,
Ann and Lloyd Dietz, Robert M. Barton.
In Favor of Open Space/Purchase - Mrs.
Joann M. Sprenger, Shirley Clemens, Abby
Loubst, Jay and Ann Rhorton, Donald and
Frances Burdorf, Pernel and Mary Ann
Barnett, Dell F. Kahan, The Newport
Conservancy, Jean Wilson Clouse, H. R.
Nyholm, Tayna Tarr, Kip and Jamie Kula,
Louise Maracellas, Carl L. DeVries,
Candi Hubert, Mr. and Mrs. Lynn
Friedman, Sue and Charles Turner, Billy
Jencks, Mark G. Hoglund (Cliff Haven
Community Association), 33 signatures -
"Behalf of All Intelligent Newport Beach
Residents," Diana Black, Lauri
Mendenhall, Mrs. William H. Spurgeon
III, Mrs. Lawrence E. Gates, Suzy
Picker, Angela Ficker White, and
Patricia and Hans Bode.
Patricia L. Temple, Advance Planning
Manager, in summarizing the proposal
noted the following:
"This project is composed of a
comprehensive set of applications
to provide entitlement for the
remaining undeveloped sites in the
City owned by The Irvine Company.
The primary approvals are the
adoption of the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space
Agreement, Development Agreement
No. 6, and the vesting of the
proposed development pursuant to
the City's Traffic Phasing
Ordinance. The agreement will be
outlined in detail in the
presentation by The Irvine
Company. The details of the
agreement are the result of
exhaustive discussions between the
company and an ad hoc committee of
the City Council formed for the
purpose of developing the terms of
the agreement. The committee was
composed of the Mayor and two City
Council members with support from
the City Attorney, Public Works
and Planning Departments, The
Volume 46 - Page 265
*CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CODICIL MEMBERS
MINUTES
August 24, 1992
agreement is a product of the City I
GPA 92-2(c)
Attorney with substantial input
from The Irvine Company.
"There are three primary
components of the agreement: 1)
Circulation Funding Program, 2)
Open Space Dedication Program, and
3) Provisions for the Vesting of
Entitlement.
"In preparing the analysis of the
project, staff noted that the
project would constitute the final
discretionary actions in the
Newport Center area. As a result,
very late in the process, the
staff raised the issue of
dedication of Newport Village from
the Library site to San Miguel
Road. The City Council ad hoc
committee and The Irvine Company
determined that the dedication
could be accomplished so long as
the company was given the ability
to use a portion of San Diego
Creek North between the Bayview
Drive extension and the Creek for
mitigation of San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor impacts as
discussed in the staff report.
This concept has been incorporated
into the Development Agreement.
"In addition to the approval of
the agreement, the development
will be vested pursuant to the
provisions of the Traffic Phasing
Ordinance. This approval is under
the long-term comprehensive
project provisions which allow for
the use of the net benefit
concept. The balance of the
approvals are the adoption or
amendment of eight planned
community texts which set forth
development standards for each
site. The standards include
height limits, setbacks, parking
requirements, landscaped
standards, etc., for four sites of
the Castaways, Newporter North,
Block 800 and San Diego Creek
South, and will be subject to site
plan review and tentative tract
map approval. Development on
Block $00, Newporter North, and
Bayview Landing will be subject to
use permit requirements. Develop-
ment on Freeway Reservation East
will be subject to additional
tract map approval; the only site
for which there is no discretion-
ary action is Corporate Plaza
West.
"Subsequent to preparation of the
staff report, the need for minor
alterations to two of the
mitigation measures were
identified. Additionally, The
Irvine Company has met with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and has identified an additional
mitigation measure. These are
Volume 46 - Page 266
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACIO
CWWIL MDMT5
LAM4A W
August 24, 1992
described in the Supplemental
staff report to the Council, and
should be incorporated into the
final action of the City Council,
if it is taken this evening. In
addition, some minor modifications
to the findings prepared for
certification of the Environmental
Impact Report have been
identified. The list of
discretionary actions on page 5
(staff report page 306) should be
amended to include Local Coastal
Program Amendment No. 28 and the
related approval in concept. The
significant effect on biological
resources identified on page 36
(staff report page 337) should be
revised from will to may, to
accurately reflect the language in
the text of the EIR.
"The staff would like to note for
the City Council the additional
requirement that has been
incorporated into the P-C Text
Amendment for the southern portion
of the Freeway Reservation East
site (Harbor View Hills Planned
Community). This measure will
require an additional acoustical
analysis of the designs of the
structures to assure optimal sound
attenuation from that development
for the adjacent community.
"Another issue raised in the staff
report is access from Dover Drive
to the view park and bluff top
areas of the Castaways site. If
the City Council desires to impose
a requirement of this nature,
staff has prepared additional
language for the planned community
text.
"Correspondence received by the
City Council prior to the hearing
has requested a 75 foot setback
from the top of the slope for the
Castaways and Newporter North
sites. This request was based on
an estimate of a projection of a
2 to 1 slope from the existing toe
of slope on the Castaways site.
It t s important to note that the
bluff side setback established in
the draft P-C Text under consider-
ation, include the greater of this
projection of a 2 to 1 slope from
the existing toe of slope or 40
feet, 'whichever is greatest. It is
the opinion of staff that the
concern raised by this correspon-
dence 1s satisfactorily addressed
by the existing provisions, since
if the scenario presented is true,
the existing provisions in the P-C
texts would result in the
requested setback.
Volume 46 - Page 267
W1
GPA 92-2(C)
i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACE19
COLNrCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\n\%0%0011'f\1\ August 24, 1992
"The Planning Commission received
a number of comments regarding the
widening of Dover Drive to the
master plan configuration of six
lanes. While the project includes
grading out of the roadway for
this purpose, the subject of the
master plan designation of the
roadway is not subject to
alteration at this time. The
designation of Dover Drive
adjacent to Upper Castaways has
long been on the master plan of
streets and highways and is also
on the County master plan of
arterial highways. The need for
this road is not directly related
to the development of Upper
Castaways, but is required as a
frontage improvement requirement
of the development. As part of the
Traffic Study, the long term need
for this improvement was again
validated. This arterial
designation is necessary to
maintain the correlation of the
City's Land Use and Circulation
Elements which was achieved by the
General Plan update approved by
the City in October of 1988.
"At the Planning Commission
hearing, several persons testified
in regards to the relationship of
the possible future widening of
Dover Drive to the ultimate need
for the construction of the 19th
Street bridge over the Santa Ana
River. During the Commission
meeting, staff indicated that
there is no connection between the
widening of Dover Drive and the
need for the 19th Street bridge.
In the response to comments, staff
had the consulting Traffic
Engineer validate the traffic
consequences of the project on the
ultimate need for the 19th Street
bridge. A special traffic model
run revealed that of all the
automobiles anticipated to utilize
the 19th Street bridge, only 640
(2.5%) will also use the portion
of Dover Drive between Coast
Highway and Wastcliff. This is
the total automobile trips which
cross the City of Costa Mesa via
19th, 17th and 16th Streets. Of
these 640 trips, only 81 (0.3%)
can be attributed to the project,
and only 30 (0.1%) can be
attributed to the development
proposed for Upper Castaways."
The Public Works Director, referencing
certain aspects of the Circulation
Element improvement funding, stated that
the point he wished to emphasize is that
the funding advance will be available to
use as matching funds and thus can be
leveraged. The City competes with other
cities and other agencies for funding
under various regional funding programs
and almost all
Volume 46 - 268
GPA 92-2(C)
• CITY OF NEIIPORT BEACP
MIMUTES
August 24, 1992
the programs available require matching GPA 92-2(C)'
funds, thus the funds proposed to be
advanced can be leveraged and very
useful in completing the remaining
elements of the Circulation Element in
the General Plan. Further, the
priorities for completing those projects
will be set by the City.
With respect to the San Diego Creek
North Planned Community site, the Public
Works Director stated it includes an
area for the proposed ramp from Jamboree
Road to the San Joaquin Hills Transpor-
tation Corridor, and he would like to
recommend that paragraph 5.1 of the
Development Agreement be amended to read
as follows:
"Company shall dedicate to the
City the area shown as open
space/public facilities on the
Planned Community Development text
for each parcel, with the
exception of certain lands on the
San Diego Creek North site that
may be necessary for
implementation of the San Joaquin
Hills Transportation Corridor
which should be offered for
dedication directly to the
Transportation Corridor Agency."
In response to question raised by
Council Member Plummer relative to the
widening of Dover Drive, the Public
Works Director stated that the area in
question pertains to Dover Drive between
Pacific Coast Highway and Westcliff
Drive only.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hedges relative to what
circulation improvements are
contemplated by the approval of a
Development Agreement, as opposed to
what otherwise would be constructed
without the benefit of a Development
Agreement, the Public Works Director
commented that the Agreement does not
directly specify any circulation system
improvements other than the obligations
of the various parcels to construct
fronting improvements associated with
development of the specific parcel, but
the Agreement does provide for an
advance of funding in the amount of
$20.6 million that would be available
for the City to use for improvements to
any element of the circulation system in
the General Plan.
The City Attorney advised that the
Development Agreement specifies three
criteria that the City has to apply in
considering how to use the advance
funding which are: 1) improvement has to
be consistent with the Circulation
Element, 2) contribute to the overall
reduction in ICU at certain
intersections, and 3) represent
improvements which have been considered
by the Council in finding that the
benefits to traffic circulation
resulting from the agreement
Volume 46 - Page 269
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACR*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
�f August 24, 1992
CALL -
substantially outweigh any increase in
traffic congestion at impacted, but
improved intersections.
In response to Council Member Hedges
inquiry, the Public Works Director
stated that the most significant project
that the City Council has approved
preliminary steps on is the widening of
MacArthur Boulevard from PCH to Ford
Road, and to the future San Joaquin
Hills Transportation Corridor.
Council Member Hart pointed out for the
benefit of those in the audience that
the Planning Commission approved less
than a 40 foot setback on the coastal
bluff which was referenced earlier by
Ms. Temple.
In response to remarks by Council Member
Hart, Ms. Temple stated that at the time
The Irvine Company indicated to the City
staff that they were willing to give up
on the request, to have that encroach-
ment into the bluff top setback area, it
was the assumption of staff that any
larger setback was automatically
acceptable, and as a result, staff went
ahead and altered the Planned Community
Text for Castaways and Newporter North,
and those actions are now before the
Council. Consequently, it is being
recommended that Ordinance Nos. 92-36
and 92-37 be reintroduced.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Watt regarding the 40
foot setback, Ms. Temple commented that
the provisions in the P-C text are
exactly the same as in the bluff setback
ordinance established in the City's
municipal code which sets a 40 foot
minimum or greater, if the projection of
a 2 to 1 slope from toe results in
greater than 40 feet. However, in the
correspondence the City Council
received, the author based his
calculations on a 75 foot setback which
he felt was correct.
Discussion continued wherein Ms. Temple
stated that the provisions of the
Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement provide for payment of three
different types of funding for
circulation improvements and roads: 1)
prepayment of fair share fees, 2)
commitment to frontage improvements, and
3) advance funds paid to the City. In
essence, the Agreement will require the
City to return back to The Irvine
Company, 50% of the fair share fees that
gather on a yearly basis, and if at the
end of 20 years the advance is not fully
repaid, then the balance is forgiven.
The other aspect of the advance is that
it is interest free.
Volume 46 - Page 270
GPA 92-2(C)
• CITY OF NEWPORT HEACEOL
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
XAA \1\�\�\ August 24, 1992
In reosponse to question raised by Mayor GPA 92-2(C)
Sansne, Me. Temple stated that each
project, with the exception of Corporate
Plaza West, has a specific set of
subsequent discretionary actions which
must be approved, at minimum, by the
Planning Commission, and possibly the
City Council if appealed or called up.
Corporate Plaza West, unless the project
is proposed to vary from the development
standards contained in the P-C, could
proceed without further discretionary
action.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hedges, Ms. Temple
explained how fair share fees are
calculated pursuant to the provisions in
the Municipal Code.
Raymond Watson, Vice Chairman of The
Irvine Company and resident of Newport
Beach, addressed the Council and stated
this specific proposal began three years
ago, and during this period, they have
met with the City Council Ad Hoc
Committee, Parks, Beaches & Recreation
Commission, community associations,
SPON, Newport Conservancy, and as a
result, they have modified their plan
along the way. He stated that not
everyone is going to be happy with the
outcome, but for the most part, they
feel they have met the needs and desire
of the community and that it has been a
very constructive and healthy process.
He added that they are not requesting
anything more than what is allowed under
the General Plan.
Tom Redwitz, Vice President of The
Irvine Company, gave an in-depth and
detailed slide presentation of the
history connected with this proposal; an
outline of the proposed Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement;
and a review of the twelve sites
included in the subject Agreement. In
summary, he noted that they reviewed 12
sites totaling 258 acres; the proposal
consists of $21.1 million in financial
commitments for circulation system
improvements; there are 152 acres of
open space (77 acres more than required
in the General Plan); there will be less
development than the City General Plan
allows; and significant benefits to the
City and Community.
Mr. Redwitz pointed out that the
Development Agreement requires that each
project come back to the City Council
(except for Corporate Plaza West) for
subsequent public hearing and review by
the City prior to any construction. In
addition, nothing in the Development
Agreement precludes the City, Newport
Conservancy, or any third party from
acquiring or purchasing the Castaways or
Newporter North sites for open space.
Volume 46 - Page 271
i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACI*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
CR\August 24, 1992
In response to question raised by
Council Member Mart, Mr. Redwitz
confirmed that conceptually, as it
relates to the Castaways site, The
Irvine Company will not build homes any
higher than 2-story, and that the homes
closer to Dover Drive will be somewhat
similar to the surrounding community,
such as Mariners.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Turner regarding senior
housing or in -home care, Ms. Temple
commented that the Land Use Element of
the General Plan makes broad provision
for senior citizen housing facilities.
In residential areas, it acknowledges
that the provision for senior citizen
housing facilities may involve densities
higher than any specific density limit
or dwelling unit limit provided for in
the Land Use Element that is allowed
under the General Plan, upon the finding
that the project that is ultimately
constructed would be no more by way of
traffic generation than the standard
residential project at the density
indicated in the General Plan. In
essence, depending on the character and
nature of the facility, you may have
significantly more rooms or beds, etc.
Assisted living and skilled nursing
facilities are subject to approval of a
Use Permit.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Watt regarding siting and
bulk, Ms. Temple stated that the
provisions contained in the Development
Agreement provide for subsequent
discretionary action of most of the
sites via site plan review. The site
plan review procedures are a mechanism
whereby the Planning Commission can
review the site plan in order to address
specific site planning issues. In this
,type of an assessment, it would be her
observation that the City Council does
not have as much discretion as it would
normally have in a regular tentative
tract map zoning adoption process.
However, through the site plan and
tentative map procedures, there is a
significant amount of discretion that
the City has in terms of affecting the
site plan itself, and the grading plan
as well. The City will not be able to
make wholesale alterations to the
development standards.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Hedges regarding the open
space dedication conditions (Exhibit F),
the City Attorney advised Exhibit F does
state that the City is required to
record a covenant, but the Development
Agreement itself specifically authorizes
the City to transfer parcels dedicated
to open space to third parties, so long
as that third party assumes the
responsibility for maintaining it as
open space.
Volume 46 - Page 272
GPA 92-2(C) l
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACP
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\�\140'%V0\1\ August 24, 1992,
Council Member Hedges inquired as to how GPA 92-2(C)
much it would cost the City to maintain
the properties proposed to be dedicated
for open space or park use, to which Ron
Whitley, Director of Parka, Beaches and
Recreation indicated it is estimated
between $100,000 to $150,000 annually
for all the acreage involved.
Discussion ensued with respect to what
amount of revenue would be generated in
terms of property taxes as a result of
this build out, wherein Council Member
Turner advised that this was an item of
discussion at their Circulation Buildout
Ad Hoc Committee meetings. They took
into consideration the loss of taxes by
not building out more square footage,
but they also felt it was reflective of
the philosophy the City wanted to
maintain when it approved the amendments
to the General Plan in 1988 and down
zoned certain properties throughout the
City.
In response to remarks of Council Member
Watt regarding the Jamboree/MacArthur
Triangle and San Diego Creek North sites
not being suitable for office space
because of San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor, Mr. Redwitz
commented that he concurred that both
sites will be difficult to build on, but
are buildable. He stated it is their
understanding that there is a desire
among the community and the City to
reduce office entitlement because there
would be a net benefit to the
circulation system due to fewer cars.
Also, that amount of square footage
within the General Plan is being
eliminated and is not being proposed to
be transferred to another site.
In response to question raised by
Council Member Turner regarding the
Development Agreement as it relates to
the Castaways site, Ms. Temple advised
that the P-C text as currently drafted
in the Agreement, does not preclude the
creation of a direct vehicular and
pedestrian access from the current and
of 16th Street to the bluff top/setback
and park areas. However, it does not
mandate that it occur and the way it is
structured currently, if The Irvine
Company were to choose to construct a
gate -guarded community, it may not be
feasible to bring a public road through
that area based on their development
concept. She stated she had indicated
earlier that this is an issue raised by
the Lutheran Church, and if it is the
opinion of the City Council that such an
access is absolutely necessary, then she
would suggest that a provision be added
to the P-C text making said requirement.
Volune 46 - Page 273
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
A\ August 24, 1992
Mr. Watson addressed the Council again
in reply to Council Member Turner's
remarks regarding dedication of
property, and indicated that they will
work with the City in terms of
flexibility regarding the subject of
dedication; however, when they convey
property for open space it is their
intent to impose restrictions whereby
that property remains unchanged as to
its use.
Mayor Sansone made reference to the
height limit allowed for the Castaways
site, wherein Mr. Redwitz stated that
pursuant to current zoning, they are
allowed up to a 32-foot height limit.
He stated they may not need the 32-foot
height limit, but it is very difficult
to estimate the actual height limit at
this time without the benefit of knowing
the product they are going to build.
In response to question raised by Mayor
Sansone regarding the feasibility of
switching the senior housing project
proposed for Bayview Landing to the
Castaways recreational park site, Mr.
Redwitz commented that as a result of
their study and the various outreach
community meetings, it was felt that
there is a desire to have an active park
on the Castaways site; however, if it is
the desire of the City Council to
provide affordable housing on the
Castaways site, and an active park on
Bayview Landing, they would not oppose
the idea.
In reply to question by Council Member
Watt, Mr. Watson indicated that if this
switch in use were approved, and the
Newport Conservancy were to purchase the
Castaways site, the purchase price to
the Conservancy would not be penalized.
At this time the meeting was opened to
public testimony.
Carl Hofbauer, 20421 Bayview Avenue,
Santa Ana Heights, representing SPON,
commended The Irvine Company in their
efforts to arrange for public
acquisition and permanent protection of
open space of the Upper Castaways and
Newporter North sites, and he hopes
their efforts are successful. He stated
he would like the City Council to
consider the various recommendations
referenced in SPON's letter dated
August 18, 1992. He cited some of their
primary concerns as follows:
1) They feel the minimum bluff
setback should be increased from
40 to 75 feet.
2) They would like to limit
development on Newporter North to
above the 110 foot contour.
Volume 46 - Page 274
GPA 92-2(C)
r CITY OF NEWPORT BEAC10
FKITWPM�•_
August 24, 1992
3) They support efforts to limit
average heights of development on
Upper , Castaways and Newporter
North to 24 feet.
4) That there be public access
from 16th Street to the bluff park
on the Upper Castaways. (In his
own oppinion, pedestrian access
would be sufficient).
Dr. Jan Vanderaloot, 2221 16th Street,
stated 'that he has met with
representatives of The Irvine Company
over the past few years regarding this
project, and commended them in "pulling
back development" in some of the wetland
areas and dedicating more open space
than required in the General Plan. He
also commended the City for assisting in
the purchase of properties at Upper
Castaways and Newporter North for
permanent open space. He suggested that
no development be Allowed in the
Newporter North site in the best
interest of the ecology of Newport Bay.
If development is allowed, the Fish and
Wildlife Service as well as the Fish and
Game Department, contend that the Coyote
that is at the Newporter North site now
will probably disappear from site. He
stated that the magnitude of this
problem is described in the Bolas Chica
EIR where development of some 4000 homes
is being considered on the mesa above
the wetlands in Huntington Beach. In
reference to East 16th Street, he stated
that the EIR does not address the
impacts to East 16th Street, inasmuch as
there has not been a noise or traffic
study involving East 16th Street; it
only analyzes 16th Street between Dover
and Irvine Avenues. He suggested that
prior to approving this project, the
Council consider the impact of the 1500
per day vehicle trips at the end of 16th
Street which will affect the people of
East 16th Street. In concluding, he
stated that it is the opinion of the
City Manager of Huntington Beach that
property taxes from residential
developments in that City ultimately do
not pay for the services that are needed
to serve those residential developments,
and this may apply to other cities as
well. Therefore, it could prove that it
will cost more to have residential
developments on the Castaways and
Newporter North than by keeping the
property as open space. He also hopes
the City gives Newport Conservancy
enough time to purchase these two
parcels so they will remain as open
space.
Allan Beek, 2007 Highland Avenue, stated
he was pleased to see the City Council
and staff, The Irvine Company, and
Newport Conservancy working together to
give the voters a chance to purchase the
Castaways and Newporter North parcels,
and he looks forward to seeking voter
approval. However, that is not the issue
Volume 46 - Page 275
,ii,liis
GPA 92-2(C)l
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACRO
DOC"
CWNCIL MEMBERS
1� WV \ August 28, 1992
at this time. He stated that the
Development Agreement under
consideration incorporates by reference
a set of code amendments, and if the
Agreement is approved, he felt the City
has "tied the hands for all future City
Councils." Therefore, the Council will
lose forever the power to amend, correct
errors, or keep up-to-date. Any
oversights will be permanently frozen
in, and to sign the Agreement would be
a tragic mistake. He referenced the
letter from SPON to the City Council
dated August 18, 1992, citing short-
comings in the Agreement. He discussed
the topic of gated communities and
explained his reasons for opposing same.
He addressed the subject of separating
open space from private homes as
illustrated in a brief slide
presentation. He stated he supports the
Mayor's comments relative to a 24-foot
height limit. In conclusion, he urged
the Council to not approve the
Development Agreement as he does not
feel it is necessary.
Anita Meister -Boyd, 1848 Port Carlow,
spoke regarding the parcel known as
Freeway Reservation East in which there
are 12 dwelling units proposed on the
site. She stated that the open space
that currently exists on this property
is shared by adults and children for
active and passive recreational use, and
on the 4th of July, the community
congregates to observe the fireworks
festivities throughout the City.
Freeway Reservation East, sometimes
referred to as Nature Park Extension,
meets the objectives of open space as
set forth in the EIR, but the 17.3 acres
left after the proposed development on
the subject property does not meet the
City's criteria as they are relatively
inaccessible and are unsuitable for
active or passive uses, except as a
small proposed park. She emphasized the
noted differences between the Freeway
Reservation East parcel and all the
other parcels under consideration
relative to the proposed 12 dwelling
units as enumerated in her letter to the
City Council. In concluding, she urged
that this site be preserved as open
space.
Robert Davis, representing Newport
Harbor Lutheran Church, 798 Dover Drive
(adjacent to the Castaways site), stated
their primary concern is Exhibit "F"
which they feel creates a landlock
situation for the church. When Dover
Drive is eventually extended, the City
will purchase land from the church for
the frontage, and as a result, they will
have no place to expand or be able to
trade the City for equal amount of land
on their southerly property line.
Therefore, it will make them illegal to
operate under their conditional use
permit. He pointed out that the
Development Agreement as written,
Volume 46 - Page 276
MINUTES
92-2(C)
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACR*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
\I\�%00* L August 24, 1992
particularly Exhibit "F", causes further JGPA 92-2(C)
problems, which he has set forth in a
detailed letter to the City Cotit C'J'
dated August 12, 1992, citing (in part)
as follows:
1) The Agreement will harm their
present programs and future
expansion plans;,
2) The Agreement provides
inadequate parking for both the
proposed parks;
3) The Agreement provides
inadequate public vehicular access
to the passive park and the bluff
viewpoint, and
4) The agreement does too little
to protect the bluffs and its
environment.
Mr. Davis displayed an exhibit outlining
a proposed plan by the church,
recommending that the parking be placed
on the north end of the park, and that
16th Street be realigned for improved
access.
Taylor Grant, Vice Chairman of the
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission,
addressed the Council in response to
inquiry regarding the proposed park on
the Castaways site. He stated that
currently it is anticipated the park
will accommodate a combination soccer
field and baseball diamond, unlighted,
with supporting restroom facilities and
probably a tot lot. Specific parking is
pprovided for adjacent to the active park
in the conceptual plans.
Linda Schindler, 1800 Port Tiffin Place,
spoke in support of retaining the
Freeway Reservation East (Nature Park
Extension) as open space, She stated
she concurred in the remarks of Anita
Meister -Boyd in opposing the proposed 12
dwelling units on this site. She stated
that in reviewing the EIR, she noted
that 9 out of 12 items were a negative
impact if this land was developed, and
therefore, urged the Council to
reconsider the proposal for this site.
Karen Evarts, 426 Via Piazza Lido,
stated she is a 20 year resident of the
City and also a charter member of
"Citizens to Save the Blufftops," and
will be speaking on behalf of herself
and the Committee. She commended The
Irvine Company, City staff and City
Council for their careful planning and
vision as reflected in the Development
Agreement of the City's remaining open
space. She discussed the seriousness of
the current and future drought
situation as it relates to new
development; the proposal to sell the
Castaways and Newporter North sites by
Volume 46 - Page 277
40 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
�'F\0 \ August 24, 1992
The Irvine Company, and the need for the
City to help financially in those
acquisitions for open space; she cited
concerns with respect to the Development
Agreement and indicated it not be
adopted at this time.
Richard Luehrs, President, Newport
Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce, spoke
in support of the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement as
presented. The Chamber recognizes the
many benefits this proposal will bring
to the community. With the City under
increasingly budget constraints, the
proposed program provides an excellent
opportunity to obtain substantial funds
for improvements and create additional
tax revenues. The project will also
create much -needed jobs during
construction and provide additional
spending in the community. He alluded to
the financial problems the State is now
facing and its impact on the City, and
indicated this situation was not going
to get any better or go away. In
concluding, he stated that not only will
the City benefit by having funds
available for circulation improvements
called for in the City's traffic
element, the City will be in a very
competitive position for matching funds
from outside sources. Therefore, the
City cannot afford to pass up this
proposal, not only because of the
economic benefits it provides, but the
open space as well.
Len Koluvek, 610 Tustin Avenue,
President, Friends of Newport Bay,
stated he was appreciative of the
efforts of The Irvine Company, the City
and Newport Conservancy to form an
assessment district to purchase the land
surrounding Newport Bay. He discussed
the importance of preserving wildlife in
the Bay as well as the importance of not
developing Newporter North site; he also
discussed the benefit of the Coyote as
opposed to the Red Fox in the Bay area;
he also felt there should be a road
alongside the bluffs, not just an public
access trail.
Royal S. Radtke, 330 Mayflower Drive,
President of the Corona del Mar Chamber
of Commerce, stated that their Board
supports The Irvine Company's proposal.
However, speaking as President of the
DeAnza Bayside Village Homeowners
Association, which consists of 266
mobile homes for senior citizens, he
stated it is their recommendation that
rather than place senior housing on
Bayview Landing, that The Irvine Company
consider selling the land that Bayside
Village is presently on to the seniors
for senior housing, therefore affording
low-income housing for 266 units in the
City. At the present time, DeAnza
Bayside Village Homeowners Association
does not fit into any of the City's
categories as far as
Volume 46 - Page 278
GPA 92-2(C)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACP
%\114A\\*
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
A\ August 24, 1992
housing, other than alternate housing. GPA 92-2(C)
He urged the Council to give some
thought to the issue of affordable
housing (which to most is not affordable
in Newport Beach) and their recom-
mendation to relocate to Bayview
Landing.
Taylor Grant, Vice Chairman of the
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission,
directed his comments to the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
The Commission's recommendation is to
approve the open space element; they do
not feel that any additional acreage is
needed; the proposal for the Castaways
site is a good compromise and overall
plan; the Commission addressed the
issues of economic balance, maintenance
costs, improvement costs, etc., and in
summary, the Commission is looking
forward to either implementing the plan
under consideration or working with the
group who purchases the Newporter North
and Castaways sites in hopes of meeting
the recreational needs of the City.
David Lamb, 1851 Port Stanhope,
addressed the Council regarding the
Freeway Reservation East parcel
(proposed to be part of the Newport
Hills Community Association). He
discussed the impact development would
have on the adjacent community, he
stated the neighborhood ad hoc committee
to study this issue, met with The Irvine
Company several times and would like to
see it remain as open space; however, if
this does not occur, they feel the
proposed plan is workable for their
association.
Robert R. Weber, 420 Heliotrope Avenue,
stated he has been a resident of the
City for 20 years; he is an affordable
housing advocate for Orange County
Homeless Issues Task Force, and
commended the City on its General Plan,
particularly the Housing Element and the
work that went into preparing it. He
stated he supports the proposal
submitted by The Irvine Company which
provides for 956 housing units and would
urge its approval.
Joanne Burns, 300 Cagney Lane, stated
she was speaking as a member of the SPON
steering committee, and as a concerned
environmental resident. She commended
all those involved in this issue who
have given so much of their time. She
spoke in support of saving the bluff
face and wildlife; was in favor of
moving the senior citizen site from
Bayview Landing to the Castaways site;
and felt that senior citizens and
bicyclists do not make a good mix.
Volume 46 - Page 279
* CITY OF NEWPORT BEACIO
f 11"
August 24, 1992
Bill Schonlau, representing Citizens for
a Better Newport, stated they endorse
the proposed Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement, and strongly
encourage the City Council to approve
the document as they believe it
represents cooperative, rather than
adversarial planning between the City
and The Irvine Company. He added that
the proposed open space is a tremendous
benefit to the City and that this open
space can be realized without being a
burden on the taxpayers. In summary, he
emphasized three points they feel are
critical to the value of this proposal:
1) the Development Agreement
provides for more open space than
is called for in the General Plan;
2) the front-end funding for
traffic improvements are also
beyond the requirements of the
General Plan; and
3) the Newport Conservancy, or
other similar agencies, who wish
to purchase any of these parcels
does retain the right to do so up
to the time of pulling permits.
Ed Benson, 1028 Westwind Way, stated he
has been a resident of the City for 21
years, and has admired many of The
Irvine Company developments throughout
the City as well in the City of Irvine.
He stated he supports the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement
because he felt it contributes to the
betterment of the City; the Agreement
provides for additional revenue in terms
of property taxes as well as sales tax
from those new residents, which funds
could be used to defray costs for
children's parks/playgrounds, etc., and
therefore, urged the Council to accept
the proposal as submitted.
Hearing no others wishing to address the
Council, the public hearing was closed.
Council Member Plummer referenced the
issue of access to public parks at the
Castaways site, and suggested the
following language be included within
Ordinance No. 92-36:
"The design of the subdivision
and/or public parks by the City,
approved through the tentative
tract map and site plan review
process, shall provide for
vehicular public access and
parking for the view park and
bluff top open space from either
16th Street and/or the new
intersection to be created at
Cliff Drive. In making this
requirement, if access is provided
from 16th Street, the Planning
Commission and/or City Council
Volume 46 - Page 280
MINUTES
GPA 92-2(G) 1
0 CITY OF NEWPORT HEAC10
CODICIL rE MM
August 24, 1992
shall not stipulate that this
access be provided directly
through the residential area if
the development includes private
streets, is a gate guarded
community, or would result in
fragmentation of the residential
area. The project proponent shall
also consult with the adjacent
Newport Harbor Lutheran Church in
the final design of the project in
regard to public access from 16th
Street."
Motion
x
Motion was made by Council Member Hart
All Ayes
to approve the foregoing.
At this time, Council Member Hart
complimented the City staff, the Council
Ad Hoc Committee, and The Irvine Company
on the proposed plan. She stated that
Newport Beach is one of the slowest
growing cities in the County, and by
adding less than 2000 people in the next
two years per the Agreement will
actually work very well for the City;
she felt that Bayview Landing was one of
the most outstanding pieces of property
around (upper section of Jamboree Road
and PCH) looking up to the upper bay to
the San Bernardino mountains, and she
would hope there would never be anything
on this site other than wildflowers and
minor grading to improve the site; with
regard to Newporter North, she suggested
consideration be given to the
suggestions referred to in Gordon Glass'
letter regarding site plan variations;
and pertaining to the Castaways site,
she supports a modified plan to
eliminate using the Lutheran Church
parking lot for a public street.
In response to the remarks made by
Council Member Hart regarding the
Lutheran Church parking lot, Ms. Temple
advised that the conceptual site plan
which Council Member Hart referred to is
one of many concepts which have been
developed and shown to various members
of the community. The recommended
actions to be taken in relationship to
the Agreement do not include any site
specific provisions, and it is her
opinion, that the previous condition
regarding vehicular and pedestrian
access on 16th Street probably gives
some latitude in the site plan review
process to the extent that the overall
functioning of the parking and the
parks, the church and residential
development is more easily addressed.
In essence, there is really nothing to
alter at this time.
Motion
x
Motion was made by Council Member Hart
All Ayes
that the minimum setback on the coastal
bluffs on the Castaways site shall be 40
feet.
Motion
x
Motion was made by Council Member Hut
to limit development to two -stories on
the Castaways site.
Volume 46 - Page 281
MINUTES
CPA 92-2(C)
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH*
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
August 24, 1992
Discussion ensued with regard to the
above suggested action wherein the
Planning Director reported that the
definition of "stories" was eliminated
some 20 years ago and substituted with
the term "height limit."
Following consideration of the above
remark, it was suggested the height
limit be set at 24/29 feet.
Council Member Turner suggested the
height limit be set at the time of site
plan review to which the City Attorney
indicated he had no objections.
Mr. Redwitz addressed the Council at
this time and stated it is their
understanding from their legal counsel
that development agreements do require
that a maximum height is established.
Mr. Watson stated that they have no
objection to the average height limit of
24/29; however, if it is possible, there
may be a structure they desire to be at
the 32 foot height limit, subject to the
Planning Commission and City Council
review; the reason being that he does
not want to see "everything at the same
height."
Mr. Redwitz suggested language that
would require a 24 foot average height
limit, going up to 29 foot maximum;
however, upon review and approval of the
Planning Commission, the height limit
may go up to 32 feet.
Ms. Temple re -worded the above language
to read as follows: "All buildings shall
comply with the height restrictions
established by the City for this area.
The maximum building height for all
buildings shall be 24 feet. The
Planning Commission, upon site plan
review, may approve buildings up to a
maximum height of 32 feet. All heights
shall be measured in accordance with the
Municipal Code and determined from the
grade approved in the site plan review
and subdivision approval."
Council Member Hart, maker of the
motion, accepted the foregoing and
clarified that the provision applied to
Castaways and Newporter North, and the
motion was voted on and carried.
Mayor Pro Tem Turner made a motion
suggesting the following additional
language regarding Bayview remediation -
Exhibit "F":
0(5) Company shall complete, to
the City's satisfaction, a
remediation program for the
removal of known petroleum
products or hazardous wastes on
the Bayview Landing parcel prior
to dedication. Company shall
diligently pursue the remediation
program to completion so that
timing of the dedication is not
affected."
Volume 46 - Page 282
MINUTES
92-2(C)
0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACI*
aft
Motion
Ayes
Noes
Motion
All Ayes
Motion
All Ayes
COI KIL MEMBM
x
x x x
x x x x
x
F4
August 24, 1992
Council Member Turner made another
motion suggesting an additional
revision to Exhibit "F" regarding
flexibility and changing the next to
last sentence to read: " and that
the City will not abandon the dedicated
parcels or transfer all or a portion of
a dedicated or conveyed parcel to a
third party for other than open space
for the uses specified in the P-C text,
unless, 1) the proposed transfer is
necessary to implement City acquisition
of open space or other property owed by
a third party, 2) the proposed
development will not compete, conflict
or interfere with development proposed
or constructed by the company, and 3)
the proposed development is consistent
with the Land Use Element."
Following discussionithe motion, as made
by Council Member Turner was voted on
and FAILED.
Notion was made by Mayor Pro Ten Turner
to approve the following language read
into the record by the City Attorney
regarding the Castaways site and access
to Dover Drive:
"To facilitate the widening of
Dover Drive or access to the park
or open space on Castaways, the
City may convey to the Lutheran
Church a portion of the dedicated
parcel on the south side of the
Church property. The amount of
property conveyed to the Church in
the event Dover Drive is widened
shall, at minimum, provide
replacement parking for spaces
lost as a result of a widening.
Any conveyance to the Church to
provide replacement parking shall
be conditioned on the Church's
conveyance of Dover Drive frontage
necessary to accommodate the
widening to luster Plan
standards."
With regard to San Diego Creek North,
notion was made by Council Member Turner
to add the following language to the
first sentence in Section 5.1 of the
Development Agreement:
"Company shall dedicate to City
the area show as open
space/public facilities on the
Planned Community Development text
for each parcel, with the
exception of certain lands on the
San Diego Creek North site that
may be necessary for implementa-
tion of the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor which
should be offered for dedication
directly to the Transportation
Corridor Agency."
Volume 46 - Page 283
['iiir-riiIP
GPA 92-2(C)
*CITY OF NEUORT BEACH*
�'�l�COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
40\01 A\ August 24, 1992
Gi7111
Motion
Ayes
Noes
xlxlxlxlxlxlx
Discussion ensued regarding senior
citizen housing relocation between the
Castaways site and Bayview Landing, and
Mayor Sansone asked Ms. Temple how the
logistics would be handled if the City
Council were to move the senior citizen
housing from Bayview Landing to the
Castaways site.
Ms. Temple responded that in order to
implement a change of this nature, the
action is rather complicated.
Currently, there is a suggestion to
adopt a resolution amending the Land Use
Element of the General Plan regarding
the Bayview Landing site and another
resolution regarding the Local Coastal
Program amendment for Bayview Landing
site. Unfortunately, the Planning
Commission did not address in any way,
shape or form, the trade-off the Council
is considering at this time, therefore,
pursuant to City Council Policy Q-1,
this matter must be referred back to the
Planning Commission for public hearing.
In response to question raised by
Council member Watt, Ms. Temple stated
that if the Council trades the active
park proposed for the Castaways site for
senior citizen housing at Bayview
Landing, there will definitely be more
building (mass and bulk) on the
Castaways site; and the use of the
senior citizen housing facility as
provided currently in the Bayview
Landing text requires that the entire
development be subject to the review and
approval of the use permit which allows
the Planning Commission and City Council
on an appeal or review to address the
specifics of the project.
Pertaining to the Bayview Landing/
Castaways trade-off, motion was made by
Mayor Sansone to continue agenda action
items f 6 g (amendments to the Land Use
Element and Local Coastal Program Land
Use Plan for Bayview Landing), and to
direct the staff to advertise same for
public hearing by the Planning
Commission on September 10 and City
Council on September 14, 1992.
Prior to voting on the above motion, Ms.
Temple pointed out that construction of
senior citizen housing on the Bayview
property involves the transfer of 30,000
sq. ft. of retail commercial to Fashion
Island, and she just wanted the Council
to be aware that the potential for
creating an active park on Bayview
Landing and the senior housing on the
Castaways site also involves that 30,000
sq.ft. transfer.
Council Member Plummer suggested the
Council consider appointing an ad hoc
committee to report back in six months
on the formation of an assessment
district for voter approval for one or
more of The Irvine Company owned
parcels, and to direct staff to come
back at the next meeting with the
appropriate resolution and guidelines.
Volume 46 - Page 284
GPA 92-2(C)
10
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACO
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
August 24, 1992
ROLL L INDEX
No formal action was taken on the GPA 92-2(C)
foregoing at this time.
In response to comments made by Council
Member Plummer regarding the paving of
Dover Drive, Ms. Temple stated that the
Public Works Department has requested
the grading out of the road bed and the
dedication of the right-of-way for the
ultimate width of Dover Drive, and
currently the City 's traffic model shows
that, with or without the development of
Upper Castaways, that amount of road is
required in that particular location.
However, it is not required to date and
it may not be required for many years
into the future.
The Public Works Director concurred in
the above remarks, and also stated that
the ultimate master plan need for
widening of Dover Drive is not dependent
explicitly on development of the
Castaways site and traffic generation
from that site.
Council Member Watt referenced the
letter from Gordon Glass regarding the
view of Avalon from Jamboree Road, and
indicated she would like to see this
view preserved through the site plan
review process.
In reply to the above, Ms. Temple
reported that the staff did a great deal
of research in addressing Mr. Glass#
comments regarding the EIR, the project
and the response to comments, andthe
staff believes that the development area
defined does preserve the existing view
toward the lower bay and of Catalina.
Council Member Watt also commented that
the reason the Newport Conservancy was
not represented in the hearing tonight
was because the group signed a
memorandum of understanding with The
Irvine Company this afternoon. She
summarized parts of the agreement,
noting it states that the Conservancy
will not object to this development pplan
and agreement; that by November 1, 1992,
there will be a negotiated purchase
price; by April 1993, the Conservancy
would ascertain the interest of Newport
Beach voters in supporting the funding;
and by November 1993 an election would
take place if determined necessary. She
also referenced the letter from the
Conservancy dated August 14, 1992,
wherein it is requested that the City
Attorney and City Manager work with the
Conservancy and The Irvine Company to
develop an initiative and/or ballot
language that could be used by an
assessment district. She stated that no
action was required at this time, but
she wanted the Council to be aware of
the request.
Motion x Hearing no other comments at this time,
All Ayes aested
ctionTemple
ahand Mayor Pro TenTurner
the following:
Volume 46 - Page 285
*CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH*
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Lf1
August 24, 1992
(a) Adopt Resolution No. 92-88,
accepting, approving and
certifying Final
Environmental Impact Report
No. 148;
(b) Make the (amended) Findings
contained in the Statement
of Facts with respect to
significant impacts
identified in the Final
Environmental Impact
Report;
(c) Find that the facts set
forth in the Statement of
overriding Considerations
are true and are supported
by substantial evidence in
the record, including the
Final Environmental Impact
Report;
(d)
With respect to the
project, find that although
the Final Environmental
Impact Report identifies
certain unavoidable
significant environmental
effects that will result if
the project is approved,
the mitigation measures
identified shall be
incorporated into the
project, and all
significant environmental
effects that can feasibly
be mitigated or avoided
have been eliminated or
reduced to an acceptable
level, and that the
remaining unavoidable
significant effects, when
balanced against the facts
set forth in the Statement
o f O v e r r i d i n g
Considerations are
acceptable;
(e)
Adopt the Mitigation
Monitoring program as
amended;
(f)
Continue adoption of
proposed Resolution
amending the Land Use
Element of the Newport
Beach General Plan for the
Bayview Landing site. Staff
directed to schedule public
hearing by the Planning
Commission on September 10,
and the City Council on
September 14;
(g) Continue adoption of
proposed Resolution
amending the Local Coastal
Program, Land Use Plan for
the Bayview Landing site.
Staff directed to schedule
public hearing by the
Planning Commission on
September 10, and the City
Council on September 14;
Volume 46 - Page 286
MINUTES
GPA 92-2(C)
• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES
Motion
All Ayes
x
August 24, 1992
(h) Reintroduce proposed
ORDINANCE 90. 92-35, (as
ascended) and pass to second
reading on September 14,
1992;
(i) Sustain the action of the
Planning Commission and
approve Traffic Study No.
82 subject to the
conditions imposed by the
Commission;
(j) Adopt Resolution No. 92-89,
adopting an amendment to
the Harbor View Hills
Planned Community;
(k) Reintroduce proposed
ORDINANCE NO. 92-36, (as
amended) and pass to second
reading on September 14,
1992; (1) ORDINANCE Reintroduce proposed
N0 92-37, (as
amended) and pass to second
reading on September 14,
1992;
(a) Adopt Resolution No. 92-90,
adopting an amendment to
the North Ford Planned
Community;
(n) Reintroduce proposed
ORDINANCE No. 92-38, (as
amended);
(o) Adopt pproposed ORDINANCE
no. 92-39;
(p) Adopt Resolution No. 92-91,
adopting an amendment to
Block 800 - Newport Center
Planned Community;
AND
(q) Adopt pproposed ORDINANCE
NO. 92-k0.
Mayor Sansone opened the public hearing
regarding proposed ORDINANCE NO. 92-43,
being.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ING TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.84
0 THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING
TO PERMITTED HEIGHT, NUMBER
AND ENCROACHMENTS OF
ACCESSOUX BUILDINGS IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTBI (PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDMENT Ift. 762).
Report from the Plann`Spg Department.
Hearing no one wishing tk address the
Council, the public hearing as closed.
Notion was made to adopt Ordinance No.
92-43. N;�
Volume 46 - Page 287
GPA 92-2(C)
Res 92-89
Res 92-90
Ord 92-39
Res 92-91
Ord 92-40
Ord 92-43
Zoning
(94)
PCA 762
0 0
Attachment No. 11.
ORDINANCE NO. 92.37
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLANFORNEWPORTERNORTH/NEWPORTERKNOLL
(ET„ ANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 765)
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach DOES ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The subject property is the following real property in the City
of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California:
That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as recorded in
Book 1, Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps of the County of
Orange.
as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" and hereinafter referred to as 'Property".
SECTION 2. Development of the property, which is zoned P-C, shall be as
specified in the Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan which is
approved and adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, and which specifies the permitted land
uses, intensity and density limits and development standards and regulations for the property
as set forth in the attached Exhibit 'B."
SECTION 3. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby
instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan to the Property as described herein; the same shall be
in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper
of the City within fifteen (15) days of its adoption. The Ordinance shall be effective thirty
days after the date of its adoption.
00417
0 0
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach, held on the 27th day of 7ujy 1992, and was adopted on
the _ day of . 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
Attachments:
Exhibits "A" & "B"
PLT..\CC\DA\A'M.OBD
00418
o-4
RA;v
NOTE. ASMORS KOOK :
MR = WMBERS
.. ...r .1 11.1 • . . _ . . .
131
jar t, sm v
R A Y
Q
-.S .......•. ,
ASSESSOR-S MO
BOOK440PAGE 13
k:=
0 EXHIBIT B
NEIIPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904
Adopted , 1992
004 2n
Planned Community District Regulations for Newporter North
ordinance No. adopted by the City of Newport
Reach Citv Council on
Introduction
Section I
Section II
Section III
Section IV
Section V
Section VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
General Notes
Definitions
Residential Development Standards
Permitted Uses
Site Density
Maximum Building Height
Setbacks From Major Streets
Setbacks
Coastal Bluff Setbacks
Streets
Landscaping
Parking
Fences, Hedges and Walls
Parks
Signs
Site Plan Review
List of Fioures
Figure I General Site Location
Figure II Land Use Plan
Figure III Statistical Analysis
Figure IV Bluff Setback Exhibit
'l•FT-�+
4
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
i0
it
11
12
10
17
2
3
7
14
12/31/91
004?:
r L
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The Newporter North Planned Community (P-C) District Regulations
have been developed in compliance with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan. This P-C has also been developed pursuant to
Chapter 20.51 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
The purpose of these District Regulations is to provide for the
development of the site as a coordinated, comprehensive project.
This will take advantage of the superior environment which
results from community planning.
Whenever the regulations contained conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained
herein shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate
this development when such regulations are not provided within
these District Regulations. All development within the Planned
Community boundaries shall comply with all provisions of the
Uniform Building Code and various mechanical codes City Standards
and Policies related thereto.
INTENT
It is the intent of this P-C District to permit the development
of the Newporter North site for residential dwellings and
associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space.
The units will be located in close proximity to Newport Center
and will provide additional housing opportunities within the
City.
LOCATION
Newporter North is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road to the
north, John Wayne Gulch to the southwest, Jamboree Road to the
east, and the Upper Newport Bay to the northwest.
06/10/92 00423
C- �7
0 0
?4
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
WwMH•
MeMwrIWIWYM
i/9/Y
M
RESIDENTIAL
m. r r PARK
.'"fixv; OPEN SPACE/NATURAL AREAS
m
QQ.
00
�
004251
LAND USE PLAN NOT TOSCALE
NEWPORTER NORTH ire
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT "..
,/9/92
i
Owt�
sBCTION I
� 3:j ;i :�� � `� I.7:� ;i •by
Park dedication requirements shall be in accordance with the
adopted Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
Water within the Planned Community dill be furnished by the
City of Newport Beach.
sewage disposal facilities within the Planned Community will
be provided by the City of Newport Beach and Orange County
Sanitation District No. 5. Prior to the issuance of any
building permits, it shall be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Utilities Department
that adequate sewer facilities will be available. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure, it shall be further
demonstrated that adequate sewer facilities exist.
Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in
accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach
Grading ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by
the Building and Planning Departments.
Building pads adjacent to slope or bluff areas may be raised
to an elevation not to exceed ten (10) feet above natural
grade. This provision does not preclude raising pad
elevations above 10 feet on interior portion of site.
Manufactured slopes, if any, shall be stabilized as soon as
possible to reduce erosion.
If mechanical appurtenances are to be built on building
rooftops, they shall be screened from street level view in a
manner compatible with the building materials.
4 06/10/92
00426
6.
7.
S.
9.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the sites shall be
examined to determine the existence and extent of
archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance
with adopted City policies.
A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade
meetings to inform the developer and grading contractors of
the results of the study. In addition, an archaeologist
shall be present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant
cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall
have the authority to stop or temporarily divert
construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess
the significance of the finds.
In the event that significant archaeological remains are
uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall
stop in that area of the subject property until an
appropriate data recovery program can be developed and
implemented. The cost of such a recovery program shall be
the responsibility of the landowner and/or developer.
A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner
and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform
inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be
allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific
area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
The final design of public on -site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation serving viewpark and coastal bluffs shall be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department;
Planning Department; and Parks, Beaches and Recreation.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing provisions shall be consistent with City
standards. Affordable housing requirements may be satisfied
off -site.
NOISE
Detailed noise studies shall be conducted for the
residential development for on -site impacts. Residential
development shall comply with the standard of 45 dBA CNEL
for interior noise levels and 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor living
areas. Noise mitigation programs shall be based upon the
recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in
acoustics and be approved by the Planning Department.
5 12/31/91
C-)l
00427
C1
0
streets within the development may be either public or
private. Public or private streets shall meet City
standards. The Newporter North development may be a private
(gate guarded) community with secured access surrounding the
development.
a. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually
screened from access streets and adjacent property from
street level views. Said screening shall form a
complete opaque screen and shall not interfere with
site distance from streets unless otherwise approved by
the City Traffic Engineer.
b. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City
of Newport Beach approval.
•,•30niq VO MI at-) 4i4y W1
All 'on -site" gas lines, electrical lines, and telephone
lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal
equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets
and adjacent properties from street level views.
13. LIGHTING
Lighting systems shall be designed and maintained in such a
manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light
spillage and glare to adjacent properties. The plans shall
be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,
with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his
opinion, this requirement has been met. Lighting systems
for any publicly maintained areas shall use city standard
fixtures approved by the utilities Department.
14. FIRE ACCESS
Fire equipment access shall be approved by the Fire
Department.
6 06/10/92 00428
C,-lz
0 • '
FIGURE III
Newporter North
Type
Residential
View Park
Open Space,
Natural Areas
and Future Roadway
Right -of -Way
Total
Acreage
Area (Net) Du/Ac Du
1 30.0 7.1 212
2 4.0 0
3 55.2 0 - 0
89.2 212
7 12/31/91 00429
C-13
0
0
8ECTION II
1,Streets - Reference to streets within the Newporter North
development shall mean either public or private streets.
Design of streets shall meet City of Newport Beach standards
or as specified herein.
2. Bluff - As used in this document, "bluff" is any natural
landform having an average slope of 26.6 degrees (50%) or
greater, with a vertical rise of twenty-five (25) feet or
greater.
3. Viewoark - For purposes herein, a viewpark represents an
area of natural character with provision of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway and passive viewing areas.
�3
12/31/91 00430
•
SECTION III
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
a. Townhouses
b. Condominiums
C. Apartments
d. Single-family detached units.
e. Model homes and sales offices
f. Recreational uses ancillary to residential uses.
SITE DENSITY
Residential development area shall not exceed thirty (30)
acres with allowance for 212 dwelling units.
g:. allyWCALt
'0
The maximum height of all buildings shall be thirty-two (32)
feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach
Municipal Code and determined from the finished grade
approved in the site plan review and subdivision approval.
SETBACKS FROM MAJOR STREETS
Street
Jamboree Road
San Joaauin Hills Road
SETBACKS
a. 32nt yard
Setback from Ultimate
Right-of-Wav Line
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
From any public or private street the minimum building
setback shall be ten (10) feet from right-of-way or
curb, whichever is greater.
Garages with direct access shall be setback from five
(5) to seven (7) feet average or a minimum average of
twenty (20) feet measured from back of curb, or in the
event that sidewalks are constructed, from back of
sidewalk. A minimum of eighteen (18) feet measured
from back of curb, or in the event that sidewalks are
constructed, from back of sidewalk shall be permitted
with roll -up or other type garage,doors approved by the
City Traffic Engineer. If five (5) foot setbacks are
proposed at corner units or lots on curves, adequate
sight distance shall be provided unless otherwise
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
9 06/10/92 00431
C,' 16
b. Side Yard
Where property lines are created a minimum five (5)
foot side yard setback shall be required.
Architectural projections may be permitted subject to
the Newport Beach Municipal code. Zero (0) foot
setback will be permitted where a minimum ten (10) feet
building to building setback is provided. At side
yards adjacent to streets a minimum five (5) foot
setback shall be maintained.
C. Rear yard
where property lines are created a minimum of ten (10)
feet rear yard setback shall be required. Structures,
other than walls and fences, along the public bluff top
area shall be setback a minimum distance of twenty (20)
feet from property line. Architectural projections may
be permitted subject to the Newport Beach Municipal
code. Decks and balconies greater than 18" above grade
may extend into the rear yard setback up to 3 feet.
The property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be
located no closer to the edge of the bluff than the point at
which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn
from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 26.6 degrees
to the horizontal. Tn no case shall a property line be
located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of a bluff
or any eroded area of the bluff unless the area is restored.
FRININFUNUVOIRT040I;J
Private streets within residential development shall be a
minimum of thirty-two (32) feet in width with parking
allowed on one aside. Through the site Man Review process,
the following modifications to this standard may be
approved:
a. The minimum width may be reduced to 26 feet for access
drives serving no more than 16 dwelling units.
b. The minimum width may be reduced to 20 feet for access
drives serving no more than 4 dwelling units.
C. The minimum width may be reduced to 16 feet for access
drives serving a single dwelling unit.
06/10/92 00432
G' 16
a 0
S.
a
d. Drives of 20 or 16 feet as provided for the above shall
be increased to a minimum width of 26 feet if serving a
common parking area.
e. Unless otherwise defined in this text, private streets
shall be designed in compliance with the private street
standards of the City of Newport Beach.
PUBLIC STREETS
Public streets within the Planned Community District shall
conform to the current criteria as specified by the City of
Newport Beach "Design Criteria for Public works
Construction".
Residential development shall be designed to provide
adequate sight distance (25 MPH), at the intersection of all
private streets and drives, and along curves unless
otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
10. LANDSCAPING
Project landscape concepts are intended to allow for
maximization of views from residential areas. Interior
greenbelt concepts are
shall be submitted as a
subdivision approval.
FFV§EF9;T,TWPdL�
encouraged. A landscape concept
part of site plan review and
Standards shall provide for:
a. Condominiums and Townhomes
plan
Dwelling units less than or equal to 1500 square feet
shall provide a minimum of 2 parking spaces per unit,
including one covered space. In addition, guest
parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of 0.5
space per unit. Guest parking may be provided on
street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons (minimum
20 feet in depth or 18 feet where roll up garage doors
are provided), in a manner acceptable to the City
Traffic Engineer. 50% of the guest spaces may be
provided on driveways.
00433
11 06/10/92
G"
u
0
Dwelling units greater than 1500 square feet shall
provide a minimum of 2 covered spaces per unit. In
addition] guest parking shall be provided at a minimum
rate of one (1) space per unit. Guest parking may be
provided on street, in parking bays, or on driveway
aprons (minimum 20 feet in depth or 18 feet where roll
up garage doors are provided), in a manner acceptable
to the city Traffic Engineer. Fifty percent (50%) of
the guest spaces may be provided on driveways.
rVINERWA ,• -7-7-771
size of open and enclosed parking spaces and areas
shall be as specified by the residential parking
standards contained in the Newport Beach Municipal
Code,with the exception that common parking areas which
are not curbside shall meet the universal parking stall
size of 8 1/2 feet in width by 17 feet in depth.
A minimum of two (2) garage parking spaces shall be
provided per unit. In addition, guest parking shall be
provided within the development at a minimum rate of
two (2) spaces per unit. Guest parking may be provided
on street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons
(minimum 20 feet in depth), in a manner acceptable to
the city Traffic Engineer. one of the guest spaces may
be provided on the driveway.
The project shall be designed so as to provide for adequate
non -vehicular circulation from residential units to common
recreation and amenity areas as well as from residential
units to external parrs and roadways. This circulation can
be provided via sidewalks adjacent to streets in combination
with walkways provided through greenbelt and common areas.
Main circulation drives shall have a sidewalk on at least
one side. sidewalks adjacent to curbs shall be a minimum of
five (5) feet in width. Sidewalks adjacent to a 3 to 4 foot
wide parkway shall be a minimum of four (4) feet in width.
004?4
12 06/10/92 �
G 19
13. FENCES HEDGES AND WALLS
Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight (8)
feet, measured from finished grade. Where the fence is
required to protect a swimming pool, the fence shall be
constructed so as to meet the requirements of the Uniform
Building Code for pool safety. Wing walls, where.an
extension of a residential or accessory structure, may be
six (6) feet in height. At street intersections (to include
driveway intersections with streets), no such appurtenance
shall exceed thirty (30) inches in height above street
pavement grade within the triangle bounded by the right-of-
way lines and a connecting line drawn between points thirty
(30) feet distant from the intersection of the right-of-way
lines prolonged. Landscape plans shall be designed to
provide adequate sight distance (25 MPH) unless otherwise
approved by the -City Traffic Engineer.
13
06/10/92
00435
G-19
1661 YZAHVl1WW
NV7d 7VLSRW 11OV38JWdAVW d0 Al/O il3d
b9t13-LIHO 3/OWUHS zf-4/779
NOV8135 31A7
JN amo mW
,or
L
oca•la4ld • 09196n
11WJM+wo]ll
'JNI SH33NIDN3 lIA13
anau15 • SWVt7v
/ �179 �O 3Ol
-I-Vt78-40 d01
NOVWJS 3N/7 AlY3dOHd WN
NOVHL39 3N17 Ald3dOlfd 71dW
A7ddV 77M S3SVO
OMl d0 30NVIS/O 6mv3do
0
SECTION IV
The Newport North view park is intended to be passive in nature,
characterized by low intensity usage such as hiking, bicycling
and informal recreation. Minimal grading for trail connections
to San Joaquin Hills Drive and Back Bay Road will be allowed. It
is intended that the physical nature of the view park be a
Snatualomerlowslevelettinglighting may bewith vallowed, pursuant e additions and ltomcity al ireview,
for security purposes.
15
06/10/92
00437
G' At
0 9
SZCTIox v
A sign program for Newporter North, approved by the Irvine
Company shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning commission,
16
06/10/92
00438
G.' 2y
SECTION VI-
A. Purpose
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The effect of this section is to establish a Site Plan
Review procedure for Newporter North to insure that the
project conforms to the objectives of the General Plan.
The Site Plan Review procedures contained in this section
promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
community by ensuring that:
(1) Development of Newporter North will not preclude
implementation of specific General Plan objectives and
policies.
(2) The value of property is protected'by preventing
development characterized by inadequate and poorly
planned landscaping, excessive building bulk,
inappropriate placement of structures and failure to
preserve where feasible natural landscape features.
C. Application
Site Plan Review approval shall be obtained prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit or a Building Permit for any
new structure, including fences, and the establishment of
grade by the Planning commission or the City Council in
accordance with Section 20.02.026.
D. Plans and Diagrams to be Submitted
The following plans and diagrams shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval:
(1) A plot plan, drawn to scale, showing the arrangement of
buildings, driveways, pedestrian ways, off-street
parking, landscaped areas, signs, fences and walks.
The plot plan shall show the location of entrances and
exits, and the direction of traffic flow into and out
of off-street parking areas, the location of each
parking space; and areas for turning and maneuvering
vehicles. The plot plan shall indicate how utility and
drainage are to be provided.
(2) A landscape'plan, drawn to scale, showing the locations
of existing trees proposed to be removed and proposed
to be retained; and indicating the amount, type, and
location of landscaped areas, planting beds and plant
materials with adequate provisions for irrigation.
17 06/10/92 00439
C'.,1.3
(3) Grading plans to ensure development properly related to
the site and to surrounding properties and structures.
(4) scale drawings of exterior lighting showing site,
location, materials, intensity and relationship to
adjacent streets and properties.
(5) Architectural drawings, renderings or sketches, drawn
to scale, showing All elevations of the proposed
buildings and structures as they will appear upon
completion.
(6) Any other plans, diagrams, drawings or additional
information necessary to adequately consider the
proposed development and to determine compliance with
the purposes of this chapter.
E. ERA
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution
of the City Council to the City with each application for
Site Plan Review under Chapter 20.01.070. (Ord. 1686, 9 1,
1976)
F. Standards
The Site Plan Review procedures established for Newporter
North shall be applied according to and in compliance with
the following standards:
(1) Sites subject to Site Plan Review under the provisions
of this section shall be graded and developed with due
regard for the aesthetic qualities of the natural
terrain, Upper Newport Hay, and landscape, giving
special consideration to waterfront resources and
unique landforms such as coastal bluffs or other sloped
areas; trees and shrubs shall not be indiscriminately
destroyed;
(2) No structures shall be permitted in areas of potential
geologic hazard unless specific mitigation measures are
adopted which will reduce adverse impacts to an
acceptable level or the Planning Commission or City
Council, on review or appeal, finds that the benefits
outweigh the adverse impacts;
(3) Residential development shall be permitted in areas
subject to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL only where
specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels
in exterior areas to less than 65 CNEL and reduce noise
levels in the interior of residences to 45 CNEL or
less;
18 06/10/92
00440
G' ;,q
G.
(4) site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas,
pedestrian and vehicular access ways, and other site
features shall give proper consideration to functional
aspects of site development;
(5) Development shall be consistent with specific General
Plan policies and objectives, the adopted Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement, and shall not
preclude the implementation of those policies and
objectives;
(6) Development shall be physically compatible with the
development site, taking into consideration site
characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes,
and sensitive resources;
(7) Archaeological and historical resources shall be
protected to the extent feasible or appropriate
mitigation measures shall be implemented.
Procedures regarding Public Hearing notification and
Planning Commission and City Council actions shall be
pursuant to Chapter 20.01.070.
19
06/10/92
00441
C- a6
RESOLUTION NO. 1302
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWPORTER
NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLLPLANNED COMMUNITY
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.765)
WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation of the Newport
Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides specific procedures
for the implementation of Planned Community zoning for properties within the City of
Newport Beach; and
WHEREAS, implementation of the project will preserve and increase public
open space; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Community District Regulations are
consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project meets the criteria of the Traffic Phasing
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the
project consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State
CEQA Guidelines, and the information contained therein has been considered by the
Planning Commission in maldng its recommendation to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of
the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council adoption of the
Newporter North/Newporter Knoll Planned Community District Regulations and Develop-
ment Plan as attached hereon as Exhibit 1.
ADOPTED this - 18th day of June . 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
1
AYES Debay, Di Sano, Edwards, Glover,
Gross, Merrill, Pomeroy
NOES
ABSENT
BY
Gary J. Dii Sano,
CHAIRMAN
BY�-
Norma Glover,
SECRETARY
Attachment: Exhibit 1
PL11:..PC\AMD\A765.RS1
2
COMMISSIONERS
VOMMK\\
• . •
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on
the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between San Joaquin Hills Road and the
Newporter Resort.
ZONE: P-C
AND
F. Amendment No 766 (,Continued Public Hearing)
amend.
No. 766
Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the
(Res.
No. 1303)
construction of 300 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 3200 University Drive, on
the northeasterly corner of Jamboree Road
and University Drive South, 'in the North
Ford Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
AND
G. Amendment No 767 (Continued Public Hearing)
amend.
No. 767
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
(Res.
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified)' District to We P-C
No. 1304)
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing.
This request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000
sq.ft. restaurant or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club.
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on
the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between Back Bay Drive and East Coast
Highway, across from the Villa Point Planned
Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
AND
-12-
00014
COMMISSIONER$
I � k\NN\
0 June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
sites addressed in the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement.
AND
C. Amendment No. 763 (Continued Public Hearw
Amend.
No. 763
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the
(Res.
constructionof 48 additional dwelling units.
1300)
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Ford Road, adjacent
to the easterly side MacArthur Boulevard,
between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills
Road, in the Harbor View Hills Planned
Community.
ZONE: P-C
AND
D. Amendment No. 764 (Continued Public Hearin¢)
Amend.
No. 764
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
(Res.
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would
1301)
provide for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the
southeasterly side of Dover Drive between the
Westcliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
AND
E. No. 765 Public Hearii;I4
Amend.
Amendment (Continued
No. 765
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
(Res.
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. 'Phis
1302)
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
-11-
00013
dOMMISSIONERS • ATTACHMENT la 0 June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL I INDEX
15. That the applicant shall agree that 'the proposed
development will not increase the need for on -street parking
ng Newport Boulevard and that the applicant agrees not
to ntest the removal, of parking for the restriping of
Newp Boulevard on the grounds of loss of on -street
parking.
16. That Coastal mmission approval shall be obtained prior
to the issuance o uilding permits or occupancy of the take-
out restaurantfaci
17. That the Planning Co fission may add to or modify
'
conditions of approval to t use permit, or recommend to
the City Council the revocatt of this use permit upon a
determination that the operatio hich is the subject of this
amendment causes injury, or is de imental to the health,
safety, peace, morals, comfort, or g eral welfare of the
community.
18. That this use permit shall expire unless exer ' ed within 24
months from the date of approval as specifie 'n Section
20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Co
19. That the proposed floor plan shall be redesigned so tha e
customer waiting area shall not exceed approximately 3
s:.
A Development Agreement No 6 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.3
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation Develop.
Improvement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the Agree.
City of Newport Beach. The proposal also includes the acceptance No. 6
of an environmental document.
AND
B. Traffic Study No 8 (Continued Public Hearine) TS No. 82
Request to approve a traffic study consistent with the provisions of
Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven
-10-
z 000
42
COMMISSIONERS
160110&4
0
! June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
i
time for the purpose. The allowance of time for acquisition is an
agreement between The Irvine Company and the Newport
Conservancy. The AdHoc Committee removed the time allocation
from the Agreement. The City's interest in keeping the issue
removed from the Development Agreement is supported by the
fact that the dedication of Newport Village is specifically tied to
the issuance of Building Permits on either the Upper Castaways or
Newporter North, and the City would not want to delay the
dedication inordinately.
Ms. Temple addressed concerns expressed regarding the widening
of Dover Drive to the Master Plan configuration of six lanes. The
project includes the grading out of the roadway; however,
construction is not currently proposed. The arterial designation is
part of the Master Plan of Streets and Highways and also the
County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Inasmuch as the
designation has been on the plans, staff considers the widening as
a fronting improvement. The need for the road is not directly
related to development above the Castaways; however, it is
necessary to assist and accommodate proposed development in the
West Newport area and Eastside Costa Mesa. As part of the
Traffic Study, the long term need for the improvement was again
validated. The arterial designation is necessary to maintain the
correlation of the City's Land Use and Circulation Elements of the
General Plan that was approved in October, 1988.
In addition to the approval of the Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement, the development proposed would be
vested pursuant to the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance.
The approval will be under the long term comprehensive provisions
which allow for the use of the concept of net benefit. The balance
of the approvals are the adoption or amendment of eight Planned
Community texts which set forth development standards for each
site. The standards include height limits, setbacks, parking
requirements, landscaping requirements and other typical zoning
requirements. The Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800,
and San Diego Creek South will be subject to further discretionary
action through the review of the Site Plan Review in addition to
Tract Maps if they are proposed. Certain types of development on
Block 800, the development on Newporter Resort, and Bayview
Landing will require Use Permits. The development on the
Freeway Reservation will be subject to Tract Map approval and
45.
00017
CJ
COMMISSIONERS
1\0M\N
o0
4 June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
only Corporate Plaza West would .require no additional
discretionary action.
In reference to page 12 of the staff report, Ms. Temple stated that
the local street setback on the Freeway Reservation site should be
corrected to 5 feet instead of 10 feet.
In reference to page 13 of the staff report, Bluff top setbacks, Ms.
Temple indicated that staff is opposed to the concept of allowing
a manufactured slope in the 40 foot property line setback area. If
it would be allowed, The Irvine Company would essentially be
using 20 feet of the 40 feet publicly owned bluff top area to build
up the development area. Staff supports the concept of a grade
separation between the park and the development area; however,
it should occur on private property. The 4:1 slope option was
offered for the Commission to consider if the encroachment is
deemed appropriate.
Page 17, Suggested Action, Item 5(b) Bayview Landing, Senior
Citizen housing with transfer of retail to Fashion Island, Ms. Temple
advised that if the action is taken it would include a
recommendation to the City Council to initiate a General Plan
Amendment.
Page 24, Exhibit 'W , Mitigation Measure No. 18, Ms. Temple
indicated that for Upper Castaways and Newporter North, No
grading, stockpile of soils or operation of equipment shall take place
within the 40 foot property line setback area established by the Bluff
top Setback Ordinance except that necessary for trail establishment
and improvements, erosion control, bluff stabilization, or preparation
of the development area The Newporter North contour reference
should be revised to refer to the lessor of 60 feet or a line 100 feet
from a formally delineated wetland in John Wayne Gulch. The
Mitigation Measure currently refers to a 60 foot contour.
In reference to the Planning Community Texts, Ms. Temple stated
that where sight distance requirements is referred to, staff is
requesting to add the phrase unless otherwise approved by the City
Traffic Engineer. Staff has requested that driveway lengths for
attached residential units be corrected from 20 feet to 18 feet if a
roll -up door is installed subject to approval of the City Traffic
-16-
00018
June 18, 1992
COMMISSIONERS
V00*X11Q&t '
MINUTES
w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Engineer. The references to parkstrip should be corrected to
parkway. In reference to the Bayview Landing PC, add to the
condition regarding the screening of mechanical equipment
screening for the view park area in addition to residential areas and
roadways. In the San Diego Creek South PC, alter the exhibit so
that the full width of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
is clearly delineated on the Land Use exhibit.
Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, referred to Ms. Temple's
foregoing comments regarding the bluff top setbacks wherein she
indicated that there are concerns regarding the slope's stability and
the affect of the additional buildup of the pad that may cause
instability to the slope. There is potential liability to the City with
respect to slope failure and the area of the slope that is instable
would probably be public property.
Commissioner Edwards addressed the Development Agreement
whereby he determined that The Irvine Company could not
increase development at any time after the adoption of the
Agreement. Ms. Flory concurred with the foregoing statement.
Commissioner Edwards asked if the Newport Conservancy or
another interested party would acquire the property, would The
Irvine Company be able to come back to the City for increased
expansion of the remaining parcels? Ms. Flory explained that the
Development Agreement handles the sale of any parcels of the
property and makes subsequent purchasers of the property subject
to the terms of the Agreement. The Irvine Company would be
bound by whatever parcels they maintain without increased
expansion.
In response for clarification of the 4:1 slope, Ms. Temple concurred
with Commissioner Edwards that if the 40 foot setback is
maintained, then the 4:1 slope would not be necessary.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Ms.
Temple referred to Bayview Landing Planned Community text,
Page 4, Item No. 3, Screening, whereby she explained that the item
has been modified to read all mechanical appurtenances on building
rooftops and utility vaults shall be screened from street level view,
pedestrian area views at the proposed view park, and from nearby
residential uses in a manner compatible with the building materials.
-17-
0001
COMMISSIONERS
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Gross, Ms.
Temple explained the Bluff top Ordinance. The bluff top setback
provisions in the Planned Community District of the Zoning
Ordinance require setbacks from bluffs. The minimum setback is
determined to be the most conservative of one of two cases: 40
feet from top of slope or a projection of a line at 2:1 slope from
the existing toe of slope, whichever one is the greatest distance.
Commissioner Glover requested a clarification of the changes to
Mitigation Measure No. 18 as previously stated by Ms. Temple.
Ms. Temple explained that the existing condition would not allow
The Irvine Company to put any object in the 40 foot setback area
during development. The intent of the condition when it was
written was to preclude anyone from stockpiling soil in such a
manner that it would erode down the bluff face. The suggested
change would allow the developer to utilize the setback area for
equipment and/or grading within the bluff top area within the 40
foot setback during construction. The commonly accepted buffer
area from wetlands is normally 100 feet; however, the biologist
selected a 60 foot contour because it would be readily definable.
There is not a wetlands delineation study completed for the site.
The modified condition would require the 60 foot contour unless
The Irvine Company provides the City with a formal delineation in
which case The Irvine Company could use the 100 foot setback or
60 foot contour, whichever is less.
Commissioner Glover addressed the Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement,. page 9 (c), regarding an amendment to
the Fair Share Ordinance, and the affect that the amendment
would, have on the small developer. Don Webb, City Engineer,
explained that the City was going to keep the Fair Share Ordinance
essentially the way it is written. The City would review the projects
at the end of the pipeline to determine if there would be sufficient
funds within the program to complete the system. There may be
situations where the fees would need to be adjusted. It would not
be a disadvantage to any particular property owner.
Commissioner Glover requested a clarification of Ms. Flory's
foregoing comments regarding the City's liability concerning the
manufactured slopes. Ms. Flory explained that the City has a
liability under the condition of public property. If The Irvine
Company increased the slope over the portion of property
-18-
0000
COMMISSIONERS
0
1105M \'4 1
0 . !
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
considered public property, in the event of slope failure or any
problems that result because of the excess weight over the unstable
section, then if there would be any injuries or resulting damage
there would be a potential for the City to be liable because it
would be public property. The private property vs. the public
property are inter -connected. Discussion ensued between
Commissioner Glover and Ms. Flory with respect to the affect the
20 foot setback would have 'on the slope. Don Webb, City
-Engineer, stated that when the City adopted the Bluff top
Ordinance it was determined that since the Grading Ordinance
established 2:1 slope as the maximum slope that would be allowed
in grading of fills and materials, that it would be an appropriate
slope for the coastal bluffs that are adjacent to the area, and the
City did not want any houses or construction closer to the top of
slope than the 2:1 slope, starting at the bottom going to the top.
In situations where there is a coastal bluff, the City determined that
if the slope is closer to 2:1 that the City did not want anything
closer than 40 feet to the top of slope. The Irvine Company has
requested to go into the 40 foot setback area by at least 20 feet,
and the City believes that it is closer to the top of slope that is
potentially going to erode in the future. The development may
inadvertently cause problems due to the increased moisture
because of landscaping in the area and may affect the existing
slopes that have been dry for many years. The City is concerned
that the 40 feet be maintained free of any surcharge, and it allows
the City more room to permit public uses. If there would be an
additional slope in the 40 foot area, then there would be drainage
that would be concentratedat the toe of slope which is closer to
the edge than the City would desire.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff
regarding the public and private slope area. Mr. Webb stated that
a concern would' be if the trail system is installed in the 20 foot
area inasmuch as the system would have to be at least 12 feet wide.
The trail would have to be paved and it would have to be able to
support police vehicles, a fire engine, the street sweeper, and
landscape maintenance vehicles. It is feasible that the vehicles
would be within 4 feet of the top of slope, not leaving enough room
for what the City -would consider a safe area; therefore, 40 feet is
needed to provide for the foregoing needs. Mr. Webb further
explained that a 4:1 slope would mean that the trail system would
have to be constructed in the 4:1 area to make it feasible, and that
-19-
0001
COMMISSIONERS
��^ k\NN\
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL_ CALL
INDEX
would eliminate a portion of the vertical separation The Irvine
Company is attempting to establish. Problems would be created in
trying to fit the public use in an area that is dedicated for public
use. If the trail would be developed in the 4.1 area it may be
necessary to construct a retaining wall at the end of the trail.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr.
Webb explained that the Master Plan of Bikeways indicates a bike
trail in addition to pedestrian uses, and the bike trail needs to be
paved inasmuch as there is a need for a combination maintenance
access road and bike trail. In response to a comment posed by
Commissioner Edwards with respect to maintaining the dedicated
area as open space, Mr. Webb explained that it has always been
anticipated that the area would be a corridor that would be used
for public access, and a trail system is a permitted use as open
space.
The public hearing was opened in connection with this item. Mr.
Raymond Watson, 2501 Alta Vista Drive, Vice -Chairman of The
Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission. In
response to a question posed by Chairman Di Sano, Mr. Watson
replied that he had no objections to the findings and conditions for
approval in Exhibit "A".
Mr. Watson addressed the foregoing concerns regarding the bluff
top. He stated that the idea is to dedicate the bluff top so that it
is usable by the public, and The Irvine Company does not want to
do anything that would interfere with that purpose.
Mr. Watson reviewed his experiences with The Irvine Company
over the past 30 years. He indicated that he had suggested that The
Irvine Company group the Company's remaining undeveloped
properties and submit the project to the City for action for the
purpose of future planning for the two institutions. He stated that
the advantage to the City is to review the project in a
comprehensive fashion, and the advantage to The Irvine Company
is to be able to plan for the future. As an incentive to reach a
contract, The Irvine Company has offered funds over and above
what is required by the developments and the funds would be used
at the discretion of the City for whatever traffic improvements the
City needs. The alternative would be to continue with the same
program that The Irvine Company previously has done which Is to
-20-
000^2
COMMISSIONERS
0
I
�Q ��,�
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
'INDEX
take one project at a time, and to come to the City without a
Development Agreement. The Irvine Company would submit the
piecemeal or collective projects in accordance with the General
Plan. If the City does not approve the subject application, The
Irvine Company would not have an incentive to provide additional
funds and would provide only the required funds.
Mr. Watson concluded that The Irvine Company met with a wide
variety of groups over the past two years. He stated that plans were
adjusted throughout the two years to accommodate the views of the
public, and at the same time the Company tried to preserve a
developable piece of property. He stated that after the public
hearings and public comments that both parties will decide whether
or not to proceed. Some members of the community would like to
acquire some of the properties for open space wherein he stated
that The Irvine Company has no objection to the request; however,
the Company is,asking for some certainty of time for the benefit of
all of the parties.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr.
Watson confirmed that the package that is being presented
provides for less development than otherwise would be allowable
under the present General Plan.
Mr. Tom Redwitz, Vice President of Land Development, Irvine
Pacific, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Redwitz
distributed booklets that gave an overview of the slide presentation
regarding the proposed Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement. Mr. Redwitz stated that subsequent to the adoption
of the General Plan in 1988, a City Council Adhoc Committee was
formed to discuss a comprehensive planning program with The
Irvine Company. He stated that in addition to the discussion with
the City, The Irvine Company had many discussions with
community groups to build a consensus on their plans. The
following presentation is a reflection of the plans and compromises
over the past 2-1/2 years, including presentations to over 35
community groups.
The primary goals of the Agreement under the City's goals were to
implement the objectives of the General Plan for circulation system
improvements and open space dedications, and to provide
community benefits earlier and to a greater extent than with
-21-
000..
i it
COMMISSIONERS
A
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
"piecemeal" planning. The Irvine Company goals were to define
their conceptual plans for the undeveloped sites and to establish
financial and open space commitments.
Mr. Redwitz indicated that The Irvine Company represents about
23 percent of the future residential growth, and about 8 percent of
the future commercial growth allowed under the General Plan. In
comparison, on a traffic basis with other projects that are allowed
under the General Plan and other outside sources, The Irvine
Company represents 7 percent.
The key elements of the proposed Agreement are a $21.1 million
financial commitment for circulation improvements; 140 acres of
open space dedicated to the City; and less development is being
proposed than the General Plan allows. If the proposal is adopted,
The Irvine Company is committing to pre -pay the Fair Share Fees.
The Fair Share Ordinance requires developers to pay road
improvement fees at the time of the Building permit. The Company
will commit to the frontage improvements. In addition, the Irvine
Company is proposing to make available to the City an interest free
loan, and to make improvements to widen MacArthur Boulevard
north of Ford Road to three lanes. The terms• of the loan is that
it is interest free and the City is to determine how the funds are
going to be spent on the circulation system improvements. The
repayment would be from 50 percent of future non -Irvine Company
standard Fair Share Fees. If after 20 years the loan is not paid
back, it would be forgiven.
The General Plan requires approximately 71 acres of open space
or 29 percent of the total development open area, and The Irvine
Company is proposing approximately 140 acres of open space or 57
percent of the total development open area. 162,000 square feet
of office space and 28 units from the Freeway Reservation site
would be eliminated from the General plan. Mr. Redwitz
addressed the projects as follows:
CastawaysUpper The General Plan allows for 151 residential
units on 35 acres. The Irvine Company would develop 151
residential units on 26 acres with a density of approximately 5-1/2
units per acre. The balance would be dedicated to the City as open
space areas along the bluff top. The development concept would
-22-
000214
41 . 0
COMMISSIONERS
I
,p��o ��
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
be similar to the Bluffs project on the east side of the bay and
would utilize an internal greenbelt.
Nna2orter North The General Plan allows for 212 residential units
on 45 acres. The Irvine Company would develop 212 residential
units on 30 acres. The balance would be dedicated to the City as
open space, and The Irvine Company has agreed to minimize
impacts to the wetland area as well as propose land for a bluff top
view park along the bluff edge.
N&wporter Knoll The General Plan designates the site for open
space and The Irvine Company would dedicate the 12 acres as
open space.
Newoorter Resort The General Plan allows for an additional 68
hotel rooms. There is no plan to construct the additional rooms;
however, The Irvine Company would secure entitlement to build
the additional rooms.
Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard The General Plan allows
for 50,000 square feet of office space. The Irvine Company would
relinquish the 50,000 square feet and dedicate -the site to the City
for open space.
an Di eo Creek North The General Plan allows for 112,000
square feet of office space. The Irvine Company proposes to
dedicate the area for open space and public facilities. The General
Plan designates the area for a fire station, and a park and ride lot
has been considered because of the proximity to the proposed San
Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor.
San Diego Creek South The General Plan allows for 300
residential units. The Irvine Company proposes to construct 300
residential units. Open space areas dedicated to the City would be
along the San Diego Creek area and Bonita Creek area.
Freeway Reservation The General Plan allows for 76 residential
units. The Irvine Company proposes to develop a maximum of 48
residential units on two sites. The lower site would consist of 12
single family detached units off of three cul-de-sacs, and a 30 foot
setback is proposed off of Newport Hills Drive to the development
area. The northern area would consist of a maximum of 36 single
-23-
000zA `
COMMISSIONERS
i
\k\N
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
family detached units, and an open space area would be dedicated
to the City,
Co=rate Plaza West The General Plan allpws for 94,000 square
feet of office space. The Irvine Company proposes to develop the
property consistent with the General Plan. The buildings would be
compatible with height and scale of other buildings in the lower
Newport Center area, or approximately 32 feet in height.
Block $QQ The General Plan allows for 245 residential units. The
Irvine Company is considering a senior life care facility for the site.
Bavview Landing The General Plan addresses two sites: the lower
pad area allows for 10,000 square feet of restaurant or 40,000
square feet of health club. The Irvine Company proposes to build
consistent with the General Plan. The alternative in the
Environmental Impact Report addresses a low income senior
housing project that The Irvine Company would support. The
upper site consists of 11.1 acres and the General Plan considers the
area as open space and The Irvine Company would dedicate the
area to the City.
Neyport Village The General Plan addresses a 10 acre museum
site and a Central Library is currently under construction on the
site. The balance of the parcel is designated as Administrative,
Professional and Financial with zero entitlement because the site
was a part of the Library Exchange Agreement which transferred
office entitlement to Civic Plaza. The Irvine Company proposes to
dedicate 12.8 acres to the City for open space use.
The benefits to the development would be road improvement
funding and more open space. The road improvement funding
would consist of pre paying Fair Share Fees and, in combination
with other funding, provides a significant source for circulation
improvements. It would place the City in a favorable position for
outside matching funds. 69 additional open space acres would be
provided that are not included in the General Plan, or 140 total
acres.
In summary, Mr. Redwitz stated that the proposal consists of 11
sites totaling 246 acres; $21.1 million in financial commitments for
circulation system improvements;140 acres of open space (69 more
-24-
000;;G
COMMISSIONERS
0
o
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
j
INDEX
acres than the General Plan); less development than the General
Plan allows; and significant benefits to the City and the
Community.
Commissioner Gross asked if The Irvine Company was going to
make . a contribution to maintain the land the Company is
dedicating to the City. Mr. Redwitz negatively replied, and he
explained that the land contribution significantly reduces the value
of the remaining development areas. In response to a question
posed by Commissioner Gross, Mr. Redwitz replied that The Irvine
Company would request a private community on the Castaways
property.
In response to a question posed by Chairman Di Sano, Ms. Temple
explained that it is the City's practice to assure that the closure of
the environmental review period occurs well in advance of the time
the EIR is certified, and the City Council is the body that certifies
the EIR. The Planning Commission public hearings are provided
as an additional forum for individuals to make comments on the
EIR verbally, and the comments would be responded to
accordingly. It is a practice that is allowed by the Environmental
Quality Act.
Commissioner Glover addressed the Castaways property and the
dedicated land on the bluff top. She indicated that she had
determined that the area should be used as a passive area for
pedestrians as opposed to a bicycle path. She stated that she had
a concern that the proposed uses that would be located in the open
space and the housing would be too much for the area, and too
much is being proposed for the site. She suggested a natural
walkway and to keep the bluffs natural, and not to construct a
concrete path.
The Planning Commission recessed at 9:25 and reconvened at 9:40
P.m.
Mr. Carl Hufbauer, 20241 Bayview Avenue, appeared before the
Planning Commission on behalf of SPON. He asked what are the
benefits to the City of the proposed Development Agreement, and
what are the most substantial things that the City would get that it
would not get if it went about business as usual without the
Agreement? The two biggest items would be an interest free loan
-25-
000::7
COMMIS31ONERS
A
k
e`
i
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
of about $13 million for road projects and eventual dedications of
prime acreage on Upper Castaways and Newporter North that are
not required by the General Plan. He asked what are the costs to
the City and its residents of the proposed Development
Agreement? The City would lose its discretion to respond to
changing conditions, including endangered species; unacceptable
increases in traffic congestion and air pollution; or an
intensification of the public's desire to minimize development on
such key parcels as Upper Castaways and Newporter North. The
Newport Conservancy or like organizations would find themselves
under immense time pressure to raise funds or generate acquisition
packets for Upper Castaways and Newporter North as the
Agreement is now written. Given the costs and given the
irreversible damage to Newport Beach's aesthetic character and
biological resources, SPON is skeptical whether the proposed
Development Agreement as it now stands is in the interest of the
City and its residents. He stated that SPON has the following
suggestions: Upper Castaways and NM=rter North More
generous setbacks from the bluffs; height and bulk limitations so
the aesthetics of the area as seen from across the bay are not
severely damaged as could occur under the present Agreement;
remove language regarding Dover Drive; language regarding
acquisition that would give the Newport Conservancy or similar
groups two years to generate funds for the purpose of acquisition
of Upper Castaways and/or Newporter North.
Commissioner Pomeroy responded to the foregoing statement
wherein he commented that it does not matter what the
DevelopmentAgreement states, the Commission does not pre-empt
an endangered species. The Irvine Company would not be able to
build on the property if they do not mitigate for an endangered
species.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Gross, Mr.
Hufbauer replied that he is not a member of the Board of
Directors of the Newport Conservancy.
In response to a comment posed by Commissioner Gross, Ms.
Temple explained that the Planned Community texts contain the
basic setbacks, height, and parking requirements. Precise
development plans indicating the exact layout of buildings, the
location of internal roads, and the location of parking facilities that
-26-
000::i
COMMISSIONERS
E
• June 18, 1992 MINUTES
OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
lNOEX
M,ATY
be provided for the public places are not addressed. The
ned Community District Standards will be reviewed by the
mission so as to make recommendations that will include
ht limits and setbacks.
Commissioner Debay and Mr. Hufbauer discussed the feasibility
that a time limit for the Newport Conservancy or another
organization to acquire the Upper Castaways. and/or Newporter
North be included in the Development Agreement.
Reverend Bill Kirlin-Hackett,1012 East Mayfair, Orange, appeared
before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Newport Harbor
Lutheran Church, located at 16th Street and Dover Drive. The
church is the only developed parcel on what is considered Upper
Castaways. The EIR does not identify the church on the Upper
Castaways; however, the EIR for the Castaways Marina does
recognize the church as part of the Castaways site. The impacts
upon the church that would result from the proposal would be that
the pre-school children would suffer during construction because of
the dust and noise level; the pre-school would be impacted
financially if the parents would not enroll the children because of
the dust and noise; the children's safety would be a concern
because of the proposed traffic on 16th Street; the nearness of
homes as a result of the wrap -around layout proposed; noise would
become an unneighborly factor between the church and the nearby
residences; the worship life and schedule would be impacted
because of the unnecessary configuration; a severe impact would
occur on the wedding schedule and services; concerns that the
church would be enveloped by a secured community with a possible
six foot wall; the location of the park presents a problem of noise
during wedding ceremonies and there would be a lack of parking
in the area; and the loss of weddings would have a severe financial
impact. Rev. Kirlin-Hackett suggested that the City, The Irvine
Company, and the church come to a clear and firm agreement
prior to the approval of the plan. He strongly recommended that
the EIR be recognized as insufficient in addressing the impact oh
the church and its mission.
Commissioner Merrill referred to the foregoing statements and he
asked if the church was entitled to more expansion based on the
General Plan. Rev. Kirlin-Hackett replied that he was not aware
of further church expansion plans. He indicated that widening of
-27-
000 9
COMMISSIONERS
�$ k
•
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Dover Drive would reduce some of the church's valuable frontage
land. The present plan as configured, has the church surrounded
by the passive park border.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay, Rev.
Kirlin-Hackett replied that he had not met personally with The
Irvine Company to discuss the project, and that it would be difficult
to contact the residents residing in the closed community without
invitation. Commissioner Debay addressed the mitigation measures
that have been placed on the Castaways property during the
construction phase. Rev. Kirlin-Hackett stated that the mitigation
measures do not address the church during construction.
Commissioner Glover and Rev. Kirlin-Hackett discussed the
concerns that the church has with respect to the children playing
and other activities that would occur in the proposed park and the
impact that the noise and parking would have on the church.
Commissioner Edwards and Rev. Kirlin-Hackett addressed
comments regarding the widening of Dover Drive. Rev. Kirlin-
Hackett indicated that the church is concerned that if Dover Drive
would be widened that the church would lose some of the parking
lot.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr.
Webb explained that a six -lane Dover Drive has been in the Master
Plan of Street and Highways since 1962.
Commissioner Debay referred to the proposed Upper Castaways
Planned Community District Regulations, page 6, wherein it states
that Noise mitigation programs shall be based upon the
recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in acoustics and be
approved by the Planning Department.
Dr. Richard G. Vinson, Costa Mesa Citizens Transportation
Alternatives Study Group, submitted and read a letter to the
Commission dated June 18,1992, from Roy Pizarek, Chairman. He
stated that the group requests to preserve the quality of life of
residential neighborhoods; the deletion of the 19th Street and
Gisler Street crossings of the Santa Ana River and the deletion or
downgrading of East 19th Street as a secondary highway on Orange
County's Master Plan of Highways; that Upper Castaways could
-28-
00030
COMMISSIONERS
A O
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF 'NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
J
INDEX
result in significant traffic impacts in residential neighborhoods in
the east side of Costa Mesa and Dover Shores in Newport Beach;
and that the Commission consider alternatives for the proposed
Upper Castaways project to compliment rather than degrade the
existing residential neighborhoods.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that the 19th Street crossing over
the Santa Ana River is essential to improve circulation throughout
the Newport Beach/Costa Mesa area.
Mr. Robert Webber, 420 Heliotrope, appeared before the Planning
Commission on behalf of the Orange County Homeless Issues Task
Force. Mr. Webber stated that he had reviewed the City's
compliance with the State regulations regarding the housing, and
planning issues. He complemented staff with regard to the housing
issues. He requested that the City not lose the potential housing
stock because it has been the policy to use 20 percent of the
housing allocation for low and very low cost housing. He indicated
that affordable housing is not included in all of the proposed
Planned Community texts, and be requested assurance that
affordable housing would be reflected in each of the projects. He
recommended that the senior housing, the restaurant and the
athletic facility be developed at Bayview Landing. Mr. Hewicker
stated that there are no proposals to relax the City's affordable
housing policy. The terminology in the Planned Community texts
allows for the provision of affordable housing either on -site or off -
site.
Mr. Willis Longyear, 215 Via San Remo, appeared before the
Planning Commission on behalf of the Newport Conservancy. He
stated that the Conservancy is proceeding with an active program
to acquire three privately held properties adjoining the Newport
Bay Ecology Reserve and Park System in order to protect an
ecological balance of the Reserve and to provide citizens of the
community with continued access to particular desirable
recreational open space. The Conservancy recommends that San
Diego Creek South remain open as a corridor for continued
wildlife access for Upper Newport Bay from inland open space
areas, and that Newporter North remain as an open wildlife habitat
as an upland breeding and hunting area and an extended habitat
for endangered species. The Conservancy requests that Upper
Castaways and Newporter North be left undeveloped for at least
-29-
19nn:��
-Vvy
C
ISSIONERS
! . i
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
the period of years that would be required for the ecological sites
to be assessed and explored in an orderly unhurried manner. The
need for recreation and open space will become increasingly
important to the City as development continues to "hem" it in,
which requires that the Upper Castaways be retained for its present
and future value as a particularly desirable parcel of recreational
and open space. That Newporter North be carefully planned to
provide low impact access for observation of wildlife in its natural
habitat. The viewpoint has been born out by a recent City survey
in which roughly 85 percent of those interviewed cited that
preservation of open space and wildlife habitat are important issues
for the City. Preliminary review of the EIR indicates strong
possibilities that it also supports the initial assessment that
development of the foregoing parcels will impose irreparable
negative impact on the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve and
Park System. The Conservancy requests that the City work with
the Conservancy to save the City's remaining small and rich
heritage of wildlife habitat and recreational open space. The
Conservancy requested that the Commission take no action in
accepting the EIR or approving the Development Agreement until
the response to comments has been completed.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr.
Longyear replied that the Conservancy would need approximately
$80 million to preserve the aforementioned sites, and they have not
begun the fundraising campaign. Mr. Longyear explained that if
The Irvine Company developed the foregoing properties that it
would take several years to get a return from their investment. The
Conservancy's intent is to build enough presence and financial
capability to meet The Irvine Company's requirements and they
hope to do that within 1-1/2 to 2 years. It is not expected that the
Conservancy would be able to pay The Irvine Company off within
that period of time.
Commissioner Gross and Mr. Longyear discussed the Conservancy's
desire to have additional time to study the EIR with respect to
Newporter North. Ms. Temple stated that there are several
archeological sites identified on the Newporter North site and that
there is specific mitigation included in the program that will
require, prior to the issuance of any Grading Permit, that the
investigation and salvage operation be complete. These types of
-30-
ooa;;z
COMMISSIONERS
I \01V\N1\\
• . June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
H
INDEX
programs are subject to the approval of a Coastal Permit for
Cultural Resource Recovery.
Mr. Michael J. Daley, 1921 Port Weybridge, appeared before the
Planning Commission as President of the Harbor View
Homeowner's Association, representing 525 homes. He addressed
the Freeway Reservation parcel wherein he indicated that the
homeowner's would be most affected by the proposed 36 dwellings
at Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard. He stated that the
Association had a previous concern that Ford Road would become
a cul-de-sac and additional houses would impact the community;
however, The Association met with The Irvine Company regarding
the property and the development was reduced from 76 structures
to 36 structures so as to blend the proposed project with the
existing community.
Mr. Alan Remington appeared before the Planning Commission
representing the Friends of the Santa Ana River. Mr. Remington
stated that roads are not the answer to traffic and there is currently
no crossing over the Santa Ana River at 19th Street; therefore,
there is no traffic. He stated that the residents oppose a six lane
road and the traffic would impact the residents. of Costa Mesa and
Newport Beach. He indicated that 2600 residences proposed in the
Santa Ana River area would generate heavy east and west traffic.
Commissioner Gross and Mr. Remington discussed the concerns
regarding the proposed impact of traffic at the comer of 19th
Street and Newport Boulevard; the widening of Dover Drive; and
the proposed 19th Street bridge.
Mr. Jack Perkins, 474 - 16th Place, Costa Mesa, appeared before
the Planning Commissions as a member of the Newport Harbor
Lutheran Church. He stated that the Church moved from a Cliff
Drive location to the present location because a freeway was
proposed for that location; however, the freeway was never
constructed. He stated that sometimes a proposal is not executed
as planned wherein he referred to the concerns expressed regarding
the expansion of Dover Drive.
Mr. Robert Hoffman, a 19th Street resident in Costa Mesa,
appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the East
Side Homeowners Association. He submitted and read a letter
dated June 18, 1992, to'the Planning Commission. He stated that
-31-
000;3
COMMISSIONERS
I* June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
their concerns are the increase in traffic because of the proposed
development and associated street widening; the safety of the
children; and the noise and pollution. The homeowners
recommended an alternative to the proposed Upper Castaways
project.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Webb
explained that the traffic projection does not indicate any change
in traffic on 19th Street related to the proposed development.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr.
Webb explained that the proposed widening of Dover Drive that
is included in the Circulation Element would be between West
Coast Highway and Westcllff Drive. Commissioner Edwards stated
that the Commission is not specifically addressing the widening of
Dover Drive. Mr. Webb explained that the Commission is only
addressing the part of the Development Agreement that requires
The Irvine Company to provide the grading, if necessary. Mr.
Webb further explained that if the City Council would change the
Circulation Element of the General Plan and downgrade it, the
widening of Dover Drive could be eliminated.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr.
Webb explained that the Upper Castaways is one of the small
increments that would occur within 20 years that would cause a
need for the widening of Dover Drive.
Commissioner Merrill concluded that it is good engineer and traffic
planning to have The Irvine Company grade Dover Drive as a
requirement as long as the roadway is on the Master Plan. Mr.
Webb stated that in the interim the parcel would be landscaped
and would provide open space.
Mr. Royal Radtke, 330 Mayflower Drive, DeAnza Village,
appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Corona
del Mar Chamber of Commerce and the Bayside Village
Homeowner's Association. Mr. Radtke stated that the Corona del
Mar Chamber of Commerce previously had concerns regarding the
Upper Castaways site and the area near the Newporter Hotel;
however, after examining the proposals, the Board of Directors
unanimously supported The Irvine Company's plan. The Bayside
Village Homeowner's Association has made no decision with
-32-
00034
Ll
COMMISSIONERS- minzs&u4s:,
CC
June 18, 1992
T+,S
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
- ,ts- ' i o ',. ! "..ri° �.
respect to the plan wasjnuch,s there are cone rns regaid�ng4MIT
,,`,
h'
cliff area across from DeAn")kkyside Village which could
a liability for the City should an accident occur within the 40 foot
setback's'
,In response to a question (dosed by Commissioner Edwards, i�Ir:
Radtke explained that the residents are concerned with the liability '
factor inasmuch as the cliff areas are not properly marked, and the
type of development that Would be allowed within the 40 foot
setback
Mr. Neil Randle, 1848 Port Tiffin Place, appeared before, the
Planning Commission on behalf of the residents concerned with the
southern portion of the Freeway Reservation project Mr. Randle
stated that the residents would prefer that the area remain open
space; however, after meeting with The Irvine Company, the
AdHoc Committee agreed to a modified project wherein the homes
would front on Newport Hills Drive and the number of structures
would be reduced from 15 homes to 12 homes.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr.
Randle explained that the aforementioned AdHoc Committee has
been sanctioned by members of the Board of Directors of the
Newport Hills Community Association. Discussion ensued
"
regarding the feasibility of purchasing the property for open space.
Mr. Gary Drew, 223 Monte Vista, Costa Mesa, appeared before the
Planning Commission as a member of the Newport Harbor
Lutheran Church and Council President. He stated that the
Church has requested thatspecific glarifications be addressed in the
Environmental Impact Report regarding the Upper Castaways site,
i.e.: the inconsistencies of the Castaways Marina EIR and the
Open Space Circulation Agreement EIR. The Church is addressed
in the Castaways Marina )EIR, and the Church is mentioned in a
minor way in the Open $pace ,Circulation E1,P Visual Chaiacter '
Section The Church has further requested that the EIR address '
mitigation measures similar to the Castaways Marina EIA Section
5.1, page 5.1-9, Land Use: To mitigate potential short term impacts
[the Church would request long term impacts] to Church activities,
the project applicant or designated representative, shall coordinate/
communicate with officials of the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church
-33-
00035
COMMISSIONERS
k\\N e
e\
0 . 0
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
to esWUsh a schedule... and plan to work out the logistics of the
development as it impacts the Church.
Commissioner Merrill indicated that the Castaways Marina
provided for a haul road, and inasmuch as the haul road would be
constructed around the Church, the Church was specifically
addressed in the Castaways Marina EIR. Mr. Drew concurred;
however, he explained that the Castaways Marina is mentioned
many times with respect to the impact that the Marina would have
on the Church.
Ms, Temple stated that the general construction impact conditions
apply to everyone; however, staff has no problem with
incorporating specific references to the Church and will respond to
the foregoing comments in Response to Comment. The full scope
of mitigation will be reviewed with the Church prior to submittal
to the City Council.
Mr. Drew stated that the Church requests that prior to Tract Map
approval or submittal, a resolution be worked out between the City,
The Irvine Company, and Newport Harbor Lutheran Church. A
specific resolution would be in place prior to the approval of a
Tract Map, that the resolution shall contain that any private or
public development assure the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church
that it will not be impacted to affect their ability to service the
community, to adhere and to continue their mission's statements
and programs that are currently offered to the community. That no
impact be made that would af£gct the Church!s physical site with
any constraints, including security, access, identity, that the Church
now enjoys.
Ms. B. L Johnson, 23 Canyon Crest, appeared before the Planning
Commission in support of the proposed Development Agreement.
She explained that the Agreement provides needs and economic
benefits for the City, and she supported the Newport Conservancy's
request to purchase the Upper Castaways site.
Mr. Ed Benson, 1028 Westwind Way, President of the Dover
Shores Community Association, appeared before the Planning
Commission. He submitted a written text of his testimony to the
Commission expressing the Association's support of the
-34-
000 ;G
COMMISSIONERS
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Development Agreement and the benefits the City would acquire
as a result of the proposed project.
Ms. Janet Remington, 1154 Boise Way, Costa Mesa, appeared
before the Planning Commission. She addressed the West Newport
OR project located adjacent to the Santa Ana River and 19th
Street, and the circulation pattern to Dover Drive. She stated that
a six lane highway would be constructed through the wetlands to
Dover Drive if the West Newport Oil project would be developed
from West Coast Highway to 19th Street in Costa Mesa, and she
expressed concerns regarding the impact the traffic would have on
the residents residing adjacent to the proposed roadway.
Commissioner Gross, Commissioner Pomeroy, Commissioner
Merrill and Ms. Remington discussed the feasibility of removing
the expansion of Dover Drive from the Master Plan of Arterial
Highways and her concerns regarding Dover Drive and the 19th
Street Bridge.
Mr. Webb stated that a study is currently going on with the County
of Orange that will review the traffic in the Huntington Beach,
Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, and Newport Beach areas that will
evaluate the needs for 19th Street, Gisler Street, and Wilson Street
bridges as well as the status of the East 19th Street link. The
recommendations that come out of the study will be forwarded to
the cities. He stated that he has been designated to participate in
the study. The group participating in the study are trying to
quantify some of the problems that are currently being addressed
and to try to determine where the traffic is coming from and going
to. The results of the study will be submitted to the City Council at
a later date.
Mr. Allen Beek, 2007 Highland, appeared before the Planning
Commission. Mr. Beek stated that the Development Agreement
gives advance approval to projects that may be done many years in
the future, and it is simply a way of the City abdicating
responsibility in the future to maintain its vigilance over protecting
the health, safety, and welfare of the community. It is improper for
the City to give away the future years, the rights of future City
Councils, and the right of the people at the polls to make their
fundamental planning decisions for the City. It has been justified
that the City would get some streets built and paid for by The
Irvine Company; however, he said the City has no need for the
-35-
000
0
COMMISSIONERS
Vas"'c
i June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
streets, and he suggested more intersection capacity and not more
lanes. He suggested that the Circulation Element be amended to
remove the additional lanes. In reference to the proposed Upper
Castaways project, Mr. Beek stated that the bluff is eroding, that
some of the runoff from the top of the bluff runs over the face and
down the bluff, and is carving gullies. One of the requirements of
the project should be that the gullies should be filled and restored,
and that a berm be established along the drainage. There should
be public bicycle and pedestrian access from 16th Street to the
bluff top development. He opposed the proposal to construct a 10
foot berm or mound adjacent to the residential development and
the open space inasmuch as the houses in back want a view and the
houses in front should be kept low and not built up, and they
should be restricted in height, so the neighbors behind can see over
the lower structures. The proposed 32 foot height limit is
completely out of character, at least for the front row of houses.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Beek
explained that The Irvine Company is taking every last dwelling
unit they are entitled to, on the Castaways, the Newporter North,
and San Diego Creek South. He stated that what The Irvine
Company is giving in open space is around the freeway, and that
area cannot be developed.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Gross, Ms. Flory
explained that the change in density would require a change in the
General Plan, and it is a matter of creating zoning for the
applications that currently exist. Mr. Hewicker explained that prior
to the time that there are homes on the site, the zoning has to be
established, Mr. Beek responded that the general outline would be
established with the subject Development Agreement and the City
would not be able to go back on the things that were given away
with the Development Agreement. Mr. Beek commended staff and
the City Attorney's office on the work that has been done with the
subject Development Agreement.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Ms.
Temple explained that the comprehensive set of mitigation
measures require that the bluffs on the Castaways and Newporter
North undergo a stabilization program. In addition, staff set up a
program whereby in order to make use of the restored top of slope
in the areas where there are erosion swells, that The Irvine
-36-
00038
• • June 18, 1992MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH _
INDEX
ROLL CALL
Company would be responsible for the restoration and re-
establishment of the slopes in those areas. Absent their willingness
to make the improvements themselves, then their development line
would be defined by the existing top of slope, which is in some
areas quite irregular. With The Irvine Company's willingness to
make those improvements, they could smooth out their
development line and make use of the new line. Provisions have
been made for both - the restoration of the erosion and the overall
stabilization of the bluff on both sides. In the case of the
restoration of the erosion areas, the cost would be the responsibility
of The Irvine Company, and the overall bluff stabilization is
currently the responsibility of the City.
Mr. Dean Reinemann, appeared before the Planning Commission.
He stated that he is on the Costa Mesa Transportation Committee;
although he is a Newport Beach resident. He expressed his
concerns regarding the standard policy that the City uses to Submit
comments regarding the EIR. Chairman Di Sano explained that the
comments on the EIR continue until July 18, 1992. Mr.
Reinemann stated that the removal of open space around the Back
Bay is the primary concern of the individuals attending the public
hearing.
Mr. Don Harvey, 2039 Port Weybridge, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Harvey addressed Mr. Beek's foregoing
comments and the inappropriateness of the Development
Agreement, and he concurred that each project should be
considered on an individual basis. He said that the Development
Agreement would allow traffic to increase, and the result is that
there would be more pressure from the public for open space. He
requested not to take away for future representatives, the power to
respond to future conditions. Mr. Harvey stated that the reason
why the widening of Dover Drive does not show on the traffic
count is because, subsequent to an extensive conversation with Cal -
Trans, that the street width does not enter into projections. The
Development Agreement is based implicitly on projections of what
is going to happen in the future. Mr. Webb commented that it was
his impression that the aforementioned statement indicates that the
traffic models do not take into consideration the number of lanes
and roadways wherein Mr. Webb replied that the statement is
incorrect. Mr. Webb explained that the traffic model does indicate
the number of lanes and it is a constrained model. Mr. Harvey
-37-
0003J
• � COMMISSIONERS June 18, 1992 MINUTES
� o
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
responded that in the Cal -Trans' models and projections, the lane
structure was not considered because it was not clear what that
would be. Mr. Harvey and Commissioner Gross discussed the
feasibility of a change in future zoning, density, and development.
Mr. Gordon Glass, 2024 Avenida Chico, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Glass addressed Newporter Nord, the
EK the Planned Community text, and public view corridors. He
commented that Newport Conservancy will hopefully be able to
raise enough money to purchase the Newporter North property. If
the Conservancy does not succeed, then he recommended a view
corridor which would not drastically impact The Irvine Company's
ability to develop the property. If there would be a view plane and
view corridor established downward to the water level to about
where East Coast Highway is, there would be a perpetual view that
thousands of people a day can enjoy. He proposed a view corridor
approximately 1200 feet south from the intersection of Santa
Barbara and Jamboree Road; establish a site plane as viewed from
Jamboree Road at 4 feet above street level or the eye height of a
driver passing downward toward the water level; and no trees or
trees that could be controlled. He proposed that as a part of the
Site Plan Review in the PC text that the aforementioned be given
serious consideration. Ms. Temple explained that within the
provisions of the Development Agreement, action could not be
taken to reduce the number of units.
Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 - 16th Street, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Dr. VanderSloot commended The Irvine
Company for the sensitivity in addressing the smaller wetlands that
are located on the subject properties, and their appreciation for the
value of wetlands as open space. He expressed a concern that after
the wetlands are dedicated to the City, is the City committed to
preserving the areas as wetlands, are there any safeguards or
restrictions, or anything that would make sure that the wetland
areas that are dedicated actually remain wetlands for perpetuity.
He stated that the wetlands located at Jamboree Road and
MacArthur Boulevard may be impacted by the San Joaquin Hills
Corridor, the Newporter North site may be impacted by the access
road to the Corridor, and the Dover Drive wetland would be
impacted by the widening of Dover Drive. He recommended that
the Commission delay their decision until after the public comment
riod is over because the Commission cannot be fully educated
-38-
000,10
i
COMMISSIONERS
IM�;mi sk"
• June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
until after reviewing the comments or the biological affects of
Newporter North until the Commission has,read what the Fish and
Game Department and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service have to
report. He said that the Bolsa Chica Mesa EIR has suggested that
cats not be allowed within the houses because cats will disturb the
wildlife within the wetlands. He recommended that The Irvine
Company the Newport Conservancy additional time to come
give
up with the necessary funding, possibly up to five years. Dr.
VanderSloot stated that the Upper Castaways development would
i
impact 16th Street even though it is not stated in the EIR, and
there has been no noise study on East 16th Street. He pointed out
that developing an active park on Upper Castaways would not be
compatible with adjacent residences. He concluded that residential
developments do not generate enough property taxes over the long
run to pay for the services -that are needed.
Mr. Jim Kociuva, 5105 - 16th Street, appeared before the Planning
Commission. He stated that Upper Castaways would generate
more traffic for the eastside neighborhoods, and he opposed the
proposed circulation plan. He addressed the traffic congestion at
the intersection of 17th Street and Irvine Avenue, and he suggested
an additional left turn lane for the east/west traffic.
Mr. Tom Redwitz reappeared before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Redwitz addressed the testimony during the public hearing
regarding Newport Conservancy, and he responded that The Irvine
Company would sell one or more of the subject properties so long
as the property was sold at fair market value and within a
reasonable time period of 12 to 18 months. He stated that The
Irvine Company has an'open door' policy regarding the issue, and
the Company has cooperated with the Conservancy to discuss the
acquisition of the sites. In response to concerns posed during the
public hearing regarding Newporter North, Mr. Redwitz explained
that SPON requested the preservation of a view corridor from
Jamboree Road; therefore, the shape of the Newporter North
development pulls back from Jamboree Road going southbound to
open up a view corridor to the lower bay. In response to public
testimony regarding the proposed Development Agreement as
opposed to 'piecemeal' projects, Mr. Redwitz explained that The
Irvine Company considers comprehensive planning to be the most
beneficial way to consider properties, and the method is consistent
-39-
00041
0
COMMISSIONERS
V`��'�'Ca:�i��\\
• June 18, 1992
MINUTES
7CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
with the way The Irvine Company has previously developed
properties.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public
hearing was closed at this time.
Mr. Redwitz reappeared before the Planning Commission in
response to questions posed by Commissioner Glover regarding the
bluff restoration. Mr. Redwitz explained that the setback of the
development area would be 40 feet, and The Irvine Company is not
proposing to develop into the 40 foot setback. The proposal was
originally that The Irvine Company would be allowed to grade into
the area, but not build into the area. Ms. Flory explained that the
concern is not whether the bluffs are restored, the concern is the
extra weight on the manufactured slope, or the additional weight
of the pad as it builds up in the extra 20 feet. Mr. Hewicker
explained that during the processing of grading, raising the
•
elevation, and creating the pad, The Irvine Company would be
developing within the 40 foot setback and that would include the
additional height of the land and the weight of the earth. Mr.
Hewicker stated that development can be considered dirt or
structures. Ms. Temple explained that the restoration of the bluff
face does not affect the liability issues identified in relationship to
the creation of the manufactured slope. Mr. Watson reappeared
before the Planning Commission in response to the foregoing
comments wherein he explained that by The Irvine Company
coming 20 feet into the 40 feet, and if something that The Irvine
Company wants to do would cause an unstable condition on the
bluff, The Irvine Company would be responsible to correct what
they have caused. Mr. Watson further explained that to do any
development, grading, etc. and if the City would indicate that what
is being done would cause instability to the bluff, then The Irvine
Company would correct what they are doing or they would pay for
it. Ms. Flory stated that the City Attorney's Office would be
looking at an assumption of liability if there would be 20 feet into
the 40 feet. Commissioner Edwards suggested the foregoing as a
condition that could be added to the project. Mr. Watson concurred
with comments made by Commissioner Merrill that The Irvine
Company would like to intrude on the setback with it slope
easement. Mr. Watson explained that The Irvine Company has
only indicated that there is a possibility that they would want to
grade into the area. Commissioner Merrill stated that by elevating
-40-
00042
COMMISSIONERS
��o!% ��
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
the lots it is feasible that The Irvine Company may be able to
mitigate the intrusion from the open space corridor into the
backyard which could present a problem, so if the property could
be elevated, and construct a wall at the top of the four foot fill, a
10 foot high barrier could be constructed and it would depress the
traffic. Chairman Di Sano asked Mr. Redwitz if The Irvine
Company would support a 20 foot setback and if they would
indemnify or hold harmless the City. Mr. Redwitz concurred.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy
regarding Mr. Beek's comments with respect to .a 32 foot height
limit, Ms. Temple explained that the 32 foot height limit is
common in Planned Community texts, and the standard Residential
Districts are either 24 feet or 28 feet.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding
the safety -factor of a 10 foot encroachment as opposed to 20 feet
into the 40 foot bluff top, Ms. Flory explained that there would be
the same safety concerns based on the additional weight over the
portion of the bluff that supports the weight.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that he would not support a very
rigid straight wall going at the 40 foot setback which would be
unattractive, and would not be to the benefit of the City. However,
he agreed with previous comments that a 20 foot area is
inadequate for access, that a 10,foot encroachment and 2:1 slope
would be somewhat of a compromise, and 20 feet adjacent to the
bluff is not enough of a level area.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards, Ms.
Flory replied that the City Attorney's Office has not discussed
cross -indemnification with The Irvine Company. Ms. Flory" further
replied that the suggestion could be voted on by the Commission
and the City Attorney's Office could address the issue with The
Irvine Company.
Commissioner Gross stated that any agreements made with The
Irvine Company regarding the encroachment into the setback area
and issues of liability could be over -ridden by a future geo-technical
study. Mr. Webb. concurred that a geo-technical study would be
the ultimate guide and if it would be geo-technically incorrect The
Irvine Company would not develop on the property.
-41-
00043
COMMISSIONERS
jo June 18, 1992 MINUTES
f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
Commissioner Merrill addressed the encroachment issue from a
planning concept whereby he determined that further permits, i.e.
an Encroachment Permit or Grading Permit, would require geo-
technical studies. Ms. Flory concurred that the Commission should
make recommendations for planning, and the liability and
agreement would be handled between the City Attorney's Office
and The Irvine Company and it would go to the City Council in
that form.
Chairman Di Sano asked if The Irvine Company would make best
efforts at the point of Site Plan Review to accommodate the
concerns of parking, sign direction, sidewalk, etc. that would be
specifically for the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church? Mr.
Redwitz agreed with the foregoing statement. Ms. Temple stated
that an additional point of decision would be included in the Site
Plan Review for the Upper Castaways Planned Community text.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Ms.
Temple stated that the purpose of requesting that the Commission
make a determination regarding an active park on Castaways is
that there had been some concerns regarding an active park and
the reference is specifically for the 4 to 5 acre facility which is on
the corner of 16th Street and Dover Drive. The definition in the
Planned Community text is that there would be an active recreation
facility on the site; however, there are limitations such as there
would be no night lights.
Commissioner Merrill stated that an active park would be the
determination of Parks, Beaches and Recreation, or he would be
interested in an inventory of the existing parks. Ms. Temple stated
that The Irvine Company reviewed the Site Development Plans
with the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and an active
ark is the result of their input in addition to the input of the Cliff
Haven Community. Chairman Di Sano stated that he would be
supportive of an active park as the result of an Outreach Meeting.
Commissioner Debay stated that many of the Newport Harbor
theran Church's concerns would be eliminated if the active park
as removed from the request. Ms. Temple suggested that a
control mechanism could be placed on the use of the active park
inasmuch as the PB&R Commission has the ability to impose use
restrictions based on time of day and day of week.
-42-
00044
. • COMMISSIONERS June 18, 1992MINUTES
o�'�, �',p d • �cq
CITY OF 'NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
Commissioner Glover requested a directive where there would be
a concerted effort to work with the Newport Harbor Lutheran
Church and staff,' including PB&R and The Irvine Company, to
come up with an agreement so the Site Plan Review would indicate
that all of the interested parties would feel comfortable. Ms.
Temple concurred that a requirement in the Site Plan Review
would include a resolution which clearly involves the agreement of
all parties.
Commissioner Pomeroy referred to the supplemental data from the
EIR, Earth Resources, wherein it is stated that the City's minimum
setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geo-technical
viewpoint concerting bluff slope instability. Appropriate safe bluff top
setback recommendations should be determined by the project geo-
technical consultant at the tentative tract map review phase to the
satisfaction of the City. He stated that the language would go far in
solving problems. Ms. Temple stated that the foregoing is in the
required mitigation measures.
Mr. Redwitz reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein
he stated that The Irvine Company would make every effort to
cooperate with the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church to come up
with a viable solution regarding the Church's concerns; however,
The Irvine Company would not accept a condition that required
prior to the Site Plan Review submittal that there would be an
agreement.
The Commission took the following straw vote actions on the
proposed project: Green is Yes - Red is No
Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
L Should The Irvine Company be allowed to use the restored top
of slope as the point of beginning for the measurement of
property and building setback lines if the erosional swales on
Castaways and Newporter North are restored by TIC?
******
Green
Red
-43-
00045
COMMISSIONERS
V1R11,Q&t
June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
2 Is the additional dedication of the remainder of Newport
KUage in combination with exchange of the southerly portion
of San Diego Creek North for ultimate dedication to the TCA
acceptable?
******
Green
Red
Castaways
3. Shall there be an active park on Castaways?
*
*
*
*
Green
*
*
Red
Castaways/Newporter North:
4. Shall TIC be allowed to encroach 20 feet into the 40 foot bluff
top property line setback area with a manufactured slope?
In response to a question posed by Chairman Di Sang the
Commission modified No. 4 to encroach 10 feet instead of 20 feet.
*
*
Green
Red
a. If yes, shall the maximum slope be 2.1 or AW
*
*
Green: 2:1
Red: 4:1
b. That any encroachment would include appropriate
arrangement between the City and The Irvine Company
relative to full indemnification of encroachment
Mr. Webb suggested that the foregoing be modified to include a
requirement to maintain the slope. Discussion ensued regarding
the responsible party(ies). Commissioner Merrill stated that
Community Association's should not be asked to maintain property
-44-
00041
0
COMMISSIONERS
O �GO"G_I\\
• June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
on 'the other side, of the wall'. Commissioner Edwards suggested
that The Irvine Company maintain or compensate the City for the
maintenance of the encroachment.
*
*
Green
*
Red
Bayview Landing.•
5. What shall be the permitted land use on the lower portion of
Bayview Landing?
a. Restaurant/Athletic Club
b. Senior Citizen housing with transfer of retail to Fashion
Island
c. Active Park with transfer of retail to Fashion Island
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Gross, Ms.
Temple explained that the problem with not taking action on the
foregoing item would be that Item 5 (b) requires a General Plan
Amendment Initiation. It is specifically structured not to be
restaurant or athletic club or senior citizen housing because with
respect to senior housing, The Irvine Company is desirous of
transferring a certain amount of retail into Fashion Island in
conjunction with the approval. Ms. Temple further explained that
The Irvine Company requested a restaurant/athletic club; however,
they would accept senior citizen housing with transfer to Fashion
Island. Mr. Redwitz reappeared before the Planning Commission
wherein he indicated that affordable senior citizen housing would
be a good project and they would be supportive of that type of
development. In response to a question posed by Chairman Di
Sano, Mr. Watson reappeared before the Planning Commission and
he replied that The Irvine Company would prefer senior citizen
housing; however, if it would be infeasible to develop senior citizen
housing he asked if the restaurant/athletic club would be
acceptable? Ms. Temple explained that the General Plan
Amendment could be structured so as to have a fall back land use.
Mr. Redwitz stated that the Planned Community text was drafted
with the restaurant/athletic club use, and an alternative would be
to allow a senior citizen housing project on the site and in the
event, transfer the entitlement to Newport Center. It is not
-45-
0,0047
C-I
COMMMI�ISSSII''ONERSVa" 1 � \t
0 June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
necessarily eliminating the use on the Bayview Landing site for the
restaurant/atbletic club use but providing an option to develop a
senior citizen housing project on the site. Chairman Di Sano
suggested that Item S (c) be modified to state Senior Citizen
Housing with transfer of retail to Fashion Island or the
restaurant/athletic club. Ms. Temple concurred with the foregoing
suggestion.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Ms.
Temple explained that on the subject site the proposal would be for
affordable senior housing addressing low and very low income
housing. Mr. Redwitz concurred. He stated that the zoning that
would be approved on the property would allow one of the uses.
In the event the affordable senior housing project is built, that it
would be the ability through a General Plan Amendment to
transfer the entitlement off of the site to Newport Center. Ms.
Temple stated that it would be at the discretion of The Irvine
Company to determine what would be the best development given
the scope of permitted land uses. The Planned Community text
only allows the restaurant and athletic club. The Commission's
action would change the PC text as it goes forward to the City
Council to show the third available land use as affordable senior
citizen housing.
Green- Restaurant/Athletic Club
White- Senior Citizen housing with transfer of retail to
Fashion Island
*
*
*
*
*
*
Red- Affordable Senior Citizen housing with transfer of
retail to Fashion Island or restaurant/athletic club.
Block 800 - Newport Center.-
6 Shall the potential senior citizen housing be subject to the
review and approval of a Use Permit?
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Ms.
Temple explained that senior citizen housing is the type of use
here the operational characteristics are of interest in terms of
controlling life care facilities. Mr. Redwitz stated that The Irvine
Company would not have an objection with a use permit.
46-
00048
COMMISSIONERS
�0
June 18, 1992
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
*
*
*
Green - Use Permit
*
Red- No Use Permit
Motion
*
Motion was made to approve Development Agreement No. 6,
Traffic Study No. 82, Amendment No. 763 (Resolution No. 1300),
Amendment No. 764 (Resolution No. 1301), Amendment No. 765
(Resolution No.1302), Amendment No. 766 (Resolution No.1303),
Amendment No. 767 (Resolution No. 1304), Amendment No. 768
(Resolution No.1305), Amendment No. 769 (Resolution No.1306),
and Amendment No. 770 (Resolution No. 1307) according to the
findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", as modified by the revisions
suggested by staff.
Commissioner Gross stated that there would only be one reason
why he would be against voting for the project and that would be
Dr. VanderSloot's comment regarding the Environmental Impact
Report. However, knowing that the EIR is not certified by the
Commission but by the City Council at a later date prior to the
closing of the draft comments, he would vote in favor of the
project.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that the Commission has met on a
consistent basis over a two year period with The Irvine Company
and the Commission has offered their own suggestions as
Commissioners as ways of enhancing the benefits to the City,
particularly in the view park area and open space area.
Commissioner Edwards concurred with Commissioner Gross'
comment regarding the EIR. He stated that the only reason he
would vote against the project would be that the City is essentially
giving up a certain amount of discretion. The benefits that would
be derived from the arrangement outweighs the difficult decision.
Commissioner Glover stated that a very good intensive Site Plan
Review has been outlined by the staff, and almost all of the
projects will come to the Commission through the public hearing
process.
Commissioner Merrill compared open space with setbacks. He
stated that setbacks are generally located on private property and
maintained by the property owner. The Irvine Company is giving
-47-
00049
COMMISSIONERS June 18, 1992 MINUTES
1�;edo�k\\
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
1NOEX
open space which will help the City. He indicated that it would be
difficult for the Newport Conservancy to raise the funds to
purchase the open space properties; therefore, he suggested that
the Conservancy raise money to improve some of the open spaces
and the ongoing maintenance could be born by the Conservancy
money.
Commissioner Debay stated that based on the benefits to the City,
the number of required mitigation measures, the review on several
different tracts, and it is a phase development, that she would
support the project.
Chairman Di Sano stated that he would support the project. He
addressed meetings between The Irvine Company, the
Commissioners, members of Community Associations, and
Outreach meetings. He stated that the proposed Development
Agreement as written by the City Attorney's Office is a document
that the City can live with and it is not a'give away'.
All Bye&
Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED.
1. That a Program Environmental Impact Report has been
prepared for the project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines and City Policy,
2. That all potential significant environmental effects which
could result from the project have been identified and
analyzed in the EIR.
3. That based upon the information contained in the
Environmental Impact Report, mitigation measures have
been identified and incorporated into the project to reduce
potentially significant environmental effects to a level of
insignificance, except in the areas of Aesthetics/Light and
Glare, Biology, and Public Services and Utilities, and that
the remaining environmental effects are significant only on
a cumulative basis. Further, that the economic and social
-48-
00050
C>
COMMISSIONERS
• June 18, 1992
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
benefits to the community override the remaining significant
INDEX
-
environmental effect anticipated as a result of the project.
4. That the information contained in the Environmental
Impact Report has been considered in the various decisions
made relative to this project.
Mitigation Measures:
AestheticsJI & and Glare
1. In conjunction with site plan review, the project proponent
shall prepare a detailed temporary grading and landscape
plan for the bluff top setback area for the purpose of
minimizing bluff erosion. If graded slopes from a
development area extend into the bluff top setback area, as
proposed by the PC Text, the project proponent shall
prepare detailed final grading and landscape plans for the
bluff top setback area. The plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department, Planning Department, Public Works
Department, and Building Department.
gsmsportationlCirculation
2. The City shall prepare a circulation improvement
monitoring program to direct expenditures of funds received
under the Development Agreement to make improvements
and to monitor the status of those improvements. The list
of improvements to be implemented shall initially be based
on those identified on Table V, with prioritization
established based on technical need and ability to
implement them in a timely manner. Flexibility to add or
delete projects on the list should be maintained to respond
to actual changes in traffic volumes and the ability of the
City to accomplish improvements so long as the projected
Net Benefit to the circulation system is maintained.
Thereafter, a review of the improvements' priority and
implementation status shall be done in conjunction with the
City's annual•Congestion Management Program and Growth
Management Program analysis and the annual review of the
Development Agreement.
-49-
0005:
COMMISSIONERS
o
• . 0
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL. CALL
INDEX
3. The applicant or successor in interest shall construct or post
bond for all frontage improvements identified in the
Development Agreement and listed in Table B of the
Program EIR.
Air
Quality
4. All grading related to the project shall be conducted in
accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. This mitigation
measure shall be made a condition of all grading permits
related to the project.
5. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation
operations while construction activities are being conducted,
fugitive dust emission shall be controlled using the following
procedures:
• Graded sections of the project that will not be
further disturbed or worked on for long periods of
time (three months or more) shall be seeded and
watered or covered with plastic sheeting to retard
wind erosion.
• Graded sections of the project which are undergoing
further disturbance or construction activities shall be
sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of
dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all
grading permits related to the project.
6. During grading and construction activities, the applicant
shall further control fugitive dust emissions using the
following measures:
• On -site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be
limited to 15 miles per hour. Entrances to all on -site
roads shall be posted with a sign indicating the
maximum speed limits on all unpaved roads.
• All areas with vehicle traffic shall be periodically
watered.
-50-
00052
COMMISSIONERS
A o
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
• Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept as
needed to remove silt which may have accumulated
from construction activities so as to prevent
accumulations of excessive amounts of dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all
grading permits related to the project.
7. Office and commercial development on the Corporate Plaza
West and Bay View Landing site shall also -participate in the
Centerride program currently in operation in the Newport
Center area. Evidence of intent to participate shall be
provided to the City of Newport Beach Building
Department prior to issuance of occupancy permit.
8. Bicycle racks shall be required in accordance with the City
of Newport Beach Transportation Demand Ordinance.
9. Construction of related frontage improvements shall include
bus turnouts and shelters if determined to be necessary and
desirable by the Orange County Transit District and/or the
City of Newport Beach. Prior to -final design and
construction of any frontage improvements, the City of
Newport Beach shall contact the Orange County Transit
District to determine if any bus turnouts or shelters will be
required.
10. All development shall include street and security lighting (in
parking lots and pedestrian walkway areas) which is energy
conserving. A lighting plan shall be submitted for all
development which demonstrates compliance with this
measure. The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning
Department and approved by the Department of Public
Works.
11. Residential, commercial and office development shall be
landscaped with an emphasis on drought resistant plant
species which will shade buildings and reduce water and
energy consumption during the summer. A landscape plan
shall be submitted for all development which demonstrates
compliance with this measure. The plan shall be reviewed
by the Planning Department and approved by the
-51-
00053
COMMISSIONERS
I � k\N\\
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
NKX
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of an
occupancy permit.
Bala
12. The applicant shall ensure that all residential lots and
dwellings are sound attenuated against present and
projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise
impacting the project, so as not to exceed an exterior
standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor living areas and an
interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms.
Evidence shall be prepared under the supervision of a City
certified acoustical consultant which demonstrates that these
standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with
applicable zoning regulations and submitted as follows:
A. Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map
or prior to the issuance of Grading Permits, at the
sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis
Report shall be submitted to the City's Advance
Planning Manager for approval. The report shall
describe in detail the exterior noise environment and
preliminary mitigation measures. Acoustical design
features to achieve interior noise standards may be
included in the report in which case it may also
satisfy "B" below.
B, Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an
acoustical analysis report describing the acoustical
design features of the structures required to satisfy
the exterior and interior noise standards shall be
submitted to the Advance Planning Manager for
approval along with satisfactory evidence which
indicates that the sound attenuation measures
specified in the approved acoustical report(s) have
been incorporated into the design of the project.
C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all
freestanding acoustical barriers must be shown on
the projects plot plan illustrating height, location and
-52-
0005,1
COMMISSIONERS
,o ,p
�O
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
construction in a manner meeting the approval of the
Cit?s Advance Planning Manager.
D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and
Occupancy, field testing in accordance with Title 25
regulations may be required by the Planning Director
to verify compliance with STC and IIC design
standards.
13. All non-residential structures shall be sound attenuated
against the combined impact of all present and projected
noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior noise
criteria as specified in the Noise Element.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence shall
be ,prepared under the supervision of a City certified
acoustical consultant that these standards will be satisfied
and shall be submitted to the Manager, Advance Planning
in the form of an Acoustical Analysis Report describing in
detail the exterior noise environment and the acoustical
design features required to achieve the interior noise
standard and which indicate that the -sound attenuation
measures specified have been incorporated into the design
of the project.
14. All freestanding acoustical barriers shall be a berm, wall or
combination berm and wall. Walls shall not contain holes
or gaps. Walls shall be constructed of slumpstone or other
masonry material. Final acoustical barrier heights and
locations shall be determined when final grading plans are
developed showing lot locations, house/building setbacks
and precise pad elevation.
Biological Resources
15. Pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the State of California
Fish and Game Code, the California Department of Fish
and Game shall be notified of any alterations to streambed
habitats. The applicant or any successors in interest shall be
responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and Game
regarding any grading related to residential development
and associated improvements on the San Diego Creek
-53-
00055
COMiMISSIONER$ � � June 18, 1992 MINUTE$
A .
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INKX
South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway
Reservation sites which would alter streambed habitats.
The applicant or any successor in interest shall notify the
Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary
permit prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Copies of
proper notification and necessary permits shall be provided
to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading
permit. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for
notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any
grading related to any public improvements (e.g. trails,
recreational facilities, roads, drainage facilities, etc.) in areas
designated for open space, public facilities, and/or parks
which would alter streambed habitats. The City of Newport
Beach shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and
obtain any necessary permits prior to commencement of any
grading which could alter the streambed habitat. The
permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 may require additional
mitigation measures deemed necessary by the Department.
16. Wetland delineation studies in accordance and conjunction
with the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers permitting processes shall be
performed for any wetland which will be impacted by
grading and construction activities. The applicant or any
successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting the
wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by
residential development or associated improvements on the
Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites. If residential
development or associated improvements on the San Diego
Creek South or Freeway Reservation sites encroach into the
Bonita Creek wetland, the applicant or any successor in
interest shall be responsible for conducting the wetland
delineation study. The City of Newport Beach shall be
responsible for conducting the wetiand delineation studies
for wetlands impacted by any public improvements/facilities
in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or
parks which will encroach into wetlands. The studies shall
occur at the time specific site plans and grading plans are
available and prior to issuance of any grading permits or
commencement of grading activities in areas containing
wetland habitat.
-54-
0005u
COMMISSIONERS
11
�90% . .�
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
17. Public use and related facility development for areas
proposed for natural open space and passive park uses
within the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Newporter
Knoll, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation, and
Jamboree/MacArthur sites shall be designed to be sensitive
to existing biological resources. To this end, facility plans
and public uses for these areas shall be prepared in
consultation with a qualified biologist who shall determine
that such plans and uses do not adversely impact sensitive
resources identified on these sites (e.g. wetlands, coastal
sage scrub, etc.). If necessary, additional environmental
documentation shall be prepared at the time facility plans
are prepared to determine if significant adverse impacts
beyond those anticipated in this Program EIR will occur. If
new significant adverse impacts are identified, additional
mitigation measures shall be adopted.
18. Grading, earthmoving, and any related construction activities
related to residential development and associated
improvements on the Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek
South, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites shall
be restricted as follows: Upper Castaways and Newporter
North - No grading (except that necessary for trail
establishment and improvements, erosion control or bluff
stabilization), stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment
shall take place within the bluff top setback area established
by the Bluff Top setback Ordinance. 'San Diego Creek
South - No grading, stockpiling of soils, or operation of
equipment shall encroach into the area of Bonita Creek
beyond the existing 15 foot elevation contour. Newporter
North - No grading, stockpiling of soils or operation of
equipment shall take place below the existing 60 foot
elevation contour surrounding the John Wayne Gulch
freshwater marsh. Bay View Landing - no grading,
stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall encroach
into the hillside above the 25-foot contour of the lower
development area.
19. Prior to grading and/or constructing any public facility on
the San Diego Creek North site which will encroach into the
on -site freshwater marsh, the City of Newport Beach (or
other public agency responsible for development of the
-55-
00057
COMMISSIONERS
V0%01%"
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CA
1111
H
INDEX
public facility) shall approve and begin implementation of
a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan
shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or
Federal agency having jurisdiction over the affected
wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new
freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an
existing freshwater marsh in or near the San Diego Creek
and Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve.
20. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential
development or associated improvement on the Upper
Castaways site which will encroach into the on -site
freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall
prepare and begin implementation of a plan which shall
offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all
mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency
having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall
be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -
site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater
marsh in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological
Reserve. A copy of the plan and all related permits shall be
presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of
a grading permit.
21. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential
development or associated improvement on the Newporter
North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater
marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare
and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the
loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation
requirements of any State or Federal agency having
jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be
achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site
or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in
or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A
copy of the plan and all related permits shall be presented
to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading
permit.
22. Development on the San Diego Creek South site shall be
designed so as to reduce the amount of light and glare
which could potentially spill over into the wetland habitats
-56-
00058
COMMISSIONERS
A1\ O
ROLL CALL
I
June .18, 1992
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
i 4
MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS
0
• June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
preparation of landscape plans to ensure that this measure
is complied with. Landscape plans shall be approved by the
City Planning Department prior to issuance of building
permits for private development or commencement of
grading for public facilities and public recreational uses,
25. All non -emergency grading related to bluff
stabilization/remediation on the Newporter North and Bay
View Landing sites shall occur during the non -breeding
season for the California gnatcatcher, The non -breeding
season is from August 1 to January 31.
Resources
Earth
Faulting and Seismicity
26. Buildings four stories in height or higher shall be designed
in accordance with requirements for seismic zone 4 as
outlined in Chapter 23 of the Uniform Building Code
and/or with the benefit of a site specific seismic ground
response spectrum study which would be prepared by the
project geotechnical consultant and structural engineer to
matching of building period With site period. The
allow m g p
g
structural plans and/or ground response study shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the Building Department
prior to issuance of a building permit.
27. Buildings less than four stories in height shall be designed
by a Structural Engineer in accordance with UBC Chapter
Non -critical structures
23 requirements for Seismic Zone 4. N o
shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking that
may accompany a maximum probable earthquake along the
Newport -Inglewood Fault. Critical structures (i.e., hospitals,
fire/police facilities, schools, etc.) shall be designed to
withstand strong g 8 round shaking associated with a maximum
credible earthquake on the Newport -Inglewood Fault.
Structural plans, including seismic design calcula-
tions/parameters, shall be approved by the City Building
Department prior to issuance of building permits.
28. Habitable buildings shall not be placed adjacent to (above
or below) slopes or bluffs where seismic induced slope or
-58-
00060
0
COMMISSIONERS
VOW, \\
• June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
bluff failure could occur. Though the City has established
a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -of -bluff
(Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General
Plan, January 21, 1991, and Newport Municipal Code
section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not
necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint
concerning bluff/slope instability during an earthquake.
Areas potentially prone to such failures shall be identified
and further evaluated by the project Geotechnical
Consultant during the Tentative Tract Map review and
Grading Plan review stage. The evaluation shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department
prior to the issuance of grading permits. Grading and
building plans shall reflect the recommendations of the
evaluation to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
29. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone
Act„a Registered Geologist shall further evaluate and make
recommendations regarding the potential for ground surface
rupture effecting proposed development on -sites where
"Potentially Active Faults" have been identified (Bay View
Landing and Freeway Reservation sites) or on any other of
the sites where Potentially Active Faults are identified in the
future. The study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of
the City Building Department and shall be prepared prior
to approval of a tentative tract map or grading permit
whichever comes first. Grading and building plans shall
reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction
of the Building Department.
Liquefaction
30. Sites where the potential for liquefaction has been
identified, or any other site where the potential for
liquefaction may be encountered during subsequent
investigations, shall be further evaluated by a geotechnical
consultant. The evaluation shall include subsurface
investigation with standard penetration testing or other
appropriate means of analysis for liquefaction potential.
The project geotechnical consultant shall provide a
statement concerning the potential for liquefaction and its
possible impact on proposed development. If necessary, the
-59-
00061
COMMISSIONERS
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
geotechnical consultant shall provide mitigation measures
which could include mechanical densification of liquefiable
layers, dewatering, fill surcharging or other appropriate
measures. The Geotechnical Consultant's report shall be
signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a
Registered Civil Engineer and shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the Building Department prior to issuance of
Grading Permit. Grading and building plans shall reflect
the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the
Building Department.
Erosion
31. Any necessary diversion devices, catchment devices, or
velocity reducers shall be incorporated into the grading plan
and approved by the City Grading Engineer prior to
issuance of grading permits. Berms or other catchment
devices shall be incorporated into the grading plans to divert
sheet Dow runoff away from areas which have been stripped
of natural vegetation. Velocity reducers shall be
incorporated into the design, especially where drainage
devices exit to natural ground.
32. All fill slopes shall be properly compacted during grading in
conformance with the City Grading Code and verified by the
project Geotechnical Consultant. Slopes shall be planted
with vegetation upon completion of grading. Conformance
with this measure shall be verified by the City Grading
Engineer prior to the issuance of occupancy permits,
33. Berms and brow ditches shall be constructed to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Grading Engineer.
Water shall not be allowed to drain over any manufactured
slope face. Top -of -slope soil berms shall be incorporated
into grading plans to prevent surface runoff from draining
over future fill slopes. Brow ditches shall be incorporated
into grading plans to divert surficial runoff from ungraded
natural areas around future cut slopes. The design of berms
and brow ditches shall be approved by the City Grading
Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
-60-
00062
COMMISSIONERS
VOW,Q \
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
!r
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
34. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, appropriate
artificial substances shall be recommended by the project
landscape architect and approved by the City Grading
Engineer for use in reducing surface erosion until
permanent landscaping is well established. Upon
completion of grading, stripped areas shall be covered with
artificial substances approved by the City Grading Engineer.
35. Drainage of both surface and subsurface water over or
toward the bluffs on the Upper Castaways and Newporter
North sites shall be minimized. Though some drainage of
rainwater over the bluff face cannot be avoided, drainage
controldevicesshall be designed to direct excess water from
site improvements away from the bluff face. Irrigation shall
be controlled to prevent excessive infiltration into the
subsurface. The project Civil Engineer shall design grading
plans to minimize surface runoff over the bluff faces. The
project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide
recommendations to minimize subsurface water migration
toward the bluff faces prior to approval of Tentative Tract
maps or site plans. All design criteria for the control of
surficial and subsurface water shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
Bluff and Slope Instability
36. The project geotechnical consultant shall review the
tentative tract map and grading plan for each site and
prepare a report addressing all salient geotechnical issues
related to bluff and slope stability of any existing bluff or
slopes. These reports,shall include: 1) detailed analysis of
field data including surface and subsurface geological
mapping; 2) laboratory testing results; 3) stability analysis of
existing bluffs and proposed slopes as illustrated on the
tentative tract map or rough grading plan; 4) conclusions; 5)
recommendations for mitigation of any identified unstable
bluffs or slopes and/or for additional investigation. These
reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist
and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
-61-
00063
COMMISSIONERS
,e046\10\4
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
37. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project
geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall make
written recommendations for manufactured slope
stabilization including, but not limited to, buttressing, rock
bolting, grouting, slope gradient laybacks, or retaining walls.
All necessary recommendations shall be included in the
grading plan to the satisfaction of the City Grading
Engineer.
38. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for
development on the top -of -bluff (Development Policy
D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21,
1991, and Newport Beach Municipal Code section
20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not necessarily
be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning
bluff/slope instability. Prior to issuance of grading permits,
appropriate safe bluff top setback recommendations shall be
determined by the project Geotechnical Consultant based on
the evaluation required by Mitigation Measure 3 to the
satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
39. During grading a geotechnical consultant shall monitor
grading operations to ensure that recommendations for
slope instability mitigation are implemented. Additionally,
the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate slopes as they are
graded through geologic mapping and analysis to ensure that
no unanticipated conditions are present. Slope stability
mitigation recommendations may require modification
during grading. Compliance with this measure shall be
verified by the Building Department.
40. Prior to issuance of building • permits, the geotechnical
consultant shall prepare a Rough Grading Report and As -
Graded Geotechnical Map for each graded site at the
completion of grading of that site. The Report shall
summarize and document compliance with all mitigation
measures. The Rough Grading Report shall include a
statement regarding the adequacy of the manufactured
slopes for their intended use and a statement regarding the
adequacy of the recommended bluff setbacks. The report
-62-
00064
COMMISSIONERS
VOWQ&
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a
Registered Civil Engineer and shall be approved by the City
Grading Engineer.
Compressible/Collapsible Soil
41. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, written
recommendations for the mitigation of
compressible/collapsible soil potential for each site shall be
provided by the geotechnical consultant. Foundation
recommendations shall be included. Recommendations
shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the site -
specific tentative tract maps and grading plans to the
satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface
mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. Mitigation, if
necessary, could include: removal and recompaction of
identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill surcharging
and settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, or
foundation design which utilizes deep piles, or other
recommended measures. The geotechnical consultant's site -
specific reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering
Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer, and shall be
approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Expansive/Corrosive Soil
42. Written recommendations for the mitigation of expansive
and corrosive soil potential for each site, shall be provided
by the project corrosion consultant, geotechnical consultant
and/or Civil engineer. Foundation recommendations shall
be included. Recommendations shall be based on surface
and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis and
shall be incorporated into final building plans prior to
issuance of building permits. The geotechnical consultant's
site -specific reports shall be signed by a Certified
Engineering Geologist and Registered City Engineer, and
shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
-63-
00065
COMMISSIONERS
1\81%_\N1
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Near Surface Groundwater
43. The project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer
shall prepare written site -specific reviews of the tentative
tract maps and grading plans addressing all salient
geotechnical issues, including groundwater. These reports
shall provide findings, conclusions and recommendations
regarding near -surface groundwater and the potential for
artificially induced groundwater as a result of future
development, and the effects groundwater may have on
existing or future bluffs, slopes and structures. The reports
shall also address the potential for ground subsidence on the
sites and properties adjacent to the sites if dewatering is
recommended. The geotechnical consultant and/or civil
engineer's reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering
Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer and shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer
prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Water Resources
Water Quality
44. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
provide to the Building and Public Works Departments haul
route plans that include a description of haul routes, access
points to the sites and watering and sweeping program
designed to minimize impacts of the haul operation. These
plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
Department. Copies of the plans shall be submitted to the
City's Planning Department.
45. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
incorporate the following erosion control methods into
grading plans and operations to the satisfaction of the City
Grading Engineer and Building Department.
a. An approved material such as straw, wood chips,
plastic or similar materials shall be used to stabilize
graded areas prior to revegetation or construction.
b. Air -borne and vehicle -borne sediment shall be
controlled during construction by: the regular
-64-
00065
COMMISSIONERS
A\0�\N-\\
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
sprinkling of exposed soils; and the moistening of
vehicles loads.
C. As approved.material such as rip rap (a ground cover
of large, loose, angular stones) shall be used to
stabilize any slopes with seepage problems to protect
the top soils in areas of concentrated runoff.
d. During the period of construction activity, existing
vegetation which will be retained on -site shall be
protected from traffic by the use of fences. If
appropriate, buffer strips or vegetative filter strips,
such as tall stands of grass, can be used as an
alternative and/or supplementary method to protect
against sediment buildup.
46. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project
geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall develop
a plan for the diversion of stormwater away from any
exposed slopes during grading and construction activities.
The plan shall include the use of temporary right-of-way
diversions (i.e., berms or swales) located at disturbed areas
or graded right-of-ways. The plan will be approved by the
City Engineer and Building Departments and implemented
during grading and construction activities.
47. The applicant shall provide a temporary gravel entrance
located at every construction site entrance. The location of
this entrance shall be incorporated into grading plans prior
to the issuance of grading permits. To reduce or eliminate
mud and sediment carried by vehicles or runoff onto public
rights -of -way, the gravel shall cover the entire width of the
entrance, and its length shall be no less than fifty feet. The
entrance plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer and Grading Engineer concurrent with review and
approval of grading plans.
48. The applicant shall construct filter berms or other approved
device for the temporary gravel entrance. The berms shall
consist of .a ridge of gravel placed across graded right-of-
ways to decrease and filter runoff levels while permitting
construction traffic to continue. The location of berms shall
-65-
00-067
COMMISSIONERS
,o
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
R01__L CALL
INDEX
be incorporated into grading plans prior to the issuance of
grading permits. The plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Grading Engineer.
49. During grading and construction, the applicant shall provide
a temporary sediment basin located at the point of greatest
runoff from any construction area. The location of this
basin shall be incorporated into grading plans. It shall
consist of an embankment of compacted soils across a
drainage. The basin shall not be located in an area where
its failure would lead to a loss of life or the loss of service
of public utilities or roads. The plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Drainage Patterns
50. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the master plans of
water, sewer and storm drain facilities shall be approved by
the City Engineer. Any systems shown to be required by
the review shall be the responsibility of the developer,
unless otherwise provided for through an agreement with
the property owner or serving Agency.
Resources
ultural
Archaeology
ALL PROJEClr SITES
51. All sites shall be mitigated pursuant to Council Policy K-5.
Where further testing or salvage is required, the applicant
shall select a City -approved qualified archaeologist to
excavate a sample of the site. All testing and salvage shall
be conducted prior to issuance of grading permits or use of
an area for recreational purposes. A written report
summarizing the findings of the testing and data recovery
program shall be submitted to the Planning Department
within 90 days of the completed data recovery program.
52. The applicant shall donate all archaeological material,
historic, or prehistoric, recovered during the project, to a
local institution which has the proper facilities for curation,
-66-
0006
COMMISSIONERS • •
V
a
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
display and 'study by qualified scholars. All. material shall be
transferred to the approved facility after laboratory analysis
and a report have been completed. The appropriate local
institution shall be approved by the Planning Department
based on a recommendation from the qualified
archaeologist.
53. Any excavation of a site located within the Coastal zone of
more than two surface meters of dirt shall require a coastal
development permit prior to commencing the excavation.
All provisions of the California Coastal Commission
guidelines shall be complied with.
UPPER CASTAWAYS
54. Prior to any grading related to development of the bluff trail
system, open space uses or bluff stabilization which could
impact CA-Ora49 and CA-Ora-186 on the Upper
Castaways site, the sites shall be subjected to test
excavations by a City approved archaeologist (experienced
in both historic and pre -historic archaeology) to determine
site integrity, extent and significance. The methodology of
the test excavation shall reflect the recommendations
contained in the Cultural Resources report prepared for this
Program EIR. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and recommendations and submitted to the
Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
BAY VIEW LANDING
55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, CA-Ora-1098 shall be
surface collected and subjected to test excavations by a City
approved archaeologist to determine site integrity, extent
and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing test excavations.
56. Prior to grading for the new park, the project sponsor shall
retain a City approved archaeologist to conduct a surface
collection and subsurface test excavation of CA-0ra-66 to
determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report
-67-
00065
COMMISSIONERS
A\t�\N-
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
shall be prepared detahing all findings and submitted to the
Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
57. Prior to grading for the view park, the project sponsor shall
retain a City approved archaeologist to place a test unit on
top of the knoll on the Bay View Landing site in the area
containing shell scatter, to determine if the shell is
representative of a subsurface archaeological deposit. A
report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted
to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing
the test excavation.
NEWPORTER NORTH
58. Prior to the use or development of the open space areas for
passive recreational uses, CA Ora 51 and CA Ora-518 on
the Newporter North site shall be surface collected and
subjected to test excavations to determine site extent and
significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing test excavations.
59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
conduct a surface collection of the eastern extension of CA
Ora-100 which would be impacted by grading and/or
development of residential uses. The surface collection
shall be conducted by a city approved archaeologist. A
report shall be prepared detailing all findings of the surface
collection and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing the surface collection.
60. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
conduct a data recovery of program CA Ora-64 on the
Newporter North site. The program shall be conducted by
a City approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared
detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning
Department within 90 days of completing the data recovery
program.
61. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential
development or any bluff stabilization, a qualified
-68-
OOOit0
COMMISSIONERS
*601\\
1.
• June ", "92 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
J,
INDEX
archaeologist shall review grading and drainage plans to
determine if there are any indirect or direct impacts to CA-
Ora-51, 52 and 518. If impacts are identified, test
excavations shall be conducted to determine site extent,
integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared
detailing all findings • and submitted to the Planning
Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
NEWPORTER KNOLL
62. Prior to any grading or use of the site, the City shall conduct
a surface collection of archaeological material present on
the top of the hill of the Newporter Knoll, with test units
placed on the hill to determine site significance and
boundaries. One unit shall be placed in the recorded area
of CA-Ora-50 to determine if a portion of the site still
exists. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of
completing surface collection test excavation.
BLOCK 800
63. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a qualified City
approved archaeologist shall conduct a surface collection of
CA Ora-136 on the Block 800 site and subject the site to
test excavations to determine site extent and significance.
A test unit shall also be placed in the northern portions of
the parcel to determine if a sub -surface midden is under the
asphalt and trash. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing test excavations.
CORPORATE PLAZA WEST
64. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a City approved
qualified archaeologist shall dig post holes in the areas
containing surface shell on the Corporate Plaza West site to
determine if the shell represents sub -surface archaeological
deposits. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings
and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days
of completing sub -surface testing.
-69-
0007
1
COMMISSIONERS 0 June 18, 1992 MINUTES
� d
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
65. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the surface near the
southern section of the property shall be examined by a City
approved qualified archaeologist after removal of brush and
prior to any ground disturbance. A report shall be prepared
detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning
Department within 90 days of completing the surface
examination,
FREEWAY RESERVATION
66. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the northern
development area (Lot 2), a City approved qualified
archaeologist shall examine the surface of areas previously
identified as CA-Ora-216. 'The examination shall be
conducted after removal of brush but prior to grading. A
report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted
to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing
the surface examination.
Paleontology
67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a collection plan
shall be prepared and implemented by a City approved,
qualified paleontological monitor for known exposed fossil
localities on Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and
Upper Castaways. Because of the small nature of some
fossils present in these rock units, matrix samples shall be
collected for processing through fine mesh screens. The
collection plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Department.
68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
make provisions for the preparation and curation of all
fossils possibly recovered from the sites during grading.
This shall be done in a manner approved by the City's
Planning Department.
69. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
identify a repository approved by the City's Planning
Department which shall receive all fossils collected from the
sites.
ao-
0007;
COMMISSIONERS
Ad
��
. June 18, 1992 ;MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH•
ROLL CALL
INOEX
70. Cliff faces along Upper Newport Bay that have served as a
reference section for micro -paleontological studies should be
protected from alteration. If bluffs along Newport Bay need
to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed
measured sections and samples shall be made before and
after alteration. Samples shall be prepared and analyzed as
part of these efforts. The City of Newport Beach shall be
responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist to
conduct the comparative study and sampling. A report shall
be submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days.
Law Enforcement
71. The project proponent shall work in conjunction with the
City of Newport Beach Police Department to ensure that
crime prevention features are included in building design
and construction. The City of Newport Beach 'Police
Department shall review all site plans and access plans.
Water
72. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the development
sites, the applicant shall be responsible for preparation of a
Master Plan of Utilities. The Master Plan of Utilities will
determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any
modifications, upgrades or extensions to the existing water
systems resulting from this project. All necessary expansions
of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water
systems needed as a result of the project will be the
responsibility of the developer, unless current district or City
policies dictate otherwise. The plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading
permits.
Wastewater
73. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer will
provide a Master Plan of Utilities facilities for the on -site
development in order to determine the exact necessary
modifications or extensions to the existing sewer systems, if
needed. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or
upgrades or extensions of existing water systems needed as
-71-
0007
COMMISSIONERS
r 9
June 18,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Rat. CALL
INDEX
a result of the project will be the responsibility of the
developer, unless current district or City policies dicta.
otherwise. The Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
B. Development AMment No. 6
Flnding5:
1. That the Development Agreement is in compliance with
California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. and
Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45.
2. That adoption of the Development Agreement would not
preclude the City from conducting future discretionary
reviews in connection with the project, nor would it prevent
the City from imposing conditions or requirements to
mitigate significant impacts identified in such reviews
provided that the measures do not render the project
infeasible.
Condition:
1. Once every 12 months from the date of execution of the
Development Agreement, the project proponent or his
successor in interest shall prepare and submit for review by
the City Council a report demonstrating compliance with the
terms of the Agreement,.as required by Section 15.45.070 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
C. TraMe Study No. 82
Findings:
1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the
impact of the proposed project on the morning and
afternoon peak hour traffic and circulation system in
accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code and City Council Policy S-1.
2. That the project is a comprehensive phased land use
development and circulation system improvement plan with
-72-
00M
COMMISSIONERS
d
.4
E
• June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF •NEWPORT BEACH
ROIL CALL
INDEX
construction of all phases not anticipated to be completed
within 60 months of project approval.
3. That the project is the subject of a development agreement
which requires the construction of major improvements early
in the development program.
4. That the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the
Newport Beach General Plan are not made inconsistent by
the impact of traffic generated by the project in that the
project proposed eliminates certain planned and anticipated
development through the dedication of certain sites for
permanent open space, and the other development sites are
to be developed consistent with or less than that allowed by
the General Plan.
5. That an unsatisfactory level of service will not be caused or
made worse at any intersection for which there is an
identified improvement.
6. That the benefits to the circulation system resulting from the
major improvements substantially outweigh the increased
traffic at impacted but unimproved intersections.
7. That there is an overall reduction in ICU at impacted
intersections, taking into account peak hour traffic volumes
at those intersections, and that the reduction is caused by
the improvements associated with the project.
I
Conditions:
1. That the Irvine Company shall make available to the City
the monies specified for circulation system improvements
consistent with the provisions of Development Agreement
No. 6.
2. That the City of Newport Beach shall utilize the monies
provided by The Irvine Company to construct in as timely
manner as possible major circulation system improvements.
These improvements shall be designed to insure that the
anticipated' overall improvement in ICU anticipated in the
traffic study is achieved.
-73-
00075
0
COMMISSIONERS
*01 �\I
June is,1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
D. Amendment No. 763
Adopt Resolution No. 1300 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No. 763.
E. Amendment No. 764
Adopt Resolution No. 1301 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No. 764.
F, Amendment No. 765
Adopt Resolution No. 1302 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No. 765.
766
IV. Amendment No.
Adopt Resolution No._1303 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No. 766.
H. Amendment NQ, 767
Adopt Resolution No. 1304 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No.767.
L Amendment No. 768
Adopt Resolution No. 1305recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No.768.
-7. Amendment No. 769
Adopt Resolution No. 1306recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No, 769.
770
K. Amendment No.
Adopt Resolution No. 1307 recommending City Council
approval of Amendment No.770.
sss
-74-
00076
COMMISSIONERS
d
•' . June 18, 1992
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Amendment No. 761 ftblic Hearing)
Item No.4
Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport
A761
Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to the design of permitted bay
window and greenhouse window encroachments into required yard
setbacks in residential districts.
INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, William
Laycock, Current Planning Manager, explained that greenhouse
on second floors in the front and rear yards,
(Res
No. 1308)
Approved
Notion
*
windows are allowed
but they are not allowed in the side yards unless approved by the
Modifications Committee.
The public hearing was opened in connection with this item. There
being no one to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed
at this time.
Motion was made and voted on to approve Amendment No. 761
All Ayes
(Resolution No. 1308) recommending to the City Council the
changes to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
MOTION CARRIED.
DISCUSSION
Disc.
Item
Motion
*
Amendment No. 762
Request to consider amendments to Title 20 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code pertaining to permitted height, number and yard
encroachments of accessory buildings in residential districts.
Motion was made and voted on to set this item for public hearing
No. 1
A762
—
PH set
All Ayes
on July 23, 1992. MOTION CARRIED.
rrr
.7j.
00'07
0
COMMISSIONERS
o
I \
,� k\N
0 June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
I
I I
I
I
INDEX
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Addl
Business
Motion was made and voted on to direct staff to prepare an
Motion
„
amendment to Title 20 of the Municipal Code for Commission
All Ayes
review so as to revise the power and duties of the Modifications
Committee regarding the heights of chimneys. MOTION
CARRIED.
12:47 am.
Ad ourn
0s•
NORMA GLOVER, SECRETARY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
-76-
0007
0 • ATTACHMENT 2a
Planning Commission Meeting June 18. 1992
Agenda Item No. 3
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TO: Planning Commission
DepartmentFROM: Planning
SUBJECT`- A. Develgpment Agmernent No. (L(EuWk-Ugadal
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the City
of Newport Beach. The proposal also includes the acceptance of an
environmental document.
WED
Request to approve a traffic study consistent with the provisions of
Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven sites
addressed in the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement.
ICE
C. Amendment No 763 fPnblic Hea*inel
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the construction
of 48 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Ford Road, adjacent to the easterly side
MacArthur Boulevard, between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills
Road, in the Harbor View Hills Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
EXI-01
Request to adopt Planned 'Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would provide
for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
00081
V
TO: Planning Commission - 2
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between the Westeliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
0
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort.
ZONE: P-C
Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the consruction
of 300 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 3200 University Drive, on the northeasterly corner
of Jamboree Road and University Drive South, in the North Ford
Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
0
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing. This
request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000 sq.ft.
restaurant or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club.
00082
0
TO: Planning Commission - 3
LOCATION: Property located, at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Drive and East Coast Highway,
across from the Villa Point Planned Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
0
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
(Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a request
to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development
Plan so as to provide for open space and public facility use of the
subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road, bounded by Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as San Diego
Creek North located at 3500 Jamboree Road, bounded by the San
Diego Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
I Amendment No. 769 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow the construction of
245 dwelling units or senior citizen housing.
LOCATION: Property located at 855 San Clemente Drive, on the southeasterly
comer of San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block 800
of Newport Center.
ZONE: P-C
TM �.� ■ .Ml
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and Unclassified
Districts to the P-C District. Also requested is the adoption of
Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for 00083
TO: Planning Commission - 4
the Corporate Plaza West Planned Community. This request would
allow for the construction of an additional 94,000 sgft. of office
development (115,000 sqft. total).
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center Drive, on the northwesterly
corner of East Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive, across from
the Corporate Plaza Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
The various applications under consideration will, if approved provide vested entitlement
for eight sites owned by The Irvine Company (TIC) throughout the City of Newport Beach.
Additionally, three sites currently owned by TIC will be zoned and dedicated for open space
and public facility use. The approvals include a development agreement, a traffic study and
eight amendments to rezone property and adopt or amend Planned Community District
Regulations. Regulations regarding the adoption of Development Agreements are contained
in Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The adoption of Traffic Studies
are governed by Chapter 15.40 of the Code and by Council Policy S-1. Regulations
regarding Amendments are in Chapter 20.84, and procedures for the adoption of or
amendments to Planned Communities are in Chapter 20.51 of the Code.
All of the proposed actions are consistent with existing General Plan land use designations,
and represent the implementation of zoning entitlements for these properties. The specific
designations for the subject sites are discussed below.
Harbor View Hills/Freeway Reservation: The Land Use Element designates this site for 76
single-family attached units. The proposed PC amendment allows for the construction of
48 dwelling units and is consistent with this designation, and also accommodates the
widening of MacArthur Boulevard as provided in the Circulation Element.
raggr Castaways: The Land Use Element designates this property for a maximum of 151
dwelling units. Although the Land Use Element Map shows this as single-family detached,
other residential development types are also permitted. The bluff areas are designated as
Recreational and Environmental Open Space. The proposed PC development plan is
consistent with these designations, as well as the future widening of Dover Drive as
anticipated in the Circulation Element.
0008.1
• 0
TO: Planning Commission - 5
Newuorter North/jporter Knoll: The Newporter North property is designated for a
maximum of 212 single-family attached units in the Land Use Element, although residential
product types are permitted. The bluff areas, as well as the Newporter Knoll, are
designated Recreational and Environmental Open Space. The proposed PC regulations are
in conformance with these designations.
North Foreman Diego Creek South: This site is designated for Multi -Family Residential
use with a maximum of 300 dwelling units, 20 percent of which shall be affordable units.
The proposed PC amendment conforms to this designation.
Bewiew Landing: This site is divided into two portions by topography. The upper portion,
near the intersection of Coast Highway and Jamboree Road, is designated for Recreational
and Environmental Open Space and is intended to be used for a view park, with a trail
staging area for pedestrians and bicyclists, restrooms, and picnicking areas. The lower
portion of the property, near Backbay Drive, is designated for Retail and Service
Commercial with an allocation of 10,000 square feet of restaurant use or 40,000 square feet
of athletic club use. The proposed PC regulations are consistent with these designations.
San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur, The San Diego Creek North site is
designated for Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial use with an allocation
of 112,000 square feet. A 2.5-acre fire station site is also designated on this parcel. The
Jamboree/MacArthur property is designated for Administrative, Professional and Financial
Commercial use with a floor area ratio limit of 0.25 (approximately 50,000 square feet).
The proposed amendment would restrict these sites to public facilities and open space, and
would eliminate all office development entitlements.
Block 800: Block 800, within Newport Center, is currently designated for 245 multi -family
units in the General Plan. The proposed planned community regulations would allow a
maximum of 245 apartments, condominiums, or senior citizen housing with ancillary skilled
nursing areas and recreation facilities. The proposed PC regulations are consistent with this
designation. As provided by the General Plan, senior citizen housing developments
exceeding the established dwelling unit limit may be approved with a finding that the project
is of particular benefit to the city and the traffic generated by the project is no greater than
the predominant use allowed in the area.
Corporate Plaza West: The Corporate Plaza West property in Newport Center has a
General Plan designation for an additional 94,000 square feet of office development on the
remaining undeveloped 9.0-acre portion of the site. The proposed PC regulations would
allow a variety of office and commercial uses consistent with the 94,000-square-foot General
Plan entitlement.
NoUrter Resort: This property is currently developed with 411 hotel rooms, and pas a
General Plan designation for an additional 68 hotel rooms. The proposed action would
provide entitlement for a maximum of 479 hotel rooms.
00085
0 0
TO: Planning Commission - 6
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines and City Council Policy K 3, a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report has
been prepared for the proposed project. The Draft EIR addresses the potential
environmental impacts and mitigation measures related to the proposed actions to the extent
possible based on the level of detail currently available, and subsequent environmental
analysis may be necessary when detailed site plans are submitted. As a result of subsequent
analyses, additional mitigation measures may be proposed and adopted. The Draft EIR also
evaluates alternatives to the proposed actions. The 45-dtly public review period for the
DEIR began on June 4 and will end on July 20.
The Draft EIR evaluates the projects potential impacts, including cumulative impacts in
connection with other past and future projects, in the areas of land use, aesthetics/light and
glare, transportation, air quality, noise, biology, earth resources, water resources, housing,
cultural resources, and public services/utilities. The Draft EIR states that no significant
impacts would result from the project in the following areas: land use, light/glare, noise,
earth resources, housing, cultural resources, and public services other than fire protection.
Although no significant direct project impacts would occur in the areas of traffic, air quality
and water quality, the project would contribute to significant cumulative impacts in these
areas. Direct unavoidable significant adverse impacts as well as cumulative impacts would
be expected in the areas of aesthetics (loss of open space and visual resources at Upper
Castaways and Newporter North) and biological resources (loss of habitat at Newporter
North and Bayview Landing). A temporary significant Impact in the area of fire protection
would result until a new fire station is constructed to serve the northern portion of the city.
In addition to the evaluation of project impacts, Chapter VI of the DEIR describes a wide
variety of alternatives to the proposed project, as required by CEQA. The purpose of this
analysis is to determine whether there are any feasible alternatives that could accomplish
the objectives of the project while reducing or eliminating significant impacts, even if those
alternatives would be more costly. Of the seven major alternatives analyzed, two were
found to be infeasible and were eliminated from further consideration by staff. Of the Eve
remaining alternatives, only the design alternative for an additional active park at Bayview
Landing was found to be environmentally superior to the proposed project due to an
increase in active park facilities. This alternative would partially conflict with the objectives
of The Irvine Company, however. None of the other feasible alternatives were found to
substantially reduce the adverse impacts of the project as proposed.
Bac o� und. On November 27, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 89-LM
establishing the Circulation Buildout City Council AdHoc Committee. This Committee was
established to work with The Irvine Company (TIC) and City staff in the development ob 0 0 8
0
TO: Planning, Commission - 7
a comprehensive approach to entitlement of certain undeveloped TIC properties consistent
with the General Plan in association with the establishment of a funding mechanism for the
construction of important components of the circulation system. Through the course of
these discussions, a program of open space and public facility dedications was identified:
The agreement is, therefore, called the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement, and consists of three major components:
1. The entitlement of eight sites owned by The Irvine Company in the City of Newport
Beach at a level equal to -or less than the General Plan Land Use Element
allocation. The sites proposed for vesting entitlement are: Upper Castaways,
Bayview Landing, Newporter Resort, Newporter North, Corporate Plaza West, Block
800 (Newport Center), San Diego Creek South and Freeway Reservation East. Two
sites would be zoned for open space uses: Newporter Knoll and
Jamboree/MacArthur. One site, San Diego Creek North will be zoned for open
space or public facility uses.
2. Advance funding of circulation system improvements through the prepayment of Fair
Share Fees, the commitment to frontage improvements, and the advance of
additional funds, with a total commitment of $20.6 million plus an additional
$500,000 for MacArthur Boulevard improvements in the City of Irvine. Funds loaned
to the City (the advance) would be interest free, and would be paid back to TIC
through a return of 509o' of Fair Share Fees collected by the City for a twenty year
term. If the advance of funds is not completely paid after twenty years, the
remainder of the debt would be forgiven.
3. The dedication to the City of land for park, open space, and public facility uses.
Three entire sites would be dedicated: Newporter Knoll, San Diego Creek North
and Jamboree/MacArthur. Substantial portions of five additional sites would also
be dedicated: Upper Castaways, Bayview Landing, Newporter North, San Diego
Creek South and Freeway Reservation East. No dedication would occur on
Corporate Plaza West, Block 800 - Newport Center or the Newporter Resort sites.
The agreement under consideration is a development agreement to be adopted pursuant to
Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The agreement sets forth the legal
framework, requirements and obligations of both parties to achieve the entitlement (for
TIC), and the land dedication and circulation funding (for the City). One item of interest
is the effective date of the agreement. In this case, the effective date is not the date of
approval, but is the first date upon which all of the following have occurred: 1. final
approval by the California Coastal Commission, 2. the CEQA challenge period has expired
or, if a lawsuit is filed, a final judgement upholding the agreement has been entered, and
3. the City has issued a grading or building permit for development of the property other
than potential senior citizen housing development on Bayview Landing, development on the
southerly parcel of Freeway Reservation East, senior housing development on Block 800 or
hotel development on the Newport Resort. The agreement does make provisions for the
City to make use of the circulation funds prior to the effective date of the agreement if
certain conditions are met.
00087
0
TO: Planning Commission - 8
The agreement can be terminated if any county, state or federal law, rule, regulation or plan
precludes compliance with one or more provisions of the agreement. The agreement may
also be terminated if either party defaults on their obligations pursuant to the agreement.
if the Company elects termination of the agreement upon default by the City, there are
provisions for repayment of circulation funds paid to the City pursuant to the agreement.
It is important to understand that this provision could be a substantial General Fund
obligation, in that the obligation is based upon the development remaining and shall be
repaid in four years.
sn�ested changss. In reviewing the agreement, there is one additional provision which the
staff would suggest. In regards to the Upper Castaways and the Newporter North parcels,
the development areas defined in the P-C Texts do not address the fact that there are some
erosional swales which would result in an uneven development area boundary due to the
provisions of the bluff top setback provisions of the Municipal Code. A provision should
be incorporated to allow the use of the new top of slope if The Irvine Company repairs the
bluff in these areas.
PrQject Alternatives. Since the development of the original project description, two
potential alterations to the project description have been proposed. These changes related
to the permitted land uses on Bayview Landing and the open space dedications on San
Diego Creek North.
Bayview Landing. The City has expressed an interest in achieving some affordable senior
citizen housing, and The Irvine Company has indicated that it would be possible to provide
this use on the Bayview landing site. If this use were authorized, it would require an
amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan since this option also includes
transfer of commercial entitlement to Fashion Island. In considering this option, the
Commission should consider the impact of greater structural intensity on the site (estimated
at 100,000 sq.ft.) and the proximity of the site to support uses such as shopping and medical
areas.
It should be noted that the EIR includes another option for the Bayview Landing site. This
would involve the transfer of the development to Fashion Island and the designation of the
lower Bayview Landing site as a neighborhood park. This is considered an environmentally
superior alternative.
The action of the Planning Commission will, therefore, include a determination of the
permitted land uses. The options are: 1. The proposed project (restaurant or athletic
club), 2. the designation of the site for senior citizen housing facilities and transfer of 30,000
sq.ft. to Fashion Island (requiring initiation of a General Plan Amendment), or 3. transfer
development to Fashion Island and designate the site for open space.
San Diego Creek North. This topic was raised as part of a concern of the City staff
regarding the disposition of the Newport Village site, since this action would be the last
entitlement action in Newport Center. Staff requested the City Council Ad Hoc Committee
to consider a requirement to dedicate the remainder of the Newport Village site as part of
this action. The Irvine Company has responded with an agreement to dedicate the Newport
TO: Planning Commission - 9
Village site if it could- maintain its ownership of the portion of San Diego Creek North
between the Creek and the Bayview Way extension. This would not alter the permitted land
uses for the site, but would allow TIC to dedicate the site to the Transportation Corridor
Agency (TCA) for mitigation and restoration as a wildlife corridor. In the view of the City
stafti this is "win -win" proposal. The City will get the additional open space on Newport
Village, removing any potential for re -entitlement in the future, and the site adjacent to San
Diego Creek will be restored as originally proposed, but with the TCA gaining ownership,
including maintenance and liability.
TRAFFIC STUDY
A comprehensive traffic study was prepared in conjunction with the environmental review
of the project, including a long range analysis of the overall program and an analysis as
required by Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code [Traffic Phasing
Ordinance (TPO)].
Long Range Traffic Analysis.
The traffic study prepared for the Environmental Impact Report includes an analysis of the
long term implications of the proposed development. Using the Newport Beach Traffic
Analysis Model developed.fok the City by Austin -Foust and Associates, the specific project
is not shown to have any impacts beyond those associated with the long term build -out of
the General Plan.
In order to address the circulation system improvement requirements associated with the
build -out of the General Plan, the City has established two circulation system funding
programs. These are the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and the Fair Share Traffic
Contribution Ordinance. This project is required to comply with both these Ordinances, and
does so through the circulation funding program adopted as part of the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Anal
This project is the fast to be processed pursuant to specific provisions of the Traffic Phasing
Ordinance for a project which is a phased land use development and circulation system
improvement plan with construction of all phases not anticipated to be complete within 60
months from the date of approval, is the subject of a development agreement resulting in
the early completion of major improvements, and includes a traffic study which demonstrates
compliance with the TPO for early phases of the development, the Land Use and
Circulation Elements remain consistent as a result of the improvements, substantial
improvements are made as a result of the project. These improvements must be of a nature
such that 1. an.unsatisfactory level of service is not caused or made worse at any intersection
for which there is a feasible improvement, 2. the benefits to traffic circulation from the
improvements substantially outweigh the increased traffic congestion at impacted but
unimproved intersections and 3. there is an overall reduction in ICU at impacted
intersections.
00089
TO, Planning Commission -10
This project is not anticlpatod to be complete within 60 tnorlt�l4r &Ad i4 the 4000 of a
development agreement as required by the TPO. Major M401140nP4 fur tha #tub of
making substantial circulation system improvements wilt be made e41Y in the Prow, ap%
specifically, as soon as the City can prepare Projects for constmctlon cMslste it W4 so
needs of the Program Thaw funck will a>sR Play a major role it} the (40 ability t9 slain
additional fundu ources from vadaus swhich typically require tiae Prnri4iga of metclii f�
(such and Prop. III and Measure M funds)•
The chart on the following page (excerpted from the EM paBe 176) sutvmariM the not
benefit analysis. The Commission should compare column 1-Ito protect, ADiMPMA"Muts
with column d - With project, with improvements. These $gores are for the yw 2000.
Column 3 shows the improvement in ICU, and concludes that the overall ICU benefit in the
AM peak hour is 1.32 and the over all benefit in the PM peak bQur i4 j..21. '}'die project,
therefore, complies with the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance.
It is important to note that the project defines certain improvements to the circulation
system, but does not specifically require that those specific improvements be in40• Tlm on
going monitoring of the development agreement and mitigation measures will require the
City to review the ultimate improvement program for compliance with she WWdpated LOS
improvements defined in the traffic study xW required by the M.
00090
TABLE U
NET BENEFIT TO CIRCULATION SYSTEM DUE TO THE PROJECT
(YEAR 2000)
1. NOROOJFGT
2. PROJECT-
3. W1'I'H
PROJECT
4. W1TH
PROJECT
S. ICU NET
'--I
o
IMPROVENWNTS
IWACT
NO WITH
U"ROVEhUMS WROVENMNTS
CHANGE
INTERSECTION
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
6. PROJECT
IMPRUVBMI.N7S
7.
Riverside & CH
.99
1.13
.02
.01
1.01
1.14
.90
.88
.09
.25
separate SBR.
9.
MacArthur & Campus
.64
1.11
.02
.01
.66
1.12
.66
112
-.02
-.01
No DIrect-Improvements.
13.
Jamboree & Campus
.92
.74
.00
.00
.92
.74
.92
.74
.00
.00
No Direct Improvements.
15.
Campus & Bristol N
.78
1.05
.01
.00
.79
1.05
.79
1.05
-.01
.00
No Direct Improvements.
Birch & Bristol N
.73
1.04
.00
.00
.73
1.04
.73
1.04
.00
.00
No Direct Improvements.
1616.
17.
Campus & Bristol S
.93
.97
.00
.00
.93
.97
.93
.97
.00
.00
No Direct Improvements.
w
18.
Birch & Bristol S
.62
.92
.00
.01
.72
.93
.62
.93
.00
-.01
No Direct Improvements.
so
19.
Irvine & Mesa
.69
1.00
.01
.00
.70
1.00
.70
1.00
-.01
.00
No Direct Improvements.
C-
20.
Irvine & University
.70
.89
.01
.00
.71
.89
.71
.89
-.01
.00
No Direct Improvements.
24:
Irvine & Westciiff/17th
.82
.93
.01
.01
.83
.94
.63
15
.19
.08
Second EBL
J.
0
27.
Dover & Bayshore/CH
.96
.89
.01
.01
.97
.90
.97
.90
-.01
-.01
No Direct Improvements.
28.
Bayside & CH
.95
.84
.01
.00
.96
.84
.96
.84
-.01
.00
No Direct Improvements.
,
29.
MacArthur & Jamboree
.78
1.64
.02
.00
.80
1.04
.80
1.04
-.02
.00
No Direct Improvements.
34.
Jamboree & University
.88
1.27
.03
.05
.91
132
72
.97
.16
30
Second SBI. Fourth NBT.
35.
Jamboree & Bison
.94
.89
.03
.03
.97
.92
.97
.92
-.03
-.03
No Direct Improvements.
37.
MacArthur & Bison
.95
.94
.00
.01
.95
95
.77
.84
.18
.10
Second NBI , Fourth NBT.
39.
MacArthur & Ford
1.03
1.01
.01
.01
1.04
1.02
.66
.84
37
.17
Fourth VN BT�Fourth SST,
Second
45.
MacArthur & SIH Rd
.79
.94
.00
.00
.79
.94
S5
28
.24
.06
T1drdSBT, Separate WBR.
46.
Mi MacArthur & San
.94
1.04
.01
.00
.95
1.04
.73
.73
.21
31
�N�LTLird SBT,
Miguel
Bu
Total ICU reduction to the Circulation
System
with the tiro
(Net
Benefit)
132
1.21
•' Source Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
ICU . Intersection Capacity UQuation
N. a North
SJH Rd -
San Joaquin Hills Road
SBL = South Bound
Left
SBT - South Bound Through
_. CH =_COOK
Highway
S = South
EBL = East
Bound
Left
NBT = North
Bound
Through
WBT - West Bound Through
• 0
TO: Planning Commission -12
The proposed project includes eight zoning amendments, which consist of revisions to
existing Planned Communities or adoption of new Planned Communities. These
amendments are discussed individually below.
� 11 � I 1 11 - 1 , �' \1.� I �h• � t V \i'1�.� \ .� • '. 1 1
This 28.3-acre property is currently part of the Harbor View Hills PC, although specific site
uses and development standards have not been established. The General Plan designates
this site for 76 residential units. The proposed PC amendment would designate this
property for 48 Low -Medium Density units on an 11-acre portion of the site (4.4 DU/acre).
A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet would also be established. The 17.3-acre
remainder of the site is proposed for open space and future right-of-way for the widening
of MacArthur Boulevard. Some of the proposed key development standards are
summarized below.
Max. building height 32 feet
Min. setbacks
Street 15 feet (major) / 10 feet (local)
Side 5 feet
Rear 20 feet
Amendment 764: Upggr Castaways
The 56.6-acre Upper Castaways site is presently allocated 151 residential units in the
General Plan. The current zoning designation is Planned Community, although no PC
regulations were previously adopted. As part of this project, PC regulations would be
adopted designating this property for 151 dwelling units on 26.0 acres, with an 11.5-acre view
park, a 4.8-acre active park, and 14.3 acres for open space and Dover Drive right-of-way.
Permitted residential types would include single-family detached, townhouses and
condominiums with ancillary recreation facilities.
Tice Upper Castaways property is located within the coastal zone, and the adopted Local
Coastal Program identifies a public bikeway/walkway along the blufftop with access from
Dover Drive and/or Westclifi Drive. The proposed PC regulations include a provision that
the design of such trails shall be subject to approval by the Public Works, Planning, and
Parks, Beaches and Recreation departments.
The proposed PC regulations would also require compliance with the City's affordable
housing policies, and off -site compliance would be permitted.
Some of the proposed key development standards are summarized below.
Max. building height 32 feet
00092
TO: Planning Commission -13
Min. setbacks
Street
Garage
Side
Rear
35 feet (Dover Dr.) / 10 feet (internal)
5-7 feet or 18 feet
5 feet / 0 (if 10 feet between buildings)
10 feet
Blufftop setbacks: One of the major issues relevant to this project is the General Plan
policy concerning preservation of coastal bluffs. The Land Use Element provides that
minimum blufftop property line setbacks of 40 feet, or as determined by a projected 2:1
slope angle from the base of the blufl•, whichever is greater, shall be maintained. In
addition, a 20-foot building setback from any blufftop property line is required. This policy
also provides that the Planning Commission may increase or decrease this minimum building
setback if it is consistent with the purposes of this policy. The proposed PC regulations
submitted by The Irvine Company would allow grading for manufactured slopes to encroach
up to 20 feet into the required blufftop property line setback, and would also allow building
pads adjacent to bluff areas to be raised as much as 10 feet above natural grade. It is the
opinion of staff that this encroachment is not desirable due to the steepness of the slope and
magnitude of the encroachment. This proposal would result in only 20 feet.for walkways
and other usable open space. The Office of the City Attorney has also expressed a concern
related to liability. Based on discussions with the Director of the Parks, Beaches and
Recreation Department, staff does not believe the requested manufactured slope
encroachment would be inconsistent with the intent of the General Plan policy as long as
the average slope ratio is limited to 4:1 and sensitive grading techniques are utilized (e.g.,
slope rounding), with grading plans subject to review and approval by the Planning, Building
and PB&R departments. A 4:1 slope is relatively gentle and could still be used by the
public. Staff has no objection to the proposal to allow building pads to be raised not more
10 feet.
Park and church access and parking: The PC regulations proposed by The Irvine Company
would permit this project to be a private, gated community with no public access from 16th
Street. In recent discussions regarding preliminary site plans with representatives of the
Newport Harbor Lutheran Church, concerns have. been expressed regarding how the
proposed access and parking for both -the passive and active parks might adversely affect the
church. This is an issue of concern to staff as well, and it must be resolved either prior to
or concurrent with the approval of the subsequent Site Plan Review and Tentative Tract
Map. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant and the church in an attempt to resolve
these concerns.
Fr,, ' 1 1 it ' 1 y�l lil \ I 1 �l Ali/lal i ' i_l I11
These two sites are separated by John Wayne Gulch and are proposed to be combined into
a single planned community with a total of 89.2 acres. The 77.2-acre Newporter North site
has a General Plan designation for 212 residential units. The General Plan designates the
Newporter Knoll site as open space. The proposed PC regulations would allow 212 units
on 30.0 acres of the Newporter North site, with a 4.0-acre view park and 43.2 acres for open
0.0093
TO: Planning Commission -14
space and future road right-of-way. Allowable building types would include single-family
detached, townhomes, condominiums, apartments, and ancillary recreailonal uses. The 120-
acre Newporter Knoll site would be designated passive open space in the PC regulations.
Some of the proposed key development standards are summarized below.
Max. building height
Min. setbacks
Street
Garage
Side
Rear
fr =1
32 feet
35 feet (major) / 10 feet 040TOa))
5-9 feet or 19 feet
5 feet / 0 (if 10 feet batwom buildings)
10 feet
Blufftop setbacks: The proposed PC regulations submitted by The Irvine Compaq contain
the same provision that would allow encroachment of manufacriued slopes into blufftop
setback areas, as well as the allowable increase in pad elevations discussed previously for
the Upper Castaways property. The same analysis would apply to this property.
Biological imoaM The land use plan contained in the proposed PC regulations anticipates
an access road at the Santa Barbara Drive extension that would result in the loss of a 0.1-
acre portion of a small wetland area. This impact would be mitigated by a proposed
requirement that any loss of wetlands bo replaced in consultation with the pepprGment of
Fish and Game and the Army Corps of Engineers, therefore $00 has no objq#Qn to the
proposed plan.
Another impact that could result from this project is the potential loss of coyote donning
and foraging area and the adverse secondary effect this could have upon the ecological
balance between coyotes, smaller predators such as foxes and feral cats, and sensitive bird
species. At this time, the probability of coyotes being eliminated from this area ,cannot be
determined.
The San Diego Creek South site is a portion of the North Ford PC, and is currently
designated for office development in the PC regulations. The property is Allocated a
maximum of 300 multi -family residential units in the General Plan, however. The proposed
PC amendment would redesignate this 21-acre property from office to Multi-FAmily
Residential with a maximum of 300 units, and 2.4 acres of open space.
Some of the proposed key development standards are summarized below.
00094
TO: Planning Commission - 15
Max. building height 35 feet
Min. setbacks
Street 25 feet (Jamboree)
20 feet (University Drive South)
15 feet (collector streets)
5 feet (private streets)
Other 5 feet with 8 feet between buildings
Amendment 767, Bavview Landing
This site, with a total of 16.1 acres, is presently designated for either 10,000 square feet of
restaurant use or a 40,000-square-foot health club on the lower 5.0-acre portion with the
upper 11.1 acres restricted to open space according to the General Plan. The current zoning
designation for this property is Unclassified. The proposed project includes the
redesignation of the site to PC and the adoption of Planned Community regulations in
conformance with the General Plan designation.
Specific site development standards would be determined as part of the Use Permit process.
Is�.us�
Park alternative: As alluded to previously, one of the project alternatives under
consideration includes the transfer of development entitlement from this site to Newport
Center/Fashion Island in the form of 30,000 square feet of retail use, and the development
of a 5-acre active park with unlighted playing fields and related facilities on the lower
portion of Bayview Landing.
Senior citizen housiue alternative: This alternative (Alternative 5c in the Draft EIR) would
also transfer development entitlement from this site to Newport Center/Fashion Island in
the form of 30,000 square feet of retail use, to be replaced with entitlement for 120 senior
citizen housing units. If this alternative were selected, it would be necessary to initiate a
General Plan amendment to redesignate the site accordingly. • '
Amendment 768: San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur
San Diego Creek North: This 14.7-acre parcel is designated for 112,000 square feet of office
space in the General Plan, with a 2.5-acre reservation for a fire station. The current zoning
designation is Unclassified. The Irvine Company proposes to dedicate the property to the
City for public facilities and open space uses. Adoption of a new Planned Community
(including the Jamboree/MacArthur site) is proposed with public facilities and open space
the only allowable uses.
Permitted uses in the lower.portion of the site (Area 1) would include preservation, wetland
and habitat restoration, and ecological or agricultural research. Allowable uses proposed
00095
TO: Planning Commission -16
for the upper portion of the site (Area 2) include active and passive public;Qareation, biotic
gardens, ecological or agricultural research, and public facilities such as roads, utilities,
drainage and flood control facilities, park and ride facilities, a fire station, and fuel
modification zones.
mbor i ;firth ur• This site occupies 4.7 acres and is currently designated for 50,000
square feet of office use in the General Plan. The oAsting zoning is Unclassified. The
Irvine Company proposes to dedicate this parcel to the City for public facility and open
space uses, and eliminate all office entitlement. The property would be included with the
San Diego Creek North site in a single Planned Community, Allowable uses would be
similar to those described for San Diego .Creek Nook.
Amendment 70, Block BW
Block 500, within Newport •Center, is a 6.4-acre site that is anrently designated for 245
multi -family units in the GeneralPlan. The proposed plamgpd community regulations would
allow a maximum of 245 apartments, condominiums, or senior citizenhousing with ancillary
skilled nursing areas and recreation facilities.
As provided by the General Plan, senior citizen housing developments exceeding -the
established dwelling unit limit may be •approved with a finding that the project :Is of
particular benefit to .the city .and the traffic generated by the project is no greater than the
predominant use allowed in the area. Staff suggests that a provision be added to tine
proposed PC regulations requiring approval of .a use permit if a senior citizen project. The
use permit process would provide the mechanism for staff and the Planning Commission to
determine whether the required findings could be made.
Specific site development standards would be determined through the site plan review
process.
Amendment 770• Corporate Plena West
The 12.1-acre Corporate Plaza West property in Newport Center has a General Plan
designation for an additional 94,000 square feet of office development on the remaining
undeveloped 9.0-acre portion of the•site. The existing development consists of 4000 square
feet of office space plus landscaping on 3.1 acres. The proposed PC regulations would allow
a variety of office and commercial uses consistent with the 94,WO�square-foot General Plan
entitlement. No specific open space designation is proposed for this project.
Some of the proposed key development standards are summarized below.
Max. building height g2 feet, not to exceed sight plane
Min, setbacks
Street 45 feet (Newport Center Drive)
30 feet (Coast Highway, Clubhouse Dr.) 0 0 0 9 0
25 feet (internal streets/parking lots)
• .j
TO: Planning Commission -17
This 23.9-acre property is currently zoned Unclassified, and has a General Plan designation
for an additional 68 hotel rooms. The proposed action would' provide entitlement for these
additional rooms subject to approval of a use permit. A maximum of 479 hotel rooms
would be permitted, with' no specific requirement for open space.
If the Commission is prepared to take action on the proposed project, the following issues
for resolution have been identified by staff:
Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement:
1. Should The Irvine Company be allowed to use the restored top of slope as the point
of beginning for the measurement of property and building setback lines if the
erosional swales on Castaways and Newporter North are restored by TIC?
2. Is the additional dedication of the remainder of Newport Village in combination with
exchange of the southerly portion of San Diego Creek North for ultimate dedication
to the TCA acceptable?
Castaways:
3. Shall there be an active park on Castaways?
Castaways/Newporter North:
4. Shall TIC be allowed to encroach 20 feet into the 40 foot bluff top property line
setback area with a manufactured slope?
a. If yes, shall the maximum slope be 2:1 or 4:1?
Bayview Landing:
5. What shall be the permitted land use be on the lower portion of Bayview Landing?
a. Restaurant/Athletic Club
b. Senior Citizen housing with transfer of retail to Fashion Island
C. Active Park with transfer of retail to Fashion Island
Block 800 - Newport Center:
6. Shall the potential senior citizen housing be subject to the review and approval of a
Use Permit?
O0OS1
0 '0
TO. Planning Commission -18
If, at the conclusion of the above determinations, the Planning Commissioa desires to
recommend approval of the project, findings and conditions for approval are attacbod as
Eabibit "A". Facbibit "W provides Findings for denial,
it on the basis of testimony received, the Commission squires additional InAarmatton from
staff:, the areas for additional information should be, IdontlOod, along with areas for
subsequent straw vote, and the public hearing continued to the meeting of Jtaly 9,1994
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. UMCNER, Director
By. '&'r 1
Patricia L Temple
Advance Planning Manager
1. Exhibit "A"
2. Exhibit "B"
3. Draft Circulation and Open Space Development Agreement
4. Planned Community Texts
5. Draft Environmental Impact Report and Technical Appendices (previously
distributed)
OM)6
TO: Planning Commission - 19.
FINDINGS ,AND CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 148
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.6
TRAFFIC STUDY NO.82
AMENDMENT NO.763
AMENDMENT NO.764
AMENDMENT NO.765
AMENDMENT NO. 766
AMENDMENT NO.767
AMENDMENT NO.768
AMENDMENT NO.769
AMENDMENT NO: 770
rim MTTqa
Findings.
1. That a Program Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project in'
compliance -with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines and CityPolicy.
2. That all potential significant environmental effects which could result from the
project have been identified and analyzed in the EIR.
3. That based upon the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report,
mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project to reduce
potentially significant environmental effects to a level of insignificance, except in the
areas of Aesthetics/Light and Glare, Biology, and Public Services and Utilities, and
that the remaining environmental effects are significant only on a cumulative basis.
Further, that the economic and social benefits to the community override the
remaining significant environmental effect anticipated as a result of the project.
4. That the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report has been
considered in the various decisions made relative to this project..
MitiEation Measures:
Aesthetics/Light and Glare
1. In conjunction with site plan review, the project proponent shall prepare•a detailed
temporary grading and landscape plan for the bluff top setback area for the purpose
of minimizing bluff erosion. If graded slopes from a development area extend into
00099
0
TO: Planning Commission - 20.
the bluff top setback area, as proposed by the PC Text, the project proponent shall
prepare detailed final grading and landscape plans for the bluff top setback area.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department, Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Building
Department.
TranipQrtationICIrculation
2. The City shall prepare a circulation improvement monitoring program to direct
expenditures of funds received under the Development Agreement to make
improvements and to monitor the status of those improvements. The list of
improvements to be implemented shall initially be based on those identified on Table
V, with prioritization established based on technical need and ability to implement
them in a timely manner. Flexibility to add or delete projects on the list should be
maintained to respond to actual changes in traffic volumes and the ability of the City
to accomplish improvements so long as the projected Net Benefit to the circulation
system is maintained. Thereafter, a review of the improvements' priority and
implementation status shall be done in conjunction with the City's annual Congestion
Management Program and Growth Management Program analysis and the annual
review of the Development Agreement.
3. The applicant or successor in interest shall construct or post bond for all frontage
improvements identified in the Development Agreement and listed in Table B of the
Program EIR.
4. All grading related to the project shall be conducted in accordance with SCAQMD
Rule 403. This mitigation measure shall be made a condition of all grading permits
related to the project.
5. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations while construction
activities are being conducted, fugitive dust emission shall be controlled using the
following procedures:
• Graded sections of the project that will not be further disturbed or worked on
for long periods of time (three months or more) shall be seeded and watered
or covered with plastic sheeting to retard wind erosion.
• Graded sections of the project which are undergoing further disturbance or
construction activities shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related
to the project.
00100
TO: Planning Commission - 21.
6. During grading and construction activities, the applicant shall further control fugitive
dust emissions using the following measures:
• On -site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.
Entrances to all on -site roads shall be posted with a sign indicating the
maximum speed limits on all unpaved roads.
• All areas with vehicle traffic shall be periodically watered.
• Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept as needed to remove silt
which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to prevent
accumulations of excessive amounts of dust.
These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related
to the project.
7. Office and commercial development on the Corporate Plaza West and Bay View
Landing site shall also participate in the Centerride program currently in operation
in the Newport Center area. Evidence of intent to participate shall be provided to
the City of Newport Beach Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy
permit.
8. Bicycle racks shall be required in accordance with the City of Newport Beach
Transportation Demand Ordinance.
9. Construction of related frontage improvements shall include bus turnouts and shelters
if determined to be necessary and desirable by the Orange County Transit District
and/or the City of Newport Beach. Prior to final design and construction of any
frontage improvements, the City of Newport Beach shall contact the Orange County
Transit District to determine if any bus turnouts or shelters will be required.
10. All development shall include street and security lighting (in parking lots and
pedestrian walkway areas) which is energy conserving. A lighting plan shall be
submitted for all development which demonstrates ,compliance with this measure.
The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the
Department of Public Works.
11. Residential, commercial and office development shall be landscaped with an
emphasis on drought resistant plant species which will shade buildings and reduce
water and energy consumption during the summer. A landscape plan shall be
submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure.
The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of an occupancy permit.
0010,
TO: Planning Commission - 22.
12. The applicant shall ensure that all residential lots and dwellings are sound attenuated
against present and projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the
project, so as not to exceed an exterior standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor living
areas and an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms. Evidence
shall be prepared under the supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant which
demonstrates that these standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with
applicable zoning regulations and submitted as follows:
A. Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map or prior to the issuance
of Grading Permits, at the sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis
Report shall be submitted to the City's Advance Planning Manager for
approval. The report shall describe in detail the exterior noise environment
and preliminary mitigation measures. Acoustical design features to achieve
interior noise standards may be included in the report in which case it may
also satisfy "B" below.
B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acoustical analysis report
describing the acoustical design features of the structures required to satisfy
the exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Advance
Planning Manager for approval along with satisfactory evidence which
indicates that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved
acoustical report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the project.
C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all freestanding acoustical
barriers must be shown on the projects plot plan illustrating height, location
and construction in a manner meeting the approval of the City's Advance
Planning Manager.
D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field testing
in accordance with Title 25 regulations may be required by the Planning
Director to verify compliance with STC and IIC design standards.
13. All non-residential structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact
of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior
noise criteria as specified in the Noise Element.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence shall be prepared under the
supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant that these standards will be
satisfied and shall be submitted to the Manager, Advance Planning in the form of an
00102
TO: Planning Commission - 23.
Acoustical Analysis Report describing in detail the exterior noise environment and
the acoustical design features required to achieve the interior noise standard and
which indicate that the sound attenuation measures specified have been incorporated
into the design of the project.
14. All freestanding acoustical barriers shall be a berm, wall or combination berm and
wall. Walls shall not contain holes or gaps. Walls shall be constructed of slumpstone
or other masonry material. Final acoustical barrier heights and locations shall be
determined when final grading plans are developed showing lot locations,
house/building setbacks and precise pad elevation. ,
Biological Resour
15. Pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the State of California Fish and Game Code, the
California Department of Fish and Game shall be notified of any alterations to
streambed habitats. The applicant or any successors in interest shall be responsible
for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to
residential development and associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South,
Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites which would
alter streambed habitats. The applicant or any successor in interest shall notify the
Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permit prior to the issuance
of a grading permit. Copies of proper notification and necessary permits shall be
provided to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and
Game regarding any grading related to any public improvements (e.g. trails,
recreational facilities, roads, drainage facilities, etc.) in areas designated for open
space, public facilities, and/or parks which would alter streambed habitats. The City
of Newport Beach shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and obtain any
necessary permits prior to commencement of any grading which could alter the
streambed habitat. The permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 may require additional mitigation measures deemed
necessary by the Department.
16. Wetland delineation studies in accordance and conjunction with the California
Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitting
processes shall be performed for any wetland which will be impacted by grading and
construction activities. The applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible
for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by residential
development or associated improvements on the Newporter North and Upper
Castaways sites. If residential development or associated improvements on the San
Diego Creek South or Freeway Reservation sites encroach into the Bonita Creek
wetland, the applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting
00103
0 0
TO: Planning Commission - 24.
the wetland delineation study. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for
conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by any public
improvements/facilities in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or
parks which will encroach into wetlands. The studies shall occur at the time specific
site plans and grading plans are available and prior to issuance of any grading
permits or commencement of grading activities in areas containing wetland habitat.
17. Public use and related facility development for areas proposed for natural open space
and passive park uses within the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Newporter
Knoll, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation, and Jamboree/MacArthur sites shall
be designed to be sensitive to existing biological resources. To this end, facility plans
and public uses for these areas shall be prepared in consultation with a qualified
biologist who shall determine that such plans and uses do not adversely impact
sensitive resources identified on these sites (e.g. wetlands, coastal sage scrub, etc.).
If necessary, additional environmental documentation shall be prepared at the time
facility plans are prepared to determine if significant adverse impacts beyond those
anticipated in this Program EIR will occur. If new significant adverse impacts are
identified, additional mitigation measures shall be adopted.
18. Grading, earthmoving, and any related construction activities related to residential
development and associated improvements on the Upper Castaways, San Diego
Creek South, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites shall be restricted as
follows: Upper Castaways and Newporter North - No grading (except that necessary
for trail establishment and improvements, erosion control or bluff stabilization),
stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall take place within the bluff top
setback area established by the Bluff Top setback Ordinance. San Diego Creek
South - No grading, stockpiling of soils, or operation of equipment shall encroach
into the area of Bonita Creek beyond the existing 15 foot elevation contour.
Newporter North - No grading, stockpiling of soils or operation of equipment shall
take place below the existing 60 foot elevation contour surrounding the John Wayne
Gulch freshwater marsh. Bay View Landing - no grading, stockpiling of soil or
operation of equipment shall encroach into the hillside above the 25-foot contour of
the lower development area.
19. Prior to grading and/or constructing any public facility on the San Diego Creek
North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the City of Newport
Beach (or other public agency responsible for development of the public facility)
shall approve and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of
wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal
agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by
either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an
00t04-
TO: Planning Commission - 25.
existing freshwater marsh in or near the San Diego Creek and Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve.
20. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential development or associated
improvement on the Upper Castaways site which will encroach into the on -site
freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin
implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall
reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction
over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new
freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh
in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all
related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of
a grading permit.
21. Prior to grading and/or constructing any, residential development or associated
improvement on the Newporter North site which will encroach into the on -site
freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin
implementation of a planwhich shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall
reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction
over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new
freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh
in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all
related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of
a grading permit.
22. Development on the San Diego Creek South site shall be designed so as to reduce
the amount of light and glare which could potentially spill over into the wetland
habitats of Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek. This can be achieved by a variety
of means including a combination of sensitive siting of lighted buildings; use of
lighting systems which conceal the light source and minimize light spillage and glare;
screening walls/berms; and dense landscaping along the edge of the development.
Any landscaped edge screening shall include non-invasive trees and shrubs. The
plant palette for the screening vegetation shall consist of dense, evergreen species
which, when mixed, achieve canopy and understory of elements to provide as much
screening as possible. The site plan and landscape plan for this edge shall be
prepared in consultation with a City -approved, qualified biologist. The site plan and
landscape plan shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance
of building permits.
23. Prior to commencing grading, all wetlands habitat in areas intended for preservation
shall be temporarily fenced. This measure shall pertain only when grading, stock-
piling, or other construction activities are proposed within 100 feet of the boundaries
00105
TO: Planning Commission - 26.
of the wetland area. A plan identifying the wetland area and the location of the
fencing shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of any
grading permit.
24. This measure shall apply to the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View
Landing, Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South and San Diego Creek North
sites. Revegetation of cut and fill slopes, bluff stabilization/remediation areas, fuel
modification zones and other graded areas adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas
(e.g. at the edge of development of residential, public facilities, or recreational areas)
shall be accomplished with plant palettes containing predominantly native species.
Steeper slopes (greater than 2:1) shall be revegetated with a mixture of coastal sage
scrub species including California sage brush which now dominates coastal sage scrub
used by California gnatcatchers. Portions of more level areas shall be revegetated
with species of native perennial grasses in an attempt to establish native grassland.
An expert in landscape revegetation, who is knowledgeable and qualified in native
plant mixtures shall provide consultation into the preparation of landscape plans to
ensure that this measure is complied with. Landscape plans shall be approved by the
City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits for private
development or commencement of grading for public facilities and public recreation-
al uses.
25. All non -emergency grading related to bluff stabilization/remediation on the
Newporter North and Bay View Landing sites shall occur during the non -breeding
season for the California gnatcatcher. The non -breeding season is from August 1 to
January 31.
Faulting and Seismicity
26. Buildings four stories in height or higher shall be designed in accordance with
requirements for seismic zone 4 as outlined in Chapter 23 of the Uniform Building
Code and/or with the benefit of a site specific seismic ground response spectrum
study which would be prepared by the project geotechnical consultant and structural
engineer to allow matching of building period with site period. The structural plans
and/or ground response study shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building
Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
27. Buildings less than four stories in height shall be designed by a Structural Engineer
in accordance with UBC Chapter 23 requirements for Seismic Zone 4. Non -critical
structures shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking that may accompany
a maximum probable earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Critical
00106
TO: Planning Commission - 27.
structures (i.e., hospitals, fire/police facilities, schools, etc.) shall be designed to
withstand strong ground shaking associated with a maximum credible earthquake on
the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Structural plans, including seismic design calcula-
tions/parameters, shall be approved by the City Building Department prior to
issuance of building permits.
28. Habitable buildings shall not be placed adjacent to (above or below) slopes or bluffs
where seismic induced slope or bluff failure could occur. Though the City has
established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -of -bluff (Develop-
ment Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21, 1991, and
Newport Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not
necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope
instability during an earthquake. Areas potentially prone to such failures shall be
identified and further evaluated by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the
Tentative Tract Map review and Grading Plan review stage. The evaluation shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to the issuance of
grading permits. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of
the evaluation to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
29. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, a Registered
Geologist shall further evaluate and make recommendations regarding the potential
for ground surface rupture effecting proposed development on -sites where
"Potentially Active Faults" have been identified (Bay View Landing and Freeway
Reservation sites) or on any other of the sites where Potentially Active Faults are
identified in the future. The study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City
Building Department and shall be prepared prior to approval of a tentative tract map
or grading permit whichever comes first. Grading and building plans shall reflect the
recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
Liquefaction
30. Sites where the potential for liquefaction has been identified, or any other site where
the potential for liquefaction may be encountered during subsequent investigations,
shall be further evaluated by a geotechnical consultant. The evaluation shall include
subsurface investigation with standard penetration testing or other appropriate means
of analysis for liquefaction potential. The project geotechnical consultant shall
provide a statement concerning the potential for liquefaction and its possible impact
on proposed development. If necessary, the geotechnical consultant shall provide
mitigation measures which could include mechanical densification of liquefiable
layers, dewatering, fill surcharging or other appropriate measures. The' Geotechnical
Consultant's report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a
Registered Civil Engineer and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building
00107
11
TO: Planning Commission - 28.
Department prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Grading and building plans shall
reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building
Department.
Erosion
31. Any necessary diversion devices, catchment devices, or velocity reducers shall be
incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Grading Engineer prior
to issuance of grading permits. Berms or other catchment devices shall be
incorporated into the grading plans to divert sheet flow runoff away from areas which
have been stripped of natural vegetation. Velocity reducers shall be incorporated
into the design, especially where drainage devices exit to natural ground.
32. All fill slopes shall be properly compacted during grading in conformance with the
City Grading Code and verified by the project Geotechnical Consultant. Slopes shall
be planted with vegetation upon completion of grading. Conformance with this
measure shall be verified by the City Grading Engineer prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits.
33. Berms and brow ditches shall be constructed to the satisfaction and approval of the
City Grading Engineer. Water shall not be allowed to drain over any manufactured
slope face. Top -of -slope soil berms shall be incorporated into grading plans to
prevent surface runoff from draining over future fill slopes. Brow ditches shall be
incorporated into grading plans to divert surficial runoff from ungraded natural areas
around future cut slopes. The design of berms and brow ditches shall be approved
by the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
34. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, appropriate artificial substances shall be
recommended by the project landscape architect and approved by the City Grading
Engineer for use in reducing surface erosion until permanent landscaping is well
established. Upon completion of grading, stripped areas sball be covered with
artificial substances approved by the City Grading Engineer.
35. Drainage of both surface and subsurface water over or toward the bluffs on the
Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites shall be minimized. Though some
drainage of rainwater over the bluff face cannot be avoided, drainage control devices
shall be designed to direct excess water from site Improvements away from the bluff
face. Irrigation shall be controlled to prevent excessive infiltration into the
subsurface. The project Civil Engineer shall design grading plans to minimize surface
runoff over the bluff faces. The project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide
recommendations to minimize subsurface water migration toward the bluff faces
prior to approval of Tentative Tract maps or site plans. All design criteria for the
00108
TO: Planning Commission - 29.
control of surficial and subsurface water shall be completed to the satisfaction of the
City Grading Engineer.
Bluff and Slope Instability
36. The project geotechnical consultant shall review the tentative tract map and grading
plan for each site and prepare a report addressing all salient geotechnical issues
related to bluff and slope stability of any existing bluff or slopes. These reports shall
include:1) detailed analysis of field data including surface and subsurface geological
mapping; 2) laboratory testing results; 3) stability analysis of existing bluffs and
proposed slopes as illustrated on the tentative tract map or rough grading plan; 4)
conclusions; 5) recommendations for mitigation of any identified unstable bluffs or
slopes and/or for additional investigation. These reports shall be signed by a
Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a
grading permit.
37. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project geotechnical consultant and/or
civil engineer shall make written recommendations for manufactured slope
stabilization including, but not limited to, buttressing, rock bolting, grouting, slope
gradient laybacks, or retaining wails. All necessary recommendations shall be
included in the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
38. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -
of -bluff (Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January
21,1991, and Newport Beach Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum
setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning
bluff/slope instability. Prior to issuance of grading permits, appropriate safe bluff top
setback recommendations shall be determined by the project Geotechnical
Consultant based on the evaluation required by Mitigation Measure 3 to the
satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer.
39. During grading a geotechnical consultant shall monitor grading operations to ensure
that recommendations for slope instability mitigation are implemented. Additionally,
the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate slopes as they are graded through geologic
mapping and analysis to ensure that no unanticipated conditions are present. Slope
stability mitigation recommendations may require modification during grading.
Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Building Department.
40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the geotechnical consultant shall prepare a
Rough Grading Report and As -Graded Geotechnical Map for each graded site at the
completion of grading of that site. The Report shall summarize and document
00109
TO: Planning Commission - 30.
compliance with all mitigation measures. The Rough Grading Report shall include
a statement regarding the adequacy of the manufactured slopes for their intended use
and a statement regarding the adequacy of the recommended bluff setbacks. The
report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil
Engineer and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Compressible/Collapsible Soil
41. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, written recommendations for the mitigation
of compressible/collapsible soil potential for each site shall be provided by the
geotechnical consultant. Foundation recommendations shall be included. Recom-
mendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the site -specific
tentative tract maps and grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Grading
Engineer. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping,
laboratory testing and analysis. Mitigation, if necessary, could include: removal and
recompaction of identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill surcharging and
settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, or foundation design which utilizes deep
piles, or other recommended measures. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific
reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil
Engineer, and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Expansive/Corrosive Soil
42. Written recommendations for the mitigation of expansive and corrosive soil potential
for each site, shall be provided by the project corrosion consultant, geotechnical
consultant and/or Civil engineer. Foundation recommendations shall be included.
Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory
testing and analysis and shall be incorporated into final building plans prior to
issuance of building permits. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall
be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered City Engineer, and
shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer.
Near Surface Groundwater
43. The project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall prepare written site -
specific reviews of the tentative tract maps and grading plans addressing all salient
geotechnical issues, including groundwater. These reports shall provide findings,
conclusions and recommendations regarding near -surface groundwater and the
potential for artificially induced groundwater as a result of future development, and
the effects groundwater may have on existing or future bluffs, slopes and structures.
The reports shall also address the potential for ground subsidence on the sites and
properties adjacent to the sites if dewatering is recommended. The geotechnical
00110
TO: Planning Commission - 31.
consultant and/or civil engineer's reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering
Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to the satisfaction
of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Water Quality
44. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide to the Building
and Public Works Departments haul route plans that include a description of haul
routes, access points to the sites and watering and sweeping program designed to
minimize impacts of the haul operation. These plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Public Works Department. Copies of the plans shall be submitted to the
City's Planning Department.
45. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the following
erosion control methods into grading plans and operations to the satisfaction of the
City Grading Engineer and Building Department.
a. An approved material such as straw, wood chips, plastic or similar materials
shall be used to stabilize graded areas prior to revegetation or construction.
b. Air -borne and vehicle -borne sediment shall be controlled during construction
by: the regular sprinkling of exposed soils; and the moistening of vehicles
loads.
C. As approved material such as rip rap (a ground cover of large, loose, angular
stones) shall be used to stabilize any slopes with seepage problems to protect
the top soils in areas of concentrated runoff.
d. During the period of construction activity, existing vegetation which will be
retained on -site shall be protected from traffic by the use of fences. If
appropriate, buffer strips or vegetative filter strips, such as tall stands of grass,
can be used as an alternative and/or supplementary method to protect against
sediment buildup.
46. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project geotechnical consultant and/or
civil engineer shall develop a plan for the diversion of stormwater away from any
exposed slopes during grading and construction activities. The plan shall include the
use of temporary right-of-way diversions (i.e., berms or swales) located at disturbed
areas or graded right-of-ways. The plan will be approved by the City Engineer and
Building Departments and implemented during grading and construction activities.
00111
9
TO: Planning Commission - 32.
47. The applicant shall provide a temporary gravel entrance located at every construction
site entrance. The location of this entrance shall be incorporated into grading plans
prior to the issuance of grading permits. To reduce or eliminate mud and sediment
carried by vehicles or runoff onto public rights -of -way, the gravel shall cover the
entire width of the entrance, and its length shall be no less than fifty feet. The
entrance plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Grading
Engineer concurrent with review and approval of grading plans.
48. The applicant shall construct filter berms or other approved device for the temporary
gravel entrance. The berms shall consist of a ridge of gravel placed across graded
right-of-ways to decrease and filter runoff levels while permitting construction traffic
to continue. The location of berms shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to
the issuance of grading permits. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Grading Engineer.
49. During grading and construction, the applicant shall provide a temporary sediment
basin located at the point of greatest runoff from any construction area. The location
of this basin shall be incorporated into grading plans. It shall consist of an
embankment of compacted soils across a drainage. The basin shall not be located
in an area where its failure would lead to a loss of life or the loss of service of public
utilities or roads. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading
Engineer.
Drainage Patterns
50. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the master plans of water, sewer and storm
drain facilities shall be approved by the City Engineer. Any systems shown to be -
required by the review shall be the responsibility of the developer, unless otherwise
provided for through an agreement with the property owner or serving Agency.
Archaeology
ALL PROD= SUES
51. All sites shall be mitigated pursuant to Council Policy K-5. Where further testing or
salvage is required, the applicant shall select a City -approved qualified archaeologist
to excavate a sample of the site. All testing and salvage shall be conducted prior to
issuance of grading permits or use of an area for recreational purposes. A written
report summarizing the findings of the testing and data recovery program shall be
00112
TO: Planning Commission - 33.
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of the completed data recovery
program.
52. The applicant shall donate all archaeological material, historic, or prehistoric,
recovered during the project, to a local institution which has the proper facilities for
curation, display and study by qualified scholars. All material shall be transferred to
the approved facility after laboratory analysis and a report have been completed.
The appropriate local institution shall be approved by the Planning Department
based on a recommendation from the qualified archaeologist.
53. Any excavation of a site located within the Coastal zone of more than two surface
meters of dirt shall require a coastal development permit prior to commencing the
excavation. All provisions of the California Coastal Commission guidelines shall be
complied with.
UPPER CASTAWAYS
54. Prior to any grading related to development of the bluff trail system, open space uses
or bluff stabilization which could impact CA-Ora-49 and CA-Ora-186 on the Upper
Castaways site, the sites shall be subjected to test excavations by a City approved
archaeologist (experienced in both historic and pre -historic archaeology) to determine
site integrity, extent and significance. The methodology of the test excavation shall
reflect the recommendations contained in the Cultural Resources report prepared for
this Program EIR. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and recommen-
dations and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
BAY VIEW LANDING
55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, CA-Ora-1098 shall be surface collected and
subjected to test excavations by a City approved archaeologist to determine site
integrity, extent and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings
and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test
excavations.
56. Prior to grading for the new park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved
archaeologist to conduct a surface collection and subsurface test excavation of CA-
Ora-66 to determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report shall be
prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90
days of completing test excavations.
00113
TO: Planning Commission - 34.
57. Prior to grading for the view park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved
archaeologist to place a test unit on top of the knoll on the Bay View Landing site
in the area containing shell scatter, to determine if the shell is representative of a
subsurface archaeological deposit. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings
and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the test
excavation.
NEWORMNORTH
58. Prior to the use or development of the open space areas for passive recreational
uses, CA Ora-51 and CA-Ora-518 on the Newporter North site shall be surface
collected and subjected to test excavations to determine site extent and significance.
A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning
Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall conduct a surface
collection of the eastern extension of CA Ora-100 which would be impacted by
grading and/or development of residential uses. The surface collection shall be
conducted by a city approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings of the surface collection and submitted to the Planning Department within
90 days of completing the surface collection.
60. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall conduct a data recovery
of program CA Ora-64 on the Newporter North site. The program shall be
conducted by a City approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all
findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the
data recovery program.
61. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential development or any bluff
stabilization, a qualified archaeologist shall review grading and drainage plans to
determine if there are any indirect or direct impacts to CA-Ora-51, 52 and 518. If
impacts are identified, test excavations shall be conducted to determine site extent,
integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
ITMJ 1L. ' ' ii
62. Prior to any grading or use of the site, the City shall conduct a surface collection of
archaeological material present on the top of the hill of the Newporter Knoll, with
test units placed on the hill to determine site significance and boundaries. One unit
shall be placed in the recorded area of CA-Ora-50 to determine if a portion of the
site still exists. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the
Planning Department within 90 days of completing surface collection test excavation.
00114
TO: Planning Commission - 35.
stock 8M
63. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a qualified City approved archaeologist shall
conduct a surface collection of CA-Ora-136 on the Block 800 site and subject the site
to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A test unit shall also
be placed in the northern portions of the parcel to determine if a sub -surface midden
is under the asphalt and trash. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations.
CORPORATE PL47A WEST
64. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a City approved qualified archaeologist
shall dig post holes in the areas containing surface shell on the Corporate Plaza West
site to determine if the shell represents sub -surface archaeological deposits. A report
shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department
within 90 days of completing sub -surface testing.
65. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the surface near the southern section of the
property shall be examined by a City approved qualified archaeologist after removal
of brush and prior to any ground disturbance. A report shall be prepared detailing
all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing
the surface examination.
FREEWAY PMERVA11ON
66. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the northern development area (Lot 2), a
City approved qualified archaeologist shall examine the surface of areas previously
identified as CA Ora-216. The examination shall be conducted after removal of
brush but prior to grading. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and
submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface
examination.
Paleontology
67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a collection plan shall be prepared and
implemented by a City approved, qualified paleontological monitor for known
exposed fossil localities on Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Upper
Castaways. Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units,
matrix samples shall be collected for processing through fine mesh screens. The
collection plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
00115
0 0
TO: Planning Commission - 36.
68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall make provisions for the
preparation and curation of all fossils possibly recovered from the sites during
grading. This shall be done in a manner approved by the City's Planning Depart-
ment.
69. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall identify a repository
approved by the City's Planning Department which shall receive all fossils collected
from the sites.
70. Cliff faces along Upper Newport Bay that have served as a reference section for
micro -paleontological studies should be protected from alteration. If bluffs along
Newport Bay need to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed measured
sections and samples shall be made before and after alteration. Samples shall be
prepared and analyzed as part of these efforts. The City of Newport Beach shall be
responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist to conduct the comparative study
and sampling. A report shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 90
days.
Law Enforcement
71. The project proponent shall work in conjunction with the City of Newport Beach
Police Department to ensure that crime prevention features are included in building
design and construction. The City of Newport Beach Police Department shall review
all site plans and access plans.
Water
72, Prior to issuance of grading permits for the development sites, the applicant shall be
responsible for preparation of a Master Plan of Utilities. The Master Plan of
Utilities will determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any modifica-
tions, upgrades or extensions to the existing water systems resulting from this project.
All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water
systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer,
unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
Wastewater
73. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer will provide a Master Plan of
Utilities facilities for the on -site development in order to determine the exact
necessary modifications or extensions to the existing sewer systems, if needed. All
necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water
0
TO: Planning Commission - 37.
systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer,
unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The Plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
S 1• 7- =7 i F.T-W7777-TITK�
1. That the Development Agreement is in compliance with California Government
Code Section 65864 et seq. and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.45.
2. That adoption of the Development Agreement would not preclude the City from
conducting future discretionary reviews in connection with the project, nor would it
prevent the City from imposing conditions or requirements to mitigate significant
impacts identified in such reviews provided that the measures do not render the
project infeasible.
Condition:
1. Once every 12 months from the date of execution of the Development Agreement,
the project proponent or his successor in interest shall prepare and submit for review
by the City Councila report demonstrating compliance with the terms of the
Agreement, as required by Section 15.45.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
C. Traffic Study No. 82
Findines.
1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed
project on the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic and circulation system in
accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City
Council Policy S-1.
2. That the project is a comprehensive phased land use development and circulation
system improvement plan with construction of all phases not anticipated to be
completed within 60 months of project approval.
3. That the project is the subject of a development agreement which requires the
construction of major improvements early in the development program.
001I7
TO. Planning Commission - 38.
4. That the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan
are not made inconsistent by the impact of traffic generated by the project in that the
project proposed eliminates certain planned and anticipated development through the
dedication of certain sites for permanent open space, and the other development sites
are to be developed consistent with or less than that allowed by the General Plan.
5. That an unsatisfactory level of service will not be caused or made worse at any
intersection for which there is an identified improvement.
6. That the benefits to the circulation system resulting from the major improvements
substantially outweigh the increased traffic at impacted but unimproved intersections.
7. That there is an overall reduction in ICU at impacted intersections, taking into
account peak hour traffic volumes at those intersections, and that the reduction is
caused by the improvements associated with the project.
1. That the Irvine Company shall make available to the City the monies specified for
circulation system improvements consistent with the provisions of Development
Agreement No. 6.
2. That the City of Newport Beach shall utilize the monies provided by The Irvine
Company to construct in as timely manner as possible major circulation system
improvements. These improvements shall be designed to insure that the anticipated
overall improvement in ICU anticipated in the traffic study is achieved.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
763.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
764.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
765.
0011 �9
TO: Planning Commission - 39.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
766.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
767.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
768.
7. Amendment No. 769
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
769.
Adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council approval of Amendment No.
770.
PLT. \PC�DA\DA6.F&C
00119
0
TO: Planning Commission - 40.'
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.6
TRAFFIC STUDY NO.82
AMENDMENT NO.763
AMENDMENT NO.764
AMENDMENT NO.76S
AMENDMENT NO.766
AMENDMENT NO.767
AMENDMENT NO.768
AMENDMENT NO: 769
AMENDMENT NO.770
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.148
1. That the proposed development agreement is not in the best interest of the City in
that the entitlements requested are not substantially outweighed by the public
benefits defined in the agreement.
B. Traffic Study No. 82,
Finding:
1. That a Traffic Study is not necessary for a project which is denied.
C. Amendments No. 763, 764,, 765, 766, 767, 7680 769, & 770,
Findings:
1. That the adoption of the proposed development standards is premature since
insufficient details regarding the proposed development are known at this time.
2. That certain of the proposed projects will have adverse effects on wetland and
coastal sage scrub habitats.
D. Environmental Impactj eepnrt No. 148.
Finding:
1. That an environmental document is not necessary for a project which is denied.
rtm..\P0,AMDM763.7MME y
001 �o
RESOLUTION �i0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWPORTER
NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL PLANNED COMMUNITY
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 765)
WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation• of the Newport
Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides specific procedures
for the implementation of Planned. Community zoning for properties within the City of
Newport Beach; and
WHEREAS, implementation of the project will preserve and increase public
open space; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Community District Regulations are
consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project meets the criteria of the Traffic Phasing
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the
project consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State
CEQA Guidelines, and the information contained therein has been considered by the
Planning Commission in malting its recommendation to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of
tie City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council adoption of the
v14ia,.
Newporter North/Newporter Knoll Planned Community District Regulations and Develop-
ment Plan as attached hereon as Exhibit 1.
ADOPTED this — day of 19929 by the following vote, to wit:
001
ABSENT
BY
Gary L Di Sano,
CHAIRMAN
BY
Norma Glover,
SECRETARY
Attachment: Exhibit 1
PLT:..PC%AMM765.RS1
;,.�• ._
v
CITY OF NEWPORT UK!
CODICIL MEMBERS
July 27, 1992
ROLL CfILL
18. HARBOR PERMIT APPLICATION 162-1 - Uphold
staff's recommendation to approve,
subject to conditions in the staff
report, request by Shull Bonsall and the
Bay Island Homeowner's Association to
revise the residential float bayward of
#1 Bay Island. [Report from the Marina
Department]
19. SPECIAL EVENTS APPLICATION - Uphold
staff's recommendation to approve
application No. 92-238, Orange County
Building Association for fundraising
event to benefit the homeless, Sunday,
November 8, 1992, for 5K and 10K runs in
Fashion Island, subject to conditions in
the staff report. [Report from the
Revenue Manager, Finance Department]
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALERDAR
AGENDA ITEM N0.
2. Report from the Planning Department
recommending ordinances be introduced
and scheduled for public hearing on
August 10, 1992 concerning The Irvine
Company.
Motion x Upon recommendation of the staff, motion
All Ayes was made to introduce and schedule for
public hearing on August 24, 1992,
rather than August 10, the following
ordinances:
(a) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-35,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AND THE IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN
SPACE AGREEMENT (DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT NO. 6);
AND
(b) PROPOSED ORDINANCE No. 92-36,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR UPPER
CASTAVAYS (Planning Commission
Amendment No. 764);
AND
(c) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-37,
being.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS, AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR NEUPORTER
NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL (Planning
Commission Amendment No. 765);
AND
Volume 46 - Page 240
MINUTES
INDEX
Harbor
Permit Apl
162-1
Special
Events
(27)
COUNCIL MEMBERS
O'CITY OF NEWPORT BEAC*
MINUTES
fifAl
Motion
All Ayes
x
July 27, 1992
(d) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-38,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RE -ZONING
THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYVIEW LANDING FROM TSE u
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR BAYVIEV LANDING (Planning
Commission Amendment No. 767);
r,
(a) POSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-39,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RE -ZONING
THE PROPERTIES COMMONLY KNOWN AS
SAN DIEGO CREEK. NORTH AND
JAMSOREE/NACARTHUR FRoN THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR SAN DIEGO CREEK NORTH -JAMBOREE
MAC ARTHUR (Planning Commission
Amendment No. 768);
AND
(f) PROPOSED ORDINANCE No. 92-40,
being,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT RE-zoNING
THE PROPERTY COM MI.T KNOWN AS
CORPORATE PLAZA VEST FROM THE U
DISTRICT TO THE P-C (PLANNED
COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CORPORATE PLAZA WEST (Planning
Commission Amendment No. 770).
12. Report from the Planning Department
recommending certain items be scheduled
for public hearing on August 10, 1992;
and upon recommendation of the staff,
motion vas made to schedule the
following for public hearing on August
24, 1992, rather than August 10:
A. TRAFFIC STUDY No. 82 - Request to
approve a traffic study consistent
with the provisions of Chapter
15,40 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code for sloven site&
addressed in the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space
Agreement, and acceptance of an
environmental document;
Volume 46 - Page 241
Ord 92-38
Bayview
Landing
PCA 767
(94)
Ord 92-39
SDiego Crk-
No-Jambre
MacArthr
PCA 768
(94)
Ord 92-40
Corp Plaza
West
PCA 770
(94)
Trfc Stdy
No. 82
(94)
1
0 City Councillteeting July 27 1992
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Agenda Item No.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Planning Department
A. Development Agreement No 6 (Ordinance Introduction)
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Cirgation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the City
of Newport Beach. The proposal also includes the acceptance, of an
environmental document.
AND
B. Amendment No 764 (Ordinance Introduction)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would provide
for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between the Westcliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
I_`►1tt7
Amendment No 765 (Ordinance Introduction
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort.
ZONE: P-C
VaNkM
D. Amendment No 767 (Ordinance Introduction)
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the I: (Unclassified) District to thej P-C
TO: City Council - 2.
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing. This
request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000 sq.ft.
restaurant or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club.
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Drive and East Coast Highway,
across from the Villa Point Planned Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
0
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
(Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a request
to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development
Plan so as to provide for open space and public facility use pf the
subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road, bounded by Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as San Diego
Creek North located at 3500 Jamboree Road, bounded by the San
Diego Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
0
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and Unclassified
Districts to the P-C District- Also requested is the adoption of
Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
the Corporate Plaza West Planned Community. This request would
allow for the construction of an additional 94,000 sq.ft. of office
development (115,000 sq.ft. total).
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center Drive, on the northwesterly
comer of East Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive, across1rom
the Corporate Plaza Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
TO: City Council - 3. •
Applications
The various applications under consideration are part of the Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement (CIOSA) and require the adoption of an Ordinance. Related
zoning actions which are adopted by Resolution are scheduled for public hearing on this
agenda (See Agenda Item L2 If approved, the CIOSA will provide vested entitlement for
eight sites owned by The Irvine Company ('ITC) throughout the City of Newport Beach.
Additionally, three sites currently owned by TIC will be zoned and dedicated for open} space
and public facility use. Regulations regarding the adoption of Development Agreeme�is are
contained in Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Regulations reg xding
Amendments are in Chapter 20.84, and procedures for the adoption of Planned Communi-
ties are in Chapter 20.51 of the Code.
Suggested Action
If desired, introduce Ordinance No. 92- regarding Development Agreement No. 6,
Ordinance No. 92- regarding Amendment No. 764, Ordinance No. 9-2::_ regarding
Amendment No. 765, Ordinance No. 92_ regarding Amendment No. 767, Ordinance No.
92- regarding Amendment No. 768 and Ordinance No, 92- regarding Amendment
No. 770 and set for public hearing on August 10, 1992.
Planning Commission Recommendation
At its meeting of June 18, 1992, the Planning Commission voted (all ayes) to recommend
approval of Development Agreement No. 6. and Amendments No. 764, 765, 767, 708 and
770 to the City Council. The Traffic Study, Amendments No. 763, 766 and 769, and the
Environmental Impact Report related to this action will be brought to the City Council for
consideration concurrent with these Ordinances. Copies of the staff report and an ea cerpt
of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting will be forwarded at the time of the
City Council, hearing.
Respectfully Submitted,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
Patricia L. Temple
Advance Planning Manager
PLT:..\DA\DA6.SR1
0
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR NEWPORTER NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO 765)
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach DOES ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The subject property is thq following real property in the City
of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California:
That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as recorded in
Book 1, Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps of the County of
Orange.
as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" and hereinafter eferred to as "Property".
SECTION 2. Development of the prope'Fty, which is zoned P-C, shall be as
specified in the Planned Community District Regulatii ns and Development Plan which is
approved and adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, and which specifies the permitted land
uses, intensity and density limits and development standards and regulations for the property
as set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
SECTION 3. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby
I
instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan to the Property as'described herein; the same shall be
in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the, Newport Beach Municipal Code.
SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and, the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper
of the City within fifteen (15) days of its adoption. Thy Ordinance shall be effective thirty
days after the date of its adoption.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach, held on the 27th day of July 1092, and was adopted on
the _ day of 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
Attachments:
Exhibits "A" & "B"
YL71.\CC\DA�M0RD
C'.2
ME-21
l 3
W
u
40-rw
,, ..
•y, 117 72
/RV/NE GAO
A 117-71
J!l!KT�r� ``
W_RS N N
S i[ AC MFr
EWPORT
ONES
As A-W
< n
".� Q� vs
`y1Q tar1.==
�v 0* `% AS 04
RG
� � r
NOTE - pmm %U !LOCK d
PAI[? `.MlERS
131
�
OZ7
I.2lC
NitC
[R S.SIC 2!
a
Lar9
5=
r�ptC
¢
r I Q.0
BAY `��'
rs:K
s
`
e10
I� -
AAZ�� -
3
- - as anEaaa] -
ASSESSOR-S MAP
eOOK440PAGE 13
9
0 EXHIBIT B '
NEWPORTLR NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904
Adopted , 1992
Planned Community District Regulations for Newporter North
ordinance No. adopted by the City of Newport
Beach City Council on
m
12/31/91
C- 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Page No.
1
Section
I
General Notes
4
Section
II
Definitions
S
Section
III
Residential Development Standards
9
Permitted Uses
9
Site Density
9
Maximum Building Height
9
Setbacks From Major Streets
9
Setbacks
9
Coastal Bluff Setbacks
10
Streets
10
Landscaping
11
Parking
11
Fences, Hedges and Walls
12
Section
IV
Parks
is
Section
V
Signs
16
Section
VI
Site Plan Review
17
List of Figures
Figure I General Site Location
Figure II Land Use Plan
Figure III Statistical Analysis
Figure IV Bluff Setback Exhibit
2
3
7
14
12/31/91
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The Newporter North Planned Community (P-C) District Regulations
have been developed in compliance with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan. This P-C has also been developed pursuant to
Chapter 20.51 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
The purpose of these District Regulations is to provide for the
development of the site as a coordinated, comprehensive project.
This will take advantage of the superior environment which
results from community planning.
Whenever the regulations contained conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained
herein shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate
this development when such regulations are not provided within
these District Regulations. All development within the Planned
Community boundaries shall comply with all provisions of the
Uniform Building Code and various mechanical codes City Standards
and Policies related thereto.
INTENT
It is the intent of this P-C District to permit the development
of the Newporter North site for residential dwellings and
associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space.
The units will be located in close proximity to Newport Center
and will provide additional housing opportunities within the
City.
LOCATION
Newporter North is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road to the
north, John Wayne Gulch to the southwest, Jamboree Road to the
east, and the Upper Newport Bay to the northwest.
1
06/10/92
C- �
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT=M +W�rwi+M/wwM
11919
0
6 4,+
tv
^� {
tNe
R 4 A
�p�EE
RESIDENTIAL
W - y PARK
OPEN SPACE/NATURAL AREAS
LAND USE PLAN
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
NOT TO SCALE
.f•
1/9/92
SECTION I
S.
Park dedication requirements shall be in accordance with the
adopted Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
Water within the Planned Community will be furnished by the
City of Newport Beach.
Sewage disposal facilities within the Planned Community will
be provided by the City of Newport Beach and Orange County
Sanitation District No. S. Prior to the issuance of any
building permits, it shall be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Utilities Department
that adequate sewer facilities will be available. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure, it shall be further
demonstrated that adequate sewer facilities exist.
Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in
accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach
Grading ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by
the Building and Planning Departments.
Building pads adjacent to slope or bluff areas may be raised
to an elevation not to exceed ten (10) feet above natural
grade. This provision does not preclude raising pad
elevations above 10 feet on interior portion of site.
Development area slopes may extend a maximum of ten (10)
feet outside the property line defining the development
area.
Manufactured slopes, if any, shall be stabilized as soon as
possible to reduce erosion.
If mechanical appurtenances are to be built on building
rooftops, they shall be screened from street level view in a
manner compatible with the building materials.
4 06/10/9 � tO
r
• 0
6.
7.
EIP
9.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the sites shall be
examined to determine the existence and extent of
archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance
with adopted City policies.
A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade
meetings to inform the developer and grading contractors of
the results of the study. In addition, an archaeologist
shall be present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant
cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall
have the authority to stop or temporarily divert
construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess
the significance of the finds.
In the event that significant archaeological remains are
uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall
stop in that area of the subject property until an
appropriate data recovery program can be developed and
implemented. The cost of such a recovery program shall be
the responsibility of the landowner and/or developer.
A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner
and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform
inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be
allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific
area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
The final design of public on -site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation serving viewpark and coastal bluffs shall be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department;
Planning Department; and Parks, Beaches and Recreation.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing provisions shall be consistent with City
standards. Affordable housing requirements may be satisfied
off -site.
NOISE
Detailed noise studies shall be conducted for the
residential development for on -site impacts. Residential
development shall comply with the standard of 45 dBA CNEL
for interior noise levels and 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor living
areas. Noise mitigation programs shall be based upon the
recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in
acoustics and be approved by the Planning Department.
5 12/31/91
C-) I
0 0
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
STREETS
Streets within the development may be either public or
private. Public or private streets shall meet city
standards. The Newporter North development may be a private
(gate guarded) community with secured access surrounding the
development.
REFUSE COLLECTION AREAS
a. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually
screened from access streets and adjacent property from
street level views. Said screening shall form a
complete opaque screen and shall not interfere with
site distance from streets unless otherwise approved by
the City Traffic Engineer.
b. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City
of Newport Beach approval.
TELEPHONE GAS AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE
All "on -site" gas lines, electrical lines, and telephone
lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal
equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets
and adjacent properties from street level views.
LIGHTING
Lighting systems shall be designed and maintained in such a
manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light
spillage and glare to adjacent properties. The plans shall
be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,
with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his
opinion, this requirement has been met. Lighting systems
for any publicly maintained areas shall use city standard
fixtures approved by the Utilities Department.
FIRE ACCESS
Fire equipment access shall be approved by the Fire
Department.
06/10/92
i
41
FIGURE III
Newporter North
Type
Residential
View Park
open Space,
Natural Areas
and Future Roadway
Right -of -Way
Total
u
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
0
Acreage
Area (Net) Du/Ac Du
1 30.0 7.1 212
2 4.0 0
3 55.2 0
89.2
7
0
212
12/31/91
C-13
SECTION II
1. Streets - Reference to streets within the Newporter North
development shall mean either public or private streets.
Design of streets shall meet City of Newport Beach standards
or as specified herein.
2. Bluff - As used in this document, "bluff" is any natural
landform having an average slope of 26.6 degrees (50%) or
greater, with a vertical rise of twenty-five (25) feet or
greater.
3.-yiMark - For purposes herein, a viewpark represents an
area of natural character with provision of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway and passive viewing areas.
11
12/31/91
C,- /4
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. PERMITTED USES
a. Townhouses
b. Condominiums
C. Apartments
d. Single-family detached units.
e. Model homes and sales offices
f. Recreational uses ancillary to residential uses.
2. SITE DENSITY
Residential development area shall not exceed thirty (30)
acres with allowance for 212 dwelling units.
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
The maximum height of all buildings shall be thirty-two (32)
feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach
Municipal Code and determined from the finished grade
approved in the site plan review and subdivision approval.
4. SETBACKS FROM MAJOR STREETS
Street
Jamboree Road
San Joaguin Hills Road
5. SETBACKS
a. Front vard
Setback from Ultimate
Right -of -Way Line
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
Minimum 35 feet to property line.
From any public or private street the minimum building
setback shall be ten (10) feet from right-of-way or
curb, whichever is greater.
Garages with direct access shall be setback from five
(5) to seven (7) feet average or a minimum average of
twenty (20) feet measured from back of curb, or in the
event that sidewalks are constructed, from back of
sidewalk. A minimum of eighteen (18) feet measured
from back of curb, or in the event that sidewalks are
constructed, from back of sidewalk shall be permitted
with roll -up or other type garage doors approved by the
City Traffic Engineer. If five (5) foot setbacks are
proposed at corner units or lots on curves, adequate
sight distance shall be provided unless otherwise
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
9 06/10/92
G�-16
b. Side Yard
Where property lines are created a minimum five (5)
foot side yard setback shall be required.
Architectural projections may be permitted subject to
the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Zero (0) foot
setback will be permitted where a minimum ten (10) feet
building to building setback is provided. At side
yards adjacent to streets a minimum five (5) foot
setback shall be maintained.
Where property lines are created a minimum of ten (10)
feet rear yard setback shall be required. Structures,
other than walls and fences, along the public bluff top
area shall be setback a minimum distance of twenty (20)
feet from property line. Architectural projections may
be permitted subject to the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. Decks and balconies greater than 1811 above grade
may extend into the rear yard setback up to 3 feet.
6. COASTAL BLUFF SETBACKS
The property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be
located no closer to the edge of the bluff than the point at
which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn
from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 266 degrees
to the horizontal. In no case shall a property line be
located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of a bluff
or any eroded area of the bluff unless the area is restored.
7. PRIVATE STREET STANDARDS
Private streets within residential development shall be a
minimum of thirty-two (32) feet in width with parking
allowed on one side. Through the Site Plan Review process,
the following modifications to this standard may be
approved:
a. The minimum width may be reduced to 26 feet for access
drives serving no more than 16 dwelling units.
b. The minimum width may be reduced to 20 feet for access
drives serving no more than 4 dwelling units.
C. The minimum width may be reduced to 16 feet for access
drives serving a single dwelling unit.
10 06/10/92
C �6
9.
10.
11.
d. Drives of 20 or 16 feet as provided for the above shall
be increased to a minimum width of 26 feet if serving a
common parking area.
e. Unles"s otherwise defined in this text, private streets
shall be designed in compliance with the private street
standards of the City of Newport Beach.
PUBLIC STREETS
Public streets within the Planned Community District shall
conform to the current criteria as specified by the City of
Newport Beach "Design Criteria for Public works
Construction".
SITE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Residential development shall be designed to provide
adequate sight distance (25 MPH), at the intersection of all
private streets and drives, and along curves unless
otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
LANDSCAPING
Project landscape concepts are intended to allow for
maximization of views from residential areas. Interior
greenbelt concepts are encouraged. A landscape concept plan
shall be submitted as a part of site plan review and
subdivision approval.
PARKING
Standards shall provide for:
a. Condominiums and Townhomes
Dwelling units less than or equal to 1500 square feet
shall provide a minimum of 2 parking spaces per unit,
including one covered space. In addition, guest
parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of 0.5
space per unit. Guest parking may be provided on
street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons (minimum
20 feet in depth or 18 feet where roll up garage doors
are provided), in a manner acceptable to the City
Traffic Engineer. SO of the guest spaces may be
provided on driveways.
11 06/10/92
G" ?
Dwelling units greater than 1500 square feet shall
provide a minimum of 2 covered spaces per unit. In
addition, guest parking shall be provided at a minimum
rate of one (1) space per unit. Guest parking may be
provided on street, in parking bays, or on driveway
aprons (minimum 20 feet in depth or i8 feet where roll
up garage doors are provided), in a manner acceptable
to the City Traffic Engineer. Fifty percent (50%) of
the guest spaces may be provided on driveways.
The size of open and enclosed parking spaces and areas
shall be as specified by the residential parking
standards contained in the Newport Beach Municipal
Ccde,with the exception that common parking areas which
are not curbside shall meet the universal parking stall
size of 8 1/2 feet in width by 17 feet in depth.
TPONEWIr-PrN M. *VA-PrW7R=-1
A minimum of two (2) garage parking spaces shall be
provided per unit. In addition, guest parking shall be
provided within the development at a minimum rate of
two (2) spaces per unit. Guest parking may be provided
on street, in parking bays, or on driveway aprons
(minimum 20 feet in depth), in a manner acceptable to
the City Traffic Engineer. one of the guest spaces may
be provided on the driveway.
: •�
The project shall be designed so as to provide for adequate
non -vehicular circulation from residential units to common
recreation and amenity areas as well as from residential
units to external parks and roadways. This circulation can
be provided via sidewalks adjacent to streets in combination
with walkways provided through greenbelt and common areas.
Main circulation drives shall have a sidewalk on at least
one side. sidewalks adjacent to curbs shall be a minimum of
five (5) feet in width. sidewalks adjacent to a 3 to 4 foot
wide parkway shall be a minimum of four (4) feet in width.
12 06/10/92
13. FENCES HEDGES AND WALLS
Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight (8)
feet, measured from finished grade. Where the fence is
required to protect a swimming pool, the fence shall be
constructed so as to meet the requirements of the Uniform
Building Code for pool safety. Wing walls, where.an
extension of a residential or accessory structure, may be
six (6) feet in height. At street intersections (to include
driveway intersections with streets), no such appurtenance
shall exceed thirty (30) inches in height above street
pavement grade within the triangle bounded by the right-of-
way lines and a connecting line drawn between points thirty
(30) feet distant from the intersection of the right-of-way
lines prolonged. Landscape plans shall be designed to
provide adequate sight distance (25 MPH) unless otherwise
approved by the City Traffic Engineer.
13
06/10/92
1.1. 1. 1 , , ... 1 19
1661 XZ AHVnNW
NV7d 7VH3NM f/OV391HOdMM-40 A1fO Had
VlHgLlLfO NOde.3s -4-4me
--- Xvm.o1�— ["-,
778 d0 dDl
r--
MOVO13S3M7A1H3dOHd MY
NOMUS 3M7 NOV913S 3M7 A1H3dOtfd ?W
DAM771n9 70V j
OZ I 06 -
z&079 d0 301
A7ddV 771M SRSVO
OMl d0 3ONV1S/0 H31V3Y9
SECTION IV
PARKS
The Newport North view park is intended to be passive in nature,
characterized by low intensity usage such as hiking, bicycling
and informal recreation. Minimal grading for trail connections
to San Joaquin Hills Drive and Back Bay Road will be allowed. It
is intended that the physical nature of the view park be a
natural setting with unobtrusive additions and minimal lighting.
Some low level lighting may be allowed, pursuant to City review,
for security purposes.
r
15 06/10/92
C- �l
11
SECTION V
A sign program for Newporter North, approved by the Irvine
Company shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
3.
06/10/92
C,W
SECTION VI. SITE PLAN REVIEW
A. Pu�ose
B.
C.
D.
The effect of this section is to establish a site Plan
Review procedure for Newporter North to insure that the
project conforms to the objectives of the General Plan.
Findings
The Site Plan Review procedures contained in this section
promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
community by ensuring that:
(1) Development of Newporter North will not preclude
implementation of specific General Plan objectives and
policies.
(2) The value of property is protected by preventing
development characterized by inadequate and poorly
planned landscaping, excessive building bulk,
inappropriate placement of structures and failure to
preserve where feasible natural landscape features.
Application
Site Plan Review approval shall be obtained prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit or a Building Permit for any
new structure, including fences, and the establishment of
grade by the Planning Commission or the City Council in
accordance with Section 20.02.026.
Plans and Diagrams to be Submitted
The following plans and diagrams shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval:
(1) A plot plan, drawn to scale, showing the arrangement of
buildings, driveways, pedestrian ways, off-street
parking, landscaped areas, signs, fences and walks.
The plot plan shall show the location of entrances and
exits, and the direction.of traffic flow into and out
of off-street parking areas, the location of each
parking space, and areas for turning and maneuvering
vehicles. The plot plan shall indicate how utility and
drainage are to be provided.
(2) A landscape plan, drawn to scale-, showing the locations
of existing trees proposed,to be removed and proposed
to be retained; and indicating the amount, type, and
location of landscaped areas, planting beds and plant
materials with adequate provisions for irrigation.
17 06/10/92
C;. y3
E.
F.
(3) Grading plans to ensure development properly related to
the site and to surrounding properties and structures.
(4) Scale drawings of exterior lighting showing size,
location, materials, intensity and relationship to
adjacent streets and properties.
(5) Architectural drawings, renderings or sketches, drawn
to scale, showing all elevations of the proposed
buildings and structures as they will appear upon
completion.
(6) Any other plans, diagrams, drawings or additional
information necessary to adequately consider the
proposed development and to determine compliance with
the purposes of this chapter.
Fs&
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution
of the City Council to the City with each application for
Site Plan Review under Chapter 20.01.070. (Ord. 1686, § 11
1976)
Standards
The Site Plan Review procedures established for Newporter
North shall be applied according to and in compliance with
the following standards:
(1) Sites subject to Site Plan Review under the provisions
of this section shall be graded and developed with due
regard for the aesthetic qualities of the natural
terrain, Upper Newport Bay, and landscape, giving
special consideration to waterfront resources and
unique landforms such as coastal bluffs or other sloped
areas; trees and shrubs shall not be indiscriminately
destroyed;
(2) No structures shall be permitted in areas of potential
geologic hazard unless specific mitigation measures are
adopted which will reduce adverse impacts to an
acceptable level or the Planning Commission or City
Council, on review or appeal, finds that the benefits
outweigh the adverse impacts;
(3) Residential development shall be permitted in areas
subject to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL only where
specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels
in exterior areas to less than 65 CNEL and reduce noise
levels in the interior of residences to 45 CNEL or
less;
18 06/10/92
G' AH
(4) Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas,
pedestrian and vehicular access ways, and other site
features shall give proper consideration to functional
aspects of site development;
(5) Development shall be consistent with specific General
Plan policies and objectives, the adopted Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement, and shall not
preclude the implementation of those policies and
objectives;
(6) Development shall be physically compatible with the
development site, taking into consideration site
characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes,
and sensitive resources;
(7) Archaeological and historical resources shall be
protected to the extent feasible or appropriate
mitigation measures shall be implemented.
G. Procedures regarding Public Hearing notification and
Planning Commission and City Council actions shall be
pursuant to Chapter 20.01.070.
19
06/10/92
c-a5
COMMISSIONERS
A
0 o Yk
June 4, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
A Development Agreement No. 6 (Public Hearing)
Item No.3
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation
DA No. 6
Improvement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the
ms 82
City of Newport Beach. The proposal also includes the acceptance
of an environmental document.
A 763
AND
A 764
B. Traffic Study No 82 (Public Hearing)
A 765
Request to approve, a traffic study consistent with the provisions of
A 766
Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven
A 767
sites addressed in the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement.
A 76a
AND
A 769
A 770
C. Amendment No 763 (Public Hearing)
Cont'd to
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community
6/I8/92
District Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the
construction of 48 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Ford Road, adjacent
to the easterly side MacArthur Boulevard,
between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills
Road, in the Harbor View Hills Planned
Community.
ZONE: P-C
AND
D. Amendment No 764 (Public Hearing)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would
provide for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
-13-
COMMISSIONERS
0 June 4, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the
southeasterly side of Dover Drive between the
Westcliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
AND
E. Amendment No 765 (Public Hearing)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on
the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between San Joaquin Hills Road and the
Newporter Resort.
'ZONE: P-C
AND
F Amendment No 766 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the
construction of 300 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 3200 University Drive, on
the northeasterly comer of Jamboree Road
and University Drive South, in the North
Ford Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
AND
-14-
COMMISSIONERS
k
10
N
• June 4, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
G. Amendment No. 767 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing.
This request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000
sq.ft. restaurant or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club.
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on
the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road
between Back Bay Drive and East Coast
Highway, across from the Villa Point Planned
Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
AND
H Amendment No 768 (,Public Hearing)
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so
as to reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the
P-C (Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a
request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan so as to provide for open space and public
facility use of the subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road,
bounded by Jamboree Road, MacArthur
Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as
San Diego Creek North located at 3500
Jamboree Road, bounded by the San Diego
Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
AND
-15-
COMMISSIONERS
�!� \
�
June 4, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
I Amendment No 769 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow the construction
of 245 dwelling units or senior citizen housing.
LOCATION: Property located at 855 San Clemente Drive,
on the southeasterly corner of San Clemente
Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block 800
of Newport Center.
ZONE: P-C
AND
J. Amendment No 770 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and Unclassified
Districts to the P-C District. Also requested is the adoption of
Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan
for the Corporate Plaza West Planned Community. This request
would allow for the construction of an additional 94,000 sq.ft. of
office development (115,000 sq.ft. total).
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center
Drive, on the northwesterly corner of East
Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive,
across from the Corporate Plaza Planned
Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that the subject item
be continued to the June 18, 1992, Planning Commission meeting.
-16-
COMMISSIONERS
In50WR`
• June 4, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
INDEX
ROLL CALL
Motion
*
Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3 to the June
Ayes
*
*
*
*
*
18, 1992, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED.
Absent
ss:
I N ITEM
Discussion
Item
I P1 n Amendment No. 92-2No.
1
!Request t initiate amendments to the Newport Beach General
GPA 92-2
foll s:
w O •A request of California Recreation Company
to amend the Lan Use Element of the Newport Beach General
(A)
Plan and the Loca Coastal Program Land Use Plan so as to
Castaways
Marina
redefine the permute commercmial entitlement from 40,000 sq.ft.
of recreational and m e comercial to a 71 slip marina with
Initiated
related marina support an parking facilities.
B 2209 Beside Drive: A reques of C.L. Burnett and Steven D.
(B)
Hillyard to amend the Land Use E ment of the Newport Beach
2209
General Plan and the Local Coastal P gram Land Use Plan so as
Bayside Dz
to alter the dwelling unit allocation d policy statements for
No
Statistical Area F3 in order to allow the s division of an existing
Recommenda
R-1 lot into two single family building sit consistent with the
tion
minimum subdivision standards of the Newpo Beach Municipal
Code.
INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
James Hewicker, Planning Director, reviewed the subjec General
Plan Amendment.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill regar ' g
GPA 92-2 (B), 2209 Bayside Drive, Mr. Hewicker explained th
the request is for the subject address. It was the belief of staff
when the General Plan was amended in 1988, that the City only
-17-
+ ' Planning Commission Meeting June 4. 1992
Agenda Item No. . 3
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT' A Development Agreement No. 6 (Public Hearin¢)
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the City
of Newport Beach. The proposal also includes the acceptance of an
environmental document.
uz b
B. Traffic Study No 82 (Public Hearing)
Request to approve a traffic study consistent with the provisions of
Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven sites
addressed in the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement.
0
Amendment No. 763 (Public Hearin
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the construction
of 48 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Ford Road, adjacent to the easterly side
MacArthur Boulevard, between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills
Road, in the Harbor View Hills Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
"Will
D. Amendment No 764 (Public Hearing)
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would provide
for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
TO: Planning Commission - 2
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between the Westeliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort.
ZONE: P-C
MCI
F. Amendment No. 766 (&blic Hearing)
Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the construction
of 300 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 3200 University Drive, on the northeasterly corner
of Jamboree Road and University Drive South, in the North Ford
Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
0
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing. This
request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000 sq.ft.
restaurant or a 40,000 sgft. athletic club.
r"
TO: Planning Commission - 3
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Drive and East Coast Highway,
across from the Villa Point Planned Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
0
•s� 0 M- awswrol-1101,
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
(Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a request
to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development
Plan so as to provide for open space and public facility use of the
subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road, bounded by Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as San Diego
Creek North located at 3500 Jamboree Road, bounded by the San
Diego Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
I. Amendment No 769 (Public Hearin
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow the construction of
245 dwelling units or senior citizen housing.
LOCATION: Property located at 855 San Clemente Drive, on the southeasterly
corner of San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block 800
of Newport Center.
ZONE: P-C
0
J. Amendment No 770 (Public Hearing)
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and Unclassified
Districts to the P-C District. Also requested is the adoption of
Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
TO: Planning Commission - 4
the Corporate Plaza West Planned
allow for the construction of an
development (115,000 sgft. total).
Community. This request would
additional 94,000 sgft, of office
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center Drive, on the northwesterly
corner of East Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive, across from
the Corporate Plaza Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
This item has been continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 18, 1992, to
allow staff and the applicant to further review the P-C Texts for consistency with City
standards.
Very truly yours,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
Patricia L. Temple
Advance Planning Manager
C\...\PL7\PC\DA\Q0S&PC1
• M t
Ibis Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach, held on the, 27th day of July 1992, and was adopted on
the _ day of 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
Attachments:
Exhibits "A" & "B"
PL7`...\WC DA\A765.ORD
MAYOR
2
6 Mart No. 3
ORDINANCE NO. 92-37
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR NEWPORTER NORTH/NE WPORTER KNOLL
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO, 765)
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach DOES ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The subject property is the following teal property in the City
of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California:
That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as recorded in
Book 1, Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps of the County of
Orange.
as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" and hereinafter referred to as "Property".
SECTION 2. Development of the property, which is zoned P-C, shall be as
specified in the Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan which is
approved and adopted pursuant to this Ordinance, and which specifies the permitted land
uses, intensity and density limits and development standards and regulations for the property
as set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
SECTION 3. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby
Instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan to the Property as described herein; the same shall be
in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
SECTION 4. The Mayor sball sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the
passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper
of the City within fifteen (15) days of its adoption. The Ordinance shall be effective thirty
days after the date of Its adoption.
65
COMMISSIONERS
A\OA\N.l \
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Community. This request would allow for the construction of an
additional 94,000 sq.ft. of office development (115,000 sq.ft. total).
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center
APPROVED
Drive, on the northwesterly comer of East
Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive,
across from the Corporate Plaza Planned
Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
Ms. Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, stated that the
subject project consists of a comprehensive set of applications to
provide entitlement for remaining undeveloped sites in the City
owned by The Irvine Company. The details of the Development
Agreement are the result of discussions between The Irvine
Company and an AdHoc Committee of the City Council formed for
the purpose of developing the terms of the Agreement for
consideration by the City. The Agreement was originally drafted
by The Irvine Company; however, it is now the product of the City
Attorney with substantial input by The Irvine Company. The three
components of the Agreement include the Circulation System
Funding Program; an Open Space Dedication Program; and the
Provision of Vesting of Entitlement. The subject action would
constitute final discretionary actions in the Newport Center area.
which caused staff to raise the issue of dedication of the Newport
Village site from the new Central Library site to San Miguel Road.
The AdHoc Committee and The Irvine Company determined that
the dedication could be accomplished so long as The Irvine
Company was given the ability to use a portion of the San Diego
Creek North site between the Bayview Drive extension and San
Diego Creek for the mitigation of San Joaquin Transportation
Corridor impacts. The concept has been incorporated into the
Development Agreement.
Ms. Temple addressed the feasibility of expansion of time for the
Newport Conservancy to acquire Castaways and Newporter North.
The Development Agreement does not address any provisions of
-14-
0001G
COMMISSIONERS
� d
�'�t
June 18, 1992 MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLLCALL
INDEX
H. Amendment No. 768 (Continued Public Hea=4
Amend.
No. 768
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so
as to reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the
(Res.
P-C (Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a
No. 1305)
request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan so as to provide for open space and public
facility use of the subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road,
bounded by Jamboree Road, MacArthur
Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as
San Diego Creek North located at 3500
Jamboree Road, bounded by the San Diego
Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
AND
I Amendment No. 769 (Continued Public Hearingl
Amend.
No. 769
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow the construction
(Res
of 245 dwelling units or senior citizen housing.
No. 1306)
LOCATION: Property located at 855 San Clemente Drive,
on the southeasterly corner of San Clemente
Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block 800
of Newport Center.
ZONE: P-C
AND
Amend.
1. Amendment No. 770 (Continued Public Hearingl
No. 770
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
(Res.
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and U
Nd. 1307)
(Unclassified) Districts to the P-C District. Also requested is the
adoption of Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for the Corporate Plaza West Planned
-13-
0002.5-
CityCouncil Abeeting August 24. 1992
Agenda Item No.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Planning Department6�
SUBJECT: A General Plan Amendment 92.2(C)
Request to amend the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach
General Plan to allow for an optional permitted land use of affordable
senior citizen housing on the Bayview Landing site in association with
the transfer of 30,000 sq.ft. of retail commercial entitlement to Fashion
Island in Newport Center. The proposal also includes the acceptance
of an environmental document.
I_ Z
B Local Coastal Program Amendment No 28
Request to amend the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan to allow
for an optional permitted land use of affordable senior citizen housing
on the Bayview Landing site in association with the transfer of 30,000
sq.ft. of retail commercial entitlement to Fashion Island in Newport
Center.
INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
0
C. Ordinance No 92.35 (Development Agreement No 6)
Request to adopt a Development Agreement for the Circulation Im-
provement and Open Space Agreement for eleven sites in the City of
Newport Beach.
D Traffic Study No. 82
Request to approve a traffic study consistent with the provisions of
Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for eleven sites
TO: Citylouncil - 2.
addressed in the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agree-
ment.
KV �]
Request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the construction
of 48 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Ford Road, adjacent to the easterly'side
MacArthur Boulevard, between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills
Road, in the Harbor View Hills Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
AND
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Upper Castaways. This request would provide
for the construction of 151 dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 900 Dover Drive, on the southeasterly side of
Dover Drive between Westcliff Drive and West Coast Highway.
ZONE: P-C
UzUP
Request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This
request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units on
Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll.
LOCATION: Property located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter
Resort.
ZONE: P-C
►:NVO7
TO: Cityf uncil - 3. •
H. Amendment No. 766
Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow for the construction
of 300 additional dwelling units.
LOCATION: Property located at 3200 University Drive, on the northeasterly corner
of Jamboree Road and University Drive South, in the North Ford
Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
0
I Ordinance No 92-38 (Amendment No. 767)
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
District. Also requested is'the adoption of Planned Community
District Regulations and Development Plan for Bayview Landing. This
request would provide for the construction of either a 10,000 sq.ft.
restaurant or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club.
LOCATION: Property located at 951 Back Bay Drive, on the northwesterly side of
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Drive and East Coast Highway,
across from the Villa Point Planned Community.
ZONE: Unclassified
ME
T Ordinance No 92-39 (Amendment No. 768)
Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 44 and 66 so as to
reclassify property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C
(Planned Community) District. The proposal also includes a request
to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development
Plan so as to provide for open space and public facility use of the
subject property.
LOCATION: Property located at 3600 Jamboree Road, bounded by Jamboree Road,
MacArthur Boulevard and SR 73, and property known as San Diego
Creek North located at 3500 Jamboree Road, bounded by the San
Diego Creek, Jamboree Road and SR 73.
ZONE: Unclassified
TO: City Council - 4.
irk
K. ,amendment No. 769
Request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District
Regulations and Development Plan so as to allow the construction of
245 dwelling units or senior citizen housing.
LOCATION: Property located at 855 San Clemente Drive, on the southeasterly
corner of San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, in Block, 800
of Newport Center.
ZONE: P-C
MM-01
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 48 so as to
reclassify property from the O-S (Open Space) and Unclassified
Districts to the P-C District. Also requested is the adoption of
Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
the Corporate Plaza West Planned Community. This request would
allow for the construction of an additional 94,000 sq.ft. of office
development (115,000 sqft. total).
LOCATION: Property located at 1050 Newport Center Drive, on the northwesterly
corner of East Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive, across from
the Corporate Plaza Planned Community.
ZONE: P-C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
The various applications under consideration are part of the Circulation Improvement and
Open Space Agreement (CIOSA). If approved, the CIOSA will provide vested' entitlement
for eight sites owned by The Irvine Company (TIC) throughout the City of Newport Beach.
Additionally, three sites currently owned by TIC will be zoned and dedicated for open space
and public facility use. Guidelines for General Plan Amendments are contained in City
Council Policy Q-1. Regulations regarding the adoption of Development Agreements are
contained in Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Regulations regarding
TO: Citylouncil - 5. •
the approval of Traffic Studies are found in Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code and in Council Policy S-1. Regulations regarding Amendments are in Chapter 20.84,
and procedures for the adoption and amendment of Planned Communities are in Chapter
20.51 of the Code.
Suggested Action
Hold hearing, close hearing; if desired
a. Adopt Resolution No. 92- ' accepting, approving and certifying Final Environ-
mental Impact Report No. 148;
b. Make the Findings contained in the Statement of Facts with respect to significant
impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report;
C. Find that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations are true
and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final
Environmental Impact Report;
d. With respect to the project, find that although the Final Environmental Impact
Report identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that will result
if the project is approved, the mitigation measures identified shall be incorporated
into the project, and all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be miti-
gated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that
the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set
forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations are acceptable;
e. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring program;
f. Adopt Resolution No. 92- , amending the Land Use Element of the Newport
Beach General Plan for the Bayview Landing site;
g. Adopt Resolution No. 92- . amending the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan
for the Bayview Landing site;
h. Reintroduce Ordinance No. 92-35 • and pass to second reading on September 14,
1992, being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE-
TWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND THE
IRVINE COMPANY FOR THE CIRCULATION IMPROVE-
MENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT
(DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6)
TO: Citygouncii - 6. 1 0
i. Sustain the action of the Planning Commission and approve Traffic Study No. 82
subject to the conditions imposed by the Commission;
j. Adopt Resolution No. 92- adopting an amendment to the Harbor View Hills
Planned Community;
k. Reintroduce Ordinance No. 92-36 .• and pass to second reading on September 14,
1992, being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR UPPER CASTAWAYS
(Pt.ANMG COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO, 764)
1. Reintroduce Ordinance No. 92-37 . and pass to second reading on September 14,
1992, being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING PLANNED COMMU-
NITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
PLANFOR NEWPORTER NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL
In. Adopt Resolution No. 92- , adopting an amendment to the North Ford Planned
Community;
n. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-38 . being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT
RE -ZONING THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
BAYVIEW LANDING FROM THE U DISTRICT TO THE
P-C (PLANNED COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPT
ING PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BAYVIEW LANDING
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 767)
o. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-39 . being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT
RE -ZONING THE PROPERTIES COMMONLY KNOWN AS
SAN DIEGO CREEK NORTH AND JAMBOREE/MAC
ARTHUR FROM THE U DISTRICT TO THE P-C
(PLANNED COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND ADOPTING
TO: City Council - 7.
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SAN DIEGO CREEK
NORTH -JAMBOREE MAC ARTHUR
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO 768)
p. Adopt Resolution No. 92- . adopting an amendment to the Block 800 - Newport
Center Planned Community;
q. Adopt Ordinance No. 92-40 , being
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT
RE -ZONING THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
CORPORATE PLAZA WEST FROM THE U DISTRICT TO
THE P-C (PLANNED COMMUNITY) DISTRICT AND
ADOPTING PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGU-
LATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CORPO-
RATE PLAZA WEST
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO, 770)
Background
On November 27, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 89-136 establishing the
Circulation Buildout City Council Ad Hoc Committee. This Committee was established to
work with The Irvine Company (TIC) and City staff in the development of a comprehensive
approach to entitlement of certain undeveloped TIC properties consistent with the General
Plan in association with the establishment of a funding mechanism for the construction of
important components of the circulation system. Through the course of these discussions,
a program of open space and public facility dedications was identified. The agreement is,
therefore, called the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement, and consists of
three major components:
1. The entitlement of seven sites owned by The Irvine Company in the City of Newport
Beach at a level equal to or less than the General Plan Land Use Element
allocation. One site, Bayview, Landing, will be entitled in such a way as to allow for
the construction of senior citizen housing with a transfer of retail commercial to
Fashion Island in addition to uses currently allowed in the General Plan. The sites
proposed for vesting entitlement are: Upper Castaways, Bayview Landing,
Newporter Resort, Newporter North, Corporate Plaza West, Block 800 (Newport
Center), San Diego Creek South and Freeway Reservation East. Two sites would be
zoned for open space uses: Newporter Knoll and Jamboree/MacArthur. One site,
San Diego Creek North will be zoned for open space and/or public facility uses.
2. Advance funding of circulation system improvements through the prepayment of Fair
Share Fees, the commitment to frontage improvements, and the advance of
TO: Cityluncil - 8.
additional funds, with a total commitment of $20.6 million plus an additional
$500,000 for MacArthur Boulevard improvements in the City of Irvine. Funds loaned
to the City (the advance) would be interest free, and would be paid back to TIC
through a return of 50% of Fair Share Fees collected by the City for a twenty year
term. If the advance of funds is not completely paid after twenty years, the
remainder of the debt would be forgiven.
3. The dedication to the City of land for park, open space, and public facility uses.
Three entire sites would be dedicated: Newporter Knoll, San Diego Creek North
and Jamboree/MacArthur. Substantial portions of five additional sites would also
be dedicated: Upper Castaways, Bayview Landing, Newporter North, San Diego
Creek South and Freeway Reservation East. No dedication would occur on
Corporate Plaza West, Block 800 - Newport Center or the Newporter Resort sites.
The dedication of the portion of the Newport Village site from the new central
library site to San Miguel Road is also provided for in the agreement.
The agreement under consideration is a development agreement to be adopted pursuant to
Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The agreement sets forth the legal
framework, requirements and obligations of both parties to achieve the entitlement (for
TIC), and the land dedication and circulation funding (for the City). One item of interest
is the effective date of the agreement. In this case, the effective date is not the date of
approval, but is the first date upon which all of the following have occurred: 1) final
approval by the California Coastal Commission; 2) the CEQA challenge period has expired
or, if a lawsuit is filed, a final judgement upholding the agreement has been entered; and
3) the City has issued a grading or building permit for development of the property other
than potential senior citizen housing development on Bayview Landing, development on the
southerly parcel of Freeway Reservation East, senior housing development on Block 800 or
hotel development on the Newport Resort. The agreement does make provisions for the
City to make use of the circulation funds prior to the effective date of the agreement if
certain conditions are met.
The agreement can be terminated if any county, state or federal law, rule, regulation or plan
precludes compliance with one or more provisions of the agreement. The agreement may
also be terminated if either party defaults on their obligations pursuant to the agreement.
If the Company elects termination of the agreement upon default by the City, there are
provisions for repayment of circulation funds paid to the City pursuant to the agreement.
It is important to understand that this provision could be a substantial General Fund
obligation, in that the obligation is based upon the development remaining and shall be
repaid in four years.
Planning Commission Action
On June 18, 1992, the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council a
series of actions which comprise the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
On August 6, 1992, the Planning Commission recommended approval 'o£ General Plan
TO: City Council - 9.
Amendment 92-2(C) and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 28, which are the follow-
up actions necessary to enact the Planning Commission recommendation in regards to
Bayview Landing. A copy of the Planning Commission staff reports and excerpts of the
Planning Commission minutes are attached for the information of the City Council.
Discussion
The Planning Commission staff reports contain the detailed analysis of this project. Two
issues were raised at the Planning Commission hearings which are discussed below. A
proposed change to the PC Text for Harbor View Hills - Freeway Reservation East is also
discussed as a result of a comment received on the Environmental Impact Report.
Bluff Top Setbacks for Castaways and Newporter North. In their request for approval for
the Planned Community texts for the Castaways and Newporter North sites, The Irvine
Company has requested to be allowed to encroach up to 20 feet into the required 40 foot
bluff top set back zone. This would allow for the placement of a fill slope in the set back
area so that the adjoining residential area can be raised up to 10 feet above the bluff top
public access area. The Planning Commission approved a slope encroachment of up to 10
feet with the adjoining community association maintaining the slope. The staff position is
that a minimum of 40 feet should be maintained for the bluff top set back for both
geological and public use concerns that warrant the widest possible set back.
Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, staff and The Irvine Company have met
to further discuss the issue of encroachment into the 40 foot set back area. As a result of
these discussions, The Irvine Company has changed its position, and is no longer seeking an
encroachment into the bluff top set back. The required revisions have been incorporated
into the PC Texts for Castaways and Newporter North (attached) and the suggested action
includes the necessary reintroduction of the Ordinances.
Site Design Issues/Newport Harbor Lutheran Church. The Planning Commission received
considerable testimony from persons associated with the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church.
Primary areas of concern are the interface of the residential development with the Church,
operational conflicts between the Church and the parks, and the provision of parking for
both parks as well as the Church.
Conceptual plans for this area have been prepared by both The Irvine Company and the
Church. It is important to note that precise site plans have not been developed for these
sites. The zoning documents will not preclude implementation of any of the concepts.
Resolution of these considerations will occur at the time of approval of the Site Plan
Review.
One issue which the City Council may wish to address is the possibility of direct access to
the bluff top trail system on the Castaways -site from 16th Street. While direct access is not
precluded by the zoning document, it is not required. If the City Council wishes to mandate
direct access to the bluff park from 16th Street, the requirement should be incorporated into
the P-C Text at this time.
TO: city Council -10.
Additional Requirement for Freeway Reservation East - South Parcel. A concern was raised
by a resident of the Harbor View Hills area regarding potential changes to the noise
environment which could result from the construction of the southern portion of the
Freeway Reservation East site adjacent to Newport Hills Drive West. Specific concerns
were raised concerning the removal of an existing berm and the construction of residences
in that area between existing homes and MacArthur Boulevard. While no potential
mitigable impact was identified in the Environmental Impact Report, The Irvine Company
has agreed to the imposition of an additional condition on this future subdivision, as follows:
"Concurrent with submittal of plans for site plan review for the southern
portion of the Freeway Reservation East site, the project applicant shall
submit to the City an accoustical barrier analysis (prepared by a City -approved
acoustical engineer) which demonstrates that the proposed building designs
result in optimal sound attenuation for the existing homes along Newport
Hills Drive West, taking into consideration the anticipated layout of the site
plaiLlf
The purpose of this requirement is to assure existing residents in the area that the design
of the structures will optimize the noise reduction which will result from the construction
of the new residences. This is similar to a requirement placed on Hoag Hospital for its
loading dock area The additional language has been incorporated into the PC Text for
Amendment No. 763 attached to this report.
Revisions to Development Agreement Text. The Office of the City Attorney has indicated
a need to make certain revisions to the text of the Development Agreement. The changed
text will be transmitted to the City Council in a separate staff report from the City Attorney.
The suggested action includes the necessary reintroduction of the Ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
By _t_a
iCAtA
Patricia L. Temple
Advance Planning Manager
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission minutes of June 18 and August 6, 1992
2. Planning Commission staff reports of June 18 and August 6, 1992
TO: City Council - 11.
3. Draft Resolution Certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 148 with
Exhibit 1: Statement of Facts and Findings and
Exhibit 2: Statement of Overriding Considerations
4. Mitigation Monitoring Program
S. Draft Resolution - General Plan Amendment 92-2(C)
6. Draft Resolution - Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 28
7. Revised Ordinance No. 92.35 - Development Agreement No. 6 (Attached to City
Attorneys staff report)
8. Findings and Conditions for Approval - Traffic Study No. 82
9. Draft Resolution - Amendment No. 763 - Harbor View Hills PC (Revised)
10. Revised Ordinance No. 92-36 - Amendment No. 764 - Upper Castaways PC
11. Revised Ordinance No. 92-37 - Amendment No. 765 - Newporter North/Newporter
Knoll PC
12. Draft Resolution - Amendment No. 766 - North Ford PC
13. Ordinance No. 92-38 - Amendment No. 767 - Bayview Landing PC
14. Ordinance No. 92-39 - Amendment No. 768 - Jamboree/MacArthur-San Diego Creek
North PC
15. Draft Resolution - Amendment No. 769 - Block 800 PC
16. Ordinance No. 92-40 - Amendment No. 770 - Corporate Plaza West PC
17. Correspondence
18. Final Environmental Impact Report 148 - Addendum and Response to Comments
(attached separately)
PLT:CC\DA\DA"R3
i I
AMENDMENT APPLICATION
OII" .tI -ZONE CHANGE)
CITY" OI' NEWPORT BEACH
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
P. O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-a915
(714) 644-3200
'
"- LL:ah Applicatron, Rec'd by
Fee: $5,560.00
t
Applicant (print) The Irvine Company Phone 720-2332
Mailing Address 550 Newport Center Dr., Ste. 700, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Property Owner Same Phone
Mailing Address Same
Address of Property Involved Newporter North - Newporter Knoll
Zone Present Use Vacant
Legal Description of Property Involved (if too long, attach separate sheet)
That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown o.
Purpose of Application Adoption of PC Text
Reasons for Application Establish land use regulations
Why is this Amendment necessary for the general welfare of the neighborhood?
To establish land use regulations
Vice President, Land Development (Irvine Pacific)
OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT
(I) (We) The Irvine Company depose
and say that (I am) (we are) the owner(s) of the property(ies) involved in this
application. (I) (We) further certify, under penalty of perjury, that the fore-
going statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith sub-
mitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of (my) (our) knowledge
and belief. ^^��
Signature(s)7/
Thomas O. Redwit
Vice President, Land Development
Irvine Pacific
DO NOT COMPLETE APPLICATION BELOW THIS LINE
Date Filed 51,2,�P49.Z Fee Pd. S .545d, DV Receipt No. a�2- 73
{searing Date (0IA9 1 Publication Date .� • �- 3 %�-
Posting Date S 2Y Mail Date G
P. C. Action�Date_
Appeal C. C. Hearing D
C. C. ActionDate
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
The applicant shall discuss the proposed development with a member of the Planning
Department prior to filing. This discussion should cover in detail the applicant's request
and the procedural steps required.
APPLICATION FORM
1. Please type or clearly print in ink the name, mailing address and telephone
number of the applicant and record owner of the property involved.
2. Give the address of the property involved. If it has no address, locate in relation
to its front street and nearest cross street.
3. Describe fully the purpose of the application. Be sure to list existing and
proposed zoning, setbacks, or what else is requested.
4. The law requires that to approve an amendment it must be determined that the
proposed zoning will benefit the general welfare of the neighborhood. Present
evidence to this effect in the space provided.
5. Please type or clearly print the legal description of the property involved. If there
is insufficient space on the form, the description on a separate sheet may be
attached. The legal description must be complete and correct as it will be part
of the ordinance making the change.
PROPERTY OWNERS' LIST AND ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS
Except for amendments to P-C (Planned Community) Development Standards, each
application must be accompanied by:
1. Two sets of gummed labels containing the names and addresses of owners of the
subject property, and property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. The list shall also contain the
addresses of occupants of residentially -zoned property within the required
prescribed radius in conjunction with zone changes, and any other development
the Planning Department makes the determination is of significant public interest.
2. Assessor's parcel map(s), indicating the 300 foot radius line and the subject
property.
This information shall be prepared by the applicant or by a title company doing business
in Orange County, utilizing names and addresses from the last equalized assessment roll
and utilizing the most recent assessor's maps, or alternatively, from such other records
as contain more recent names, addresses, or maps.
PLANS
Each application must be accompanied by 20 sets of plot plans, floor plans, and
elevations, and other pertinent information you feel will help illustrate your proposal.
Each set of plans must be stapled and folded to a size of 81W by 14". The plans shall
be legibly drawn to scale and dimensioned, utilizing an engineering scale at 1" = 10', 20',
301, or 40', or an architectural scale at 1/8" or 1/4" = 1' and shall contain the following
information:
1. The name and address of owner, and the owner's agent or representative.
2. A north arrow and the scale of the drawing.
3. Property lines of the subject property.
4. Adjacent streets and alleys, giving right-of-way widths and street names.
The plans shall also contain the following additional information, if applicable;
(OVER)
Amendment Information Sheet - 2.
5. All existing and proposed structures and all improvements, including driveways,
walls, carports, garages, swimming pools, accessory buildings, and structures to be
removed.
6. Parking areas, designed to City standards.
7. Signs, indicating location, height, and square footage.
8. Fencing (walls) indicating type, location, and height.
9. Landscape areas.
10. Topography.
FILING F'EE
A filing fee is required at the time of filing to partially defray the cost of processing and
other expenses. The Planning Department will advise you of said fee.
File the completed application, plans, and fee in the Planning Department by 12:W
Noon, Friday, 27 days prior to a Planning Commission meeting. (Note: If the project
requires the approval of an environmental document, all information and fees must be
filed by 12:00 Noon, Friday, 48 days prior to a Planning Commission meeting.) The
Planning Commission meets on Thursdays preceding the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each
month at 7:30 p.m. Your application will be scheduled for the earliest possible
Commission meeting. The Planning Department will advise you of the hearing date
when you file.
PLANS MUST BE CAREFULLY DRAWN AND EASILY READABLE. IF THE
PLAN IS NOT SO DRAWN, IT WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE FOR FILING.
ANY MODIFICATION OF THE PLANS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT LEAST SEVEN (7) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO
THE DAY OF THE HEARING. ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN PLANS
SUBMITTED DURING THE SEVEN (7) DAY PERIOD WILL RESULT IN A
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF THE APPLICATION BY THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
IF THIS APPLICATION INVOLVES STRUCTURAL ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING
BUILDINGS, YOU ARE ADVISED TO CONSULT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO FILING THIS APPLICATION IN ORDER TO DETERMINE
ELECTRICAL, BUILDING AND PLUMBING CODE REQUIREMENTS.
THIS APPLICATION MAY BE CONTINUED TO A SUBSEQUENT MEETING IF
THE APPLICANT OR AN AUTHORIZED AGENT DOES NOT APPEAR AT THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
IF IT IS DETERMINED BY STAFF THAT YOUR PROJECT REQUIRES THE
APPROVAL OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT DURING TIME PROCESSING
PERIOD, THIS APPLICATION WILL HAVE TO BE CONTINUED TO A
SUBSEQUENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THAN ORIGINALLY
SCHEDULED.
TENTATIVE MAP APPLICATION
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
3300 Newport Boulevard
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach,, CA 92658-8915
(714) 644-3200
NoTTK lgC'll
Application Redd
Fee: $ OR $ (42 0a per
lot (whichever is greater)
Tentative Tract No. 15011
� �2•?�q,,00
APPLICANT (Print) The Irvine Company PHONE 120-2000
MAILING ADDRESS 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
PROPERTY OWNER The Irvine Company P13ONE 720-2000
MAILING ADDRESS-
550 Net Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Newport
P�DDIESS OFOZEl�TY IIVOLVFED Newporter North Planned Community. Bounded by
an oaquin H s oa on t e nort John Wayne.Guicn tote southwest, Jamboree oa
to the east, and Upper Newport Bay to the northwest. 16ol -%1GMh*rev_ (Zioc4'
Residential &
ZONE open Space PRESENT USE vacant Land
Legal description of Property Involved (if too long, attach separate sheet),
See attached sheet for Legal Description.
List any exceptions requested from standard subdivision requirements
The following streets exceed the 400-feet maximum cul-de-sac length
for private streets: Street "B" = 640 feet.
Signature of Owner Wi11laiN H. arland
Executive Vice President
Date 9/30/94
Signature of Applicant or Agent Date
-----------------------------------------------------
DO NOT COMPLETE APPLICATION BELOW THIS LINE
Date Filed `4 3 `E Fee Pd. VA Receipt No.
Hearing Date _ \ `—\ )Q"k - OCT 041994
Posting Date �`2�S`�l�k Mail Date CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.C. Action G(U 1�1/iAr7rt �iG�. Date la 8 9
Appeal
C.C. Hearing � — � • ��
C.C. Action �2�0.�3�.�_f Date
P
0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(714)644-3225
March 24, 1993
Ms. Meg Vaughn
Staff Analyst
California Coastal Commission
245 W. Broadway, Ste. 380
P.O. Box 1450
Long Beach, CA 90802-4416
SUBJECT: Analysis of the Consistency of the Circulation Improvement and Open Space
Agreement (CIOSA Development Agreement) with the Newport Beach Certified
Local Coastal Program. Land Use Plan
Dear Ms. Vaughn,
This letter and analysis is in response to your correspondence dated March 11, 1993 wherein you
requested additional information from the City regarding the consistency of the CIOSA
Development Agreement with the City's certified Land Use Plan. Your letter indicated five sites
in question as to the proposed project's consistency with the certified Land Use Plan. In our
telephone conversation you indicated that one of those five sites was Bayview Landing. I am not
addressing this site here because the consistency has been resolved by the Commission's action on
LCP amendment 3-92 in February. The remaining sites in question are Upper Castaways,
Newporter North, Jamboree/MacArthur and San Diego Creek North. Each is discussed
individually below.
Lipper Castaways
You have indicated that an LCP amendment may be needed for this site due to discrepancies in
the Land Use Plan map contained in the LCP and the Planned Community Text exhibits attached
to the CIOSA Agreement. The City of Newport Beach does not believe there is any discrepancy
between the two documents, and that there is no need for an LCP amendment for the following
reasons:
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
Ms. Meg Vaughn
California Coastal Comnution
Page 2.
Comparing the level of detail between the LCP Maps and the PC Text Maps attached to the
CIOSA Agreement is inappropriate since they are intended to provide for different levels of
planning specificity. The LCP maps are similar in detail to a General Plan. The PC Text Maps
are similar in detail to zoning specificity. State Planning Law requires that "diagrams"
accompany the General Plan Text. These diagrams are intended only to show general land
use relationships, and are not as regulatory in nature as a zoning ordinance map. The
diagrams with the text should provide a rational basis for planning -related regulations. Since
there is no definition as to the level of specificity required for LCP, Land Use Plan exhibits,
the City of Newport Beach has used the General Plan concept contained in the State General
Plan guidelines for the LCP maps.
2. The maps contained in the LCP, Land Use Plan are not intended to be used separate and apart
from the LUP text. Rather, the maps and text should be used together in order to determine a
projects consistency with the Plan. In this case, the plan text amplifies the maps by clearly
indicating that "This development shall incorporate a public park and viewing area of
approximately 10 acres parallel to the bluffs, including adequate parking. Any development
on the site shall be sited and designed to adequately protect and buffer the environmentally
sensitive area(s) on this site"* It is the position of the City of Newport Beach that this
language provides sufficient latitude for the delineation in the CIOSA Agreement of the
development and dedication areas as proposed.
3. The City of Newport Beach considers its General Plan and LCP to be permissive for
institutional, infrastructure and open space land uses, since these are generally public benefit
uses which are of lesser intensity than economic land uses such as residential, commercial and
industrial. Other developments in the Coastal Zone have been approved with reductions in the
development area caused by right-of-way dedications, bus turn outs and landscape buffers.
One project with the development area so reduced is the Villa Point Phase Two condominium
project.
Newporter North:
The rationale for consistency for the Newporter North site is the same as for the Upper
Castaways site. In this particular case, the text in the Land Use Plan is even more clear as to the
potential restriction of the development area of the site. Specifically, the text states "Precise
mapping of sensitive resource areas is required prior to approval of development on the
remainder of the site. No development of these areas is permitted, and any development of this
site shall be sited and designed to adequately protect and buffer the environmentally sensitive
area(s) on this site"' Clearly, some adjustments to the development area of this site are
anticipated by the text.
Ms. Meg Vaughn
California Coastal Comm
Page 3.
Jamboree/MacArthur:
The rationale for consistency with the certified land use plan for this is a combination of item 3
discussed under Upper Castaways with other policies regarding environmentally sensitive habitat
areas contained in the land use plan. These policies (starting.on Page 20) limit the use of sites
with certain types of habitats. Included on the list of sensitive areas are riparian areas and
freshwater marshes. The Jamboree/MacArthur site is occupied by a well developed riparian
wetland, which has some relationship to the San Joaquin Marsh area in the City of Irvine.
Preservation of this wetland is not considered feasible in association with the ±50,000 sq.ft. of
office entitlement contained in the certified LUP. The Irvine Company has proposed to dedicate
the site for open space purposes, and abandon the entitlement. It is the position of the City that
the intent not to use established entitlement does not create inconsistency with the LUP.
San Diego Creek North:
The rationale for consistency with the certified LUP for the proposed use of San Diego Creek
North is similar to that for JamboreelMacArthur. In this particular case, a portion of the site is
designated as open space for the purpose of preserving an identified wildlife corridor between the
San Joaquin Marsh and Upper Newport Bay. This requirement would allow for a finding of
consistency with ESHA policies of the certified LUP. The use of the remainder of the site for
public facilities is in part already allowed in the LUP, since a fire station reservation is included in
the area description for the site. Once again, The Irvine Company has determined to dedicate the
site for public and open space uses, and abandon the entitlement allowed in the LUP. It is the
position of the City that the intent not to use entitlement does not create inconsistency with the
LUP.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide information to you prior the completion of your staff
report for the CIOSA Agreement. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please give me a call at (714) 644-3225.
Very truly yours,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
By "L
Patricia L. Temple 17
Advance Planning Manager
tw
APPRAISAL REPORT
NEWPORTER NORTH SITE
t 89.2 ACRE RESIDENTIAL SITE
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
Date of Report: Submitted to:
November 8, 1990 Mr. Thomas O. Redwitz
Vice President
Land Development, Irvine Pacific
550 Newport Center Drive
Suite 700
P.O. Box 1
Newport Beach, California 92658-8904
Date of Value: Submitted by:
August 1, 1990 Fuller & Associates
3 Civic Plaza
Suite 255
Newport Beach, CA 92660
ORANGE COUNTY
SUITE 255
3 CIVIC PLAZA
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660
AREA CODE 71.
TELEPHONE 644-AO40
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
REAL ESTATE
APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS
RICHARD A. FULLER. MAI
TELECOPIER
(7141 64A-4065
November 8, 1990
Mr. Thomas O. Redwitz
Vice President
Land Development, Irvine Pacific
550 Newport Center Drive
Suite 700
P.O. Box 1
Newport Beach, California 92653-8904
Dear Mr. Redwitz:
•
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
SUITE B
5122AVENIOA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92OOB
AREA CODE 619
TELEPHONE 434-70SO
RE: Appraisal of ±89.2 acre Newporter
North Site, Newport Beach,
California
In accordance with our proposal dated October 10, 1990, and your authorization dated
October 15, 1990, we have made an examination of the above -referenced property for the
purpose of estimating it's fair market value as of August 1, 1990. Based upon your
instruction, the value of the subject property has been estimated under the following
development alternatives:
1) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units and required
park dedication requirement ranging from (A) 2.4 acres (46.6 developable
acres, 4.55 D.U./acre) to (B) 4.0 acres (45.0 developable acres, 4.71
D.U./acre);
2) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units and 9.0 acres
of park dedication (40.0 developable acres, 5.30 D.U./acre).
FAIR MARKET VALUES
As a result of this investigation and an analysis of matters pertinent to the property's
value, we have concluded that the fair market values thereof, as of said date, were as
follows:
1A) 212 Units, 2.4 Acre Park Dedication:
$68,200,000
1 B) 212 Units, 4.0 Acre Park Dedication:
$67,200,000
2) 212 Units, 9.0 Acre Park Dedication:
$56,500,000
SCOPE OF ASSIGNMENT
The scope of this assignment has been to physically inspect the subject property;
complete a market data study of the comparable market data; analyze the physical
characteristics of the subject property; compare the market data to the subject property;
and form an opinion as to the fair market value of the subject property.
REPORT FORM
In the interest of brevity, and by specific instructions of the client, this report is herein
submitted in summary form. All market data, factual data, reasoning, computations,
descriptions, analyses, and discussions, from which, in part, the valuation conclusion was
derived, have been retained in our files, and is partially summarized within this report.
This report has been prepared in -conformity with Regulation No.10 "Code of Professional
Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct" of the American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal is to express an opinion of the fair market value of the
Newporter North site, under the development alternatives set out above, as of August 1,
1990.
2
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
USE OF THE APPRAISAL
The function of this appraisal is for disposition purposes.
DEFINITION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE
"The most probable price, as of.a specified date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash,
or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell
after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to fair
sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self-interest,
and assuming that neither is under undue duress." - The Aporraisai of Real Estate, The
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 9th Edition.
Fee, simple estate.
NATURE OF INTEREST APPRAISED
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This appraisal has been based upon the following assumptions and limiting conditions:
1) That we assume no responsibility for matters legal in character, nor do we
render any opinion as to the title which is assumed to be good. All existing
liens, and encumbrances, securing payment of money, have .been
disregarded, and the property is appraised as though free and clear under
responsible ownership and competent management.
2) That information obtained for use in this appraisal is believed to be true and
correct to .the best of our ability, however, no responsibility is assumed for
errors or omissions, or for information not disclosed which might otherwise
affect the valuation estimate.
3) Disclosure of the contents of this appraisal report is governed by the
By -Laws and Regulations of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers,
of which Mr. Fuller is a member.
4) Neither all, nor any part, of the contents of this report (especially any
conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers, or the firm with which
they are connected, or any reference to the American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers, or the MAI designation) shall be disseminated to the public
through advertising media, public relations, news media, sales media,,or any
other public means of communication without prior written consent and
approval of the undersigned.
5) That this valuation estimate is of surface rights only, and the valuation of
mineral rights, if any, has been disregarded.
3
FuLLER & ASSOCIATES
1, I, 0 •
6) That no warranty is made as to the seismic stability of the subject property.
7) That the appraisers, by reason of this appraisal, are not required to give
testimony, or attendance in court with reference to the property appraised,
unless arrangements have been previously made thereof.
8) That the submission of this report constitutes completion of the services
authorized. It is submitted upon the condition that the client will provide the
appraisers customary compensation relating to any subsequent required
depositions, conferences, additional preparation, or testimony.
9) That, by specific instructions of the client, this report will not be prepared for
litigation purposes. If this matter is adjudicated in any manner, the appraiser
reserves the right to prepare a comprehensive narrative report, at an
additional fee, and to further review and verify the data upon which the
estimate of value is based.
10) That Preliminary Title Report No. OR-1549930, dated May 24, 1990, and
prepared by First American Title Insurance, sets out all the covenants,
conditions, restrictions, and easements which encumber the subject
property, as of the date of value, and that these conditions of title do not,
affect the future developability of the subject property, in accordance with
the development alternatives provided by the client.
11) That as a soil report was not available to the appraisers, subsoil conditions
are considered favorable for development, but no guarantee of same is
implied here.
12) That, as no hydrology studies were available for review, it is assumed that
any drainage sheet flow through the subject property would be contained,
and the property under appraisement would not be subject to inundation.
13) That as no legal description was available for review, it is assumed that the
subject property is a portion of Block 55 Irvine's Subdivision, and is as set
out on the Parcel Map contained within this report.
14) That an inconsistency exists between the Assessors size estimate of 85.47
acres and the 89.2 acre size estimate provided by the client. For purposes
of this appraisal the 89.2 acre size estimate is assumed to be correct;
however it is recognized that the Constraint Map prepared by Adams
Streeter Civil Engineers, dated September 7, 1990 sets out the net parcel
size as 86.447 acres which is assumed to exclude the required street
dedication adjacent to San Joaquin Hills Road.
15) That all maps and exhibits included within this report are for illustration
purposes only, and are set out to assist the reader in visualizing the
property.
4
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
,, 0 0
16) That unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous
substances, including without limitation asbestos, urea formaldehyde, foam
insulation, polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum leakage, or agricultural
chemicals, which may or may not be present on the property, or other
environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did the
appraisers become aware of such during the appraiser's inspection. The
value estimated is predicated on the assumption that there is no such
condition on or in the property or in such proximity thereto that it would
cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions,
nor for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them.
17) That by instruction of the client, the value of the subject property has been
estimated under the following development alternatives.
1) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units
and required park dedication requirement ranging from (A) 2.4
acres (46.6 developable acres, 4.55 D.U./acre) to (B),4.0 acres
(45.0 developable acres, 4.71 D.U./acre);
2) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units
and 9.0 acres of park dedication (40.0 developable acres, 5.30
D.U./acre).
18) That the estimate of 40.2 acres for slopes and natural areas, as provided by
the client, includes all undevelopable slopes, natural areas, and required
street dedications.
19) That the development cost estimates provided by the client have not been
independently verified, however are assumed to be correct.
20) That, the cost estimate to mitigate or salvage the existing archaeological site
were provided by the client and have not been independently verified,
however are assumed to be correct.
21) That a review of the Preliminary Noise Study for Irvine Pacific Projects,
prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, Report No. 90-235, dated September
14, 1990 indicates that the subject site is located outside the Airport 60 dB
CNEL Noise Contour Zone.
22) That the basis for allocation of lots with significant views was the View
Opportunity Study, prepared by the SWA Group, dated October, 1990,
which was assumed to be correct.
5
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Identification:
The subject property is referred to as the Newporter North site, and is identified
as Assessor's Parcels 440-132-21 and 24.
Location:
The subject property is located at the southwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and
San Joaquin Hills Road, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of
California.
Legal Description:
As no legal description was available for review, it is assumed that the subject
property is a portion of Block 55 Irvine's Subdivision, and is as set out on the
Parcel Map contained within this report.
Parcel Size and Shape:
The subject property is assumed to contain 89.2 gross acres, and is irregular in
shape. Estimates of the developable area for each development alternative are set
out in the Highest and Best Use Section of this report.
Contour and Draina9e:
Contour:
The subject property is comprised of a predominately level bluff top mesa,
and steep bluffs which adjoin Upper Newport Bay. John Wayne Gulch
traverses through the southerly portion of the site. Elevations vary 10 feet
above sea level, adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay, to ±120 feet above sea
level at the bluff top.
Draina9e:
In the northerly portion of the site, drainage sheet flow is generally in a
westerly direction. In the southerly portion of the site drainage sheet flow
is in to John Wayne Gulch which drains into the Upper Newport Bay.
C
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
r . t . '�-+++,-ws:: �.. • i �!�'(T. �'i w s. ;.#1SMY �! � i"A yF _ -• -s..07
s • ii' S
Y Y
�S
1 i�4
' 4 Y
_ ._ .w- �,?. ��•^... r - �.� ..,I •.i� r � -TEA
Access and Streets:
Access:
Pacific Coast Highway (State Highway 1):
Pacific Coast Highway (State Highway 1) is located ±1/2 mile south
of the subject property. This highway is the major coastal access
route through Orange County and is paved from 4 to 8 lanes.
Streets
Jamboree Road:
Jamboree Road adjoins the southeasterly boundary of the subject
property. This road is paved to 6 lanes with a center median and is
improved with concrete curbs and gutters, and sidewalks.
Jamboree Road is designated as a major arterial highway, (6 lane
divided highway with 128 foot right of way), on the City's Master Plan
of Streets.
San Joaquin Hills Road:
San Joaquin Hills Road adjoins the northerly boundary of the subject
property. This road is paved to 4lanes and is improved with concrete
curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Back Bay Drive:
Back Bay Drive adjoins the northwesterly boundary of the subject
property. This road is paved to 1 lane with a bike path.
Land Use:
Jurisdiction:
City of Newport Beach
Existing Municipal Zoning:
Designation:
PC -Planned Community District
(No adopted PC development text)
7
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
,p I.
VIEW FROM JAMBOREE WEST
11
WEST
NEWPORTER NORTH
VISUA1- ANALI'SIS
I:XIS•I'IN(; VIEWS FROM JAMBOREE
I•I:I p �RI p I , n. II:, I\I 1.4 II II � PI•\ 1 I ,11•,11 \ I
I•Rt 1'\I<I 11111 IIII ll1 U,RI111•
VIM IAWAI II IN Al l
The purpose of the PC Zone is to provide for the classification and
development of parcels of land as coordinated, comprehensive
projects so as to take advantage of the superior environment which
can result from large-scale community planning.
This district is designed to include various types of land uses, such
as single-family residential developments, multiple housing
developments, professional and administrative areas, commercial
centers, industrial parks or any public or quasi -public use or
combination of uses, through the adoption of a Development Plan
and text materials which 'set forth land use relationships and
development standards.
General Plan:
Designation:
The northern portion of the site is designated as Single Family
Attached, with a maximum of 212 dwelling units allowed. This
designation of Single Family Attached represents an anticipated
development type, and is not intended to limit development to only
that type. This area may be developed with any of the residential
product types within the established dwelling unit limit.
Bluff areas and environmentally sensitive resource areas are
designated for Recreational and Environmental Open Space. Precise
mapping of sensitive areas is required prior to approval of
development on the remainder of the site. No development of these
areas is permitted.
Recreation and Open Space Element:
The Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan
discusses the subject site as follows:
A special view park of 4 acres is designated at this site. The
park will be located at the bluffs and will provide viewing
opportunities with some traditional neighborhood park
recreational facilities to serve area residents. An optional
access road and parking similar to Ocean Avenue in Corona
del Mar is proposed. This option would be exercised at the
discretion of the City.
E-1
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Park Dedication:
Chapter 19.50 of the City's Subdivision Code authorizes the City to require,
as a condition of approval of a tentative Subdivision map or parcel map, the
dedication ofland or payment of fees in lieu of, for the development of parks
and recreational facilities.
Where a park or recreational facility has been designated in the recreational
element of the General Plan within the proposed subdivision, the subdivider
shall dedicated land for a park.
The amount of land to be dedicated is computed by multiplying the average
number of persons per dwelling unit (2.25 persons per household) by the
number of units in the subdivision, and then multiplying by the acres of park
per 1,000 persons (5 acres) and dividing by 1,000. The calculated park
dedication requirement for the subject site is 2.4 acres.
If there is no park or recreational facility designated in the recreational
element of the General Plan to be located within the proposed subdivision,
or'if the proposed subdivision contains 50 parcels or less, the subdivider
shall, pay a fee in lieu of dedication of land. This fee is currently $6,894.37
per dwelling unit.
Local Costal Program:
Designation:
Low Density Residential (4 D.U. per buildable acre)
25% of the allowable units are transferable to either Newport Center
or North Ford at the option of the property owner.
The Local Coastal Program discusses the subject site as follows:
The structures shall be clustered to accommodate
archaeological sites and marsh sites. A public
bikeway/walkway is proposed for this site. Any development
on this site shall be sited and designed to adequately protect
and buffer the environmentally sensitive areas on this site.
E
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
x
R �(
_fir`'• V-o,, y
ti.'
LEGEND
UTILITY COMPANIES
'
� KRYOr La.
r.Wawr w� ,uu
uK WATER
arr s Kwr a.w
31m KWr YULvw
— C.rtLIIK
aVwt aLw.w We.
[IIIQf L1Yf
SEWER
^•
_ IronLaooic.L nrt
r[vwr r.a. u r,wr
:i...
avr Ka,.nal
ola ufzn
xr
3
GAS
ruvmu W.
Y.KIn, u ulw
'
ELECT.
rp i im iiu[i� muo. w
�
M,L w. a raLl
vlo u✓Lw
TELEPHONE,r1eN
rww rPU. M lm
OIp .1,•)lll
.?JW
p4
HF�A
4
C O N S T R A I N T S M A P
NEWPORTER NORTH • NEWPORT BEACH • CALIFORNIA
x
rr[rLKo rw. nnK mine mrwr
ne KVwr mw. rM
Kwr ruo,. u
.a,.v ... ww. naLm euu miKm.iK_
intK. u on
Archaeological Sites:
Eight archaeological sites are identified as being located within
the subject property. Seven of them are located within the
undevelopable slopes and natural areas of the site. The
significant archaeological site is located in the central portions
of the property and comprises ±15 acres of developable
blufftop area. Salvage or mitigation of these archaeological
sites would be required as a condition of development on the
subject property.
Easements:
A Southern California Edison easement traverses through the,
southerly portion of the site. The City of Newport Beach owns
an easement for drainage purposes in the central portions of
the site.
Preliminary Noise Study:
A review was made of the Preliminary Noise Study for Irvine Pacific Projects,
prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, report No. 90-235, dated September
14, 1990. The following are findings of this report:
1) The projected worst case unmitigated noise level at the site is
73.1 dB CNEL, adjacent to Jamboree Road.
2) The site is located outside of the airport 60 dB CNEL noise
contour. Noise exposure from the airport on the site is
estimated at 57 dB.
3) Mitigation recommendations are dependant upon location of
development. If living units are constructed adjacent to
Jamboree Road, walls as high as 7.5 feet will be required.
4) The installation of mechanical ventilation is recommended due
to aircraft noise.
11
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Utilities:
Water:
Available, City of Newport Beach
Sewer:
Available, City of Newport Beach
Natural Gas:
Available, Southern California Gas Company
Electricity:
Available, Southern California Edison Company
Telephone:
Available, Pacific Bell Company
Present Use•
The subject property is currently vacant and unimproved.
Highest and Best Use:
By instruction of the client, the value of the subject property was estimated under
the following development alternatives.
1) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units and
required park dedication requirement ranging from (A) 2.4 acres (46.6
developable acres, 4.55 D.U./acre) to (B) 4.0 acres (45.0 developable
acres, 4.71 D.U./acre);
2) With existing General Plan Entitlement of 212 residential units and 9.0
acres of park dedication (40.0 developable acres, 5.30 D.U./acre).
12
FULLER & AssocIATES
Oro,r�w • -}✓yam. 1 �A
it
�M{`,,y-� - •.••- • •-�g�-. - JAMBOREE R�--- � i - l 1, __ �_ ,.�,:._... ,_ rr_•
14444
��—�y`Z1•�� "-�-`:tam �_+'.,.�- r.—f.resar�4.J_.�Yi J��, _ = � • .. _ •' J , � - , �`\�(1 � •'�ti 1' �j. _ ,r
.7
°'- DEVELOPMENT AREA
.yam• ••3i%' y >`iJ_ r� Y�• ' I .:�i I ,` JOHN WAYNI: C
K N EWPORT i'- '� '# �� - r. i i:,• � �, i
VIEW PARKrl
SCENARIO NO.
1A&B,2
VIEW PARK
71
UPPER NEWPORT BAY
KNOLL
...mo,4 ro
NEWPORTER NORTH'
V'VT-TTRTT XM
VALUATION SUMMARY
Introduction:
The market data approach was utilized in estimating the fair market value of the subject
site under the various development alternatives. This approach to value involved
comparing sales of similar properties, in a finished condition, to the subject property,
as if in a finished condition. After adjusting the market data for differences, the value
of a non -view finished lot on the subject site was estimated for each development
alternative.
A premium was added to the lots in each alternative which were considered to have
significant views. The estimated costs to finish the subject site, and the estimated
archaeological site mitigation costs, were deducted from these values to arrive at the
estimated fair market value of the subject property in the as is condition for each
development alternative.
Method of Valuation.
Scope of Market Data Search:
In the valuation of the subject property, a search was made for sales of comparable
properties. Special emphasis was placed on properties located in Newport Beach
and the surrounding area.
In all, several items of market data were discovered with varying degrees of
comparability to the subject property. Of these, 12 items of market data were_
considered most pertinent in this analysis. The Market Data Summary on the
following pages set out a summary of each transaction. By instruction of the client,
the details of these transactions have been retained in our files.
Value Estimate For Non -View, Finished Lots:
In analyzing each item of market data, a comparison was made between the
market data and the non -view finished lots within the subject property.
Consideration was given to differences in date of sale, terms of sale, land use,
location, parcel size, views from parcel, and estimated costs to finish.
13
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUMMARY
Newport Coast Planned Community
No.
Identification Net Acres Units Density a Date
Sale Price
S/Acre
Unit
1
Area 2B1-3/4 28.7 58 2.0 5/90 (1)
$25,534,014
$ 889,687
$440,242
Bramalea SFD 6/90 (2)
2
Area 2A1-1 35 80 2.3 6/90 (2)
$30,885,378
$ 687,511
$386,067
J.M. Peters Co. SFD
•
3
Area 2A-2 10.4 36 3.5 5/90 0)
$ 9,683.340
$ 931,090
$268,982
RecreActions SFA 6/90 (2)
4
Area 2131A/2 18.7 134 7.2 5/90 (1)
$20,742,712
$1,109,236
$154,796
Bren Co. SFA 6/90 (2)
5
Area 2A-2 9.5 72 7.6 5/90 (1)
$10,466,958
$1,101,785
$145,374
RecreActions SFA 6/90 (2)
All sites are being sold in a raw condition.
80% Financing was offered at 1% over prime, with the balance due in 1 year.
The Irvine Company Is involved with a profit participation program on all projects.
All sites are subject to an Assessment District Lien and proposed Mello Roos District for school facilities.
•
(1) Closed on model complex.
(2) Projected closing of Phase I.
RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUMMARY
Turtle Rock and Tustin Ranch
No.
Identification
Net Acres
Units
0
Sale Dat
Sale Price
$/Acre
Unit
1
Turtle Rock -Enclave VII
48.4
127
2.6
4/04/89
$39,701,830
$820,286-
$312,613
SFD, Tract 12022
Standard Pacific (1)
•
2
Turtle Rock -Enclave VII
7.9
77
9.8
6/08/89
$3,857,060
$488;235
$ 50,092
Lots 5-11, Tract 12022
Standard Pacific (1)
3
Tustin Ranch IV
14.0
55
3.9
6/18/90
$9,667,295
$690,521
$175,769
Lot 26, Tract 13627
Cameo Homes (2)
4
Tustin Ranch IV
29.9
151
5.1
6/28/90
18,404,784
$615,545
$121,886
Lots 7 & 8, Tract 13627
Lewis Homes (2)
5
Tustin Ranch IV
15.25
91
6.0
6/28/90
$8,150.000
$534,426
$ 89,560
Lots 5 & 6, Tract 13627
A-M Homes (2)
•
6
Tustin Ranch IV
12.50
77
6.2
6/26/90
$7,428,390
$594,271
$ 96,473
Lot 1, Tract 13627
Fieldstone (2)
7
Tustin Ranch IV
8.68
74
8.5
6/22/90
$5,336,032
$614,750
$72,109
Lot 3, Tract 13627
Baycrest (2)
(1) Sitesoldin unfinished condition.
(2) Site sold in finished condition.
500
450
EMCA
H
Z
0 350
w
�'a
Z c
vai 300
0 �
w °
V)
f1v
250
200
150
100
Newport Coast Residential Land Sales
$/ADJUSTED FINISHED UNIT vs. DENSITY
(1) Bran
ialea
(2) J I
I Peters
❑ 3
e atia
s
❑ 4 Br
.
C7 (5)
Rcc reatic
ns
3
DENSITY
7
I
U
After adjustments for these factors, and an analysis of the correlation between sale
price per unit and density, the value of a non -view, finished .lot on the subject site
was estimated for each development alternative. These estimates are set out as
follows:
1A),212 Units, 2.4 Acre Park Dedication (4.55 D.U./acre):
$310,000 per lot
1B) 212 Units, 4.0 Acre Park Dedication (4.71 D.U./acre):
$305,000 per lot
2) 212 Units, 9.0 Acre Park Dedication (5.30 D.U./acre):
$260,000 per lot
View Study:
For purposes of this appraisal, an estimate was made as to the number of lots in
each alternative that would have significant views of either the bay, or Fashion
Island and the golf course. The basis for allocation of lots with significant views
was the View Opportunity Study, prepared by the SWA Group, dated October,
1990, which was assumed to be correct. The number of lots with significant views
are estimated as follows:
Alternative
Total No.
Lots with
Lots with
Lots
No.
Lots
Bay Views
FI/Golf Views
W Views
1
212
61
32
119
A&B
2
212
61
32
119
View Premium:
In order to quantify the view premium for lots with views comparable to the subject
property, studies were conducted of sales of similar properties with and without
views. Emphasis was given to residential tracts adjacent to Upper Newport Bay.
Two of the tracts which were of special significance were the Bluffs North area of
Eastbluff and Bayview Terrace. Six paired sales, with and without views, from each
of these tracts were analyzed and are set out on the following pages.
14
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
' �. .. �.- Srt._i'tr_3�{���Y�"-iYik�{si.�".'�j`_; _�JA'�.J n�b'-•{_� .._ -
1, �t`i - .'Si.� . ���@..�;'•." _ F. - .
NEWPORTER NORTH
VIEW OPPORTUNITIES
',:,: IC\NFU ItR IM I.\E MCMC UL% ELOPMENr
. !d 1%RLUM 111 5%%Ac;RULP OCFOUER 1990
7.ONE \ 7 1 j I]1 .]
1'
7ONL- 11 fl it i
Ztl\E C
ter;
Pair No.
1
E
3
4
41
10
VIEW STUDY
Bluffs North Paired Sales
Sale
Sale
Price
Estimated
Address
Plan
view
Date
Price
Difference
Land Value
410 Plata
D
No
5/89
$347,000
$ 88,000
$231.100
2621 Vista Omada
D
Yes
3/89
$435,000
2657 Vista Omada
E
No
10/89
$420,000
$170,000
$291,900
2433 Vista Nobleza
E
Yes
10/89
$590,000
2661 Vista Omada
D
No
2/89
$340,000
$ 95,000
$224,100
2621 Vista Omada
D
Yes
3/89
$435,000
501 Playa
D
No
6/90
$359,000
$161,000
$243,100
527 Playa
D
Yes
7/90
$520,000
304 Otero
T
No
12/88
$345,000
$ 65,000
$229,100
430 Vista Parada
T
Yes
11/88
$410,000
2659 Vista Omada
T
No
5/90
$360,000
$ 95,000
$244,100
2653 Vista Omada
T
Yes
8/90
$455,000
view
Premium
38%
(42%)
58%
(67%)
42%
(47%)
66%
(75%)
28% .
(31 %)
39%
(44%)
Pair No.
1
2
3
4
5
VIEW STUDY
Bayview Terrace Paired
Sales
Sale
Sale
Price
Estimated
View
Address
lean
View
Dee
Price
Difference
Land Value
Premium
71 Pelican
5
No
5/90
$450,000
_
$125,000
$310,600
40%
48 Cormorant
5
Yes
7/90
$515,000
(69%)
•
17 Cormorant
5
No
9/88
$351,000
$ 64,000
$211,600
30%
34 Cormorant
5
Yes
8/88
$415,000
(46%)
25 Cormorant
5
No
8/88
$340,000
$ 85,000
$200,600
42%
38 Cormorant
5
Yes
9/88
$425,000
(63%)
25 Cormorant
5
No
8/88
$340.000
$ 80,000
$200,600
40%
14 Cormorant
5
Yes
9/88
$420,000
(59%),
17 Cormorant
5
No
9/88
$351,000
$ 74,000
$211,600
%
38 Cormorant
5
Yes
9/88
$425,000
(53 %) •
44 Gannet Lane
5
No
7/90
$420,000
$155,000
$280,600
55%
48 Cormorant
5
Yes
7/90
$575,000
(92%)
To estimate the view premium from each of the paired sales, the difference in sale
price was divided by the estimated land value of the nonview lot. The land value
of the nonview lot was estimated by two methods, first by estimating the
depreciated value of the improvements and subtracting it from the sale price, and
secondly by multiplying the sale price by an estimated land -to -value ratio.
The extracted view premiums range from 28% to 92%. Based upon an inspection
of the views from the paired sales and the views from the subject site, it was
concluded that a 65% view premium would be appropriate for those lots with bay
views, and a 25% view premium for lot with Fashion Island and golf course views.
Site Development Costs:
A cost of $75,000 per net acre was estimated to develop the site from its existing
raw condition to a mass graded condition with utilities available. A cost of $125,000
per net acre was estimated to develop the site from a mass graded condition to a
finished condition where fine grading is completed and onsite streets and utilities
are in place. These development cost estimates were provided by the client and
have not been independently verified, however are assumed to be correct.
The estimated cost of $200,000 ($125,000 + $75,000) per net acre was deducted
from the estimates of value for the site in a finished condition, to conclude an
estimate of value for the site in an unfinished condition, before archaeological
mitigation.
Archaeological Site Mitigation Costs:
The client estimated the cost to salvage or mitigate the archaeological site located
within the subject property to be between $2 to $4 million dollars. An estimate of
$3 million dollars was considered to be reasonable by the appraisers.
The estimated archaeological site mitigation costs of $3 million dollars was
deducted from the estimates of value for the site in an unfinished condition, to
conclude at an estimate of value for the site in the as is condition.
15
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Value Calculations:
Based upon the above analyses, the estimates of fair market value for each
development alternative are calculated as follows:
1A) 212 Units. 2.4 Acre Park Dedication (4.55 D.U./acre):
Non -View Lots:
119 Non -View Lots @ $310,000/Lot $36,890;000
Fashion Island/Golf Course View Lots:
32 FI/GC View Lots @ $387,500/Lot $12,400,000
Bay View Lots:
61 Bay View Lots @ $511,500/Lot $31,201,500
Subtotal $80,491,500
Less Development Costs:
46.6 Acres @ $200,000/Acre ($ 9,320,000)
Less Archaeological Mitigation Costs:
Lump Sum ($ 3.000.0001
Total $68,171,500
Round To $6 28. 00,000
1B) 212 Units. 4.0 Acre Park Dedication (4.71 D.U./acre):
Non -View Lots:
119 Non -View Lots @ $305,000/Lot $36,295,000
Fashion Island/Golf Course View Lots:
32 F.I./G.C. View Lots @ $381,250/Lot $12,200,000
16
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Bay View Lots:
61 Bay View Lots @ $503,250/Lot
Subtotal
Less Development Costs:
45.0 Acres @ $200,000/Acre
Less Archeological Mitigation Costs:
Lump Sum
Total
Round To
$30,698,250
$79,193,250
($ 9,000,000)
($_3.000.000)
$67,193,250
$67 20 000
2) 212 Units, 9.0 Acre Park Dedication (5.30 D.U./acre):
Non -View Lots:
119 Non -View Lots @ $260,000/Lot $30,940,000
Fashion Island/Golf Course View Lot:
32 FI/GC View Lots @ $325,000/Lot
Bay View Lots:
61 Bay View Lots @ $429,000/Lot
Subtotal
Less Development Costs:
40.0 Acres @ $200,000/Acre
Less Archaeological Mitigation Costs:
Lump Sum
Total
Round To
17
$10,400,000
$26,169,000
$67,509,000
($ 8,000,000)
($ 3.000.000)
$56,509,000
$ 6 500 000
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Conclusion of Value:
After careful consideration of the foregoing data, and other factors, it is our opinion
that the fair market values of the subject property, based on the assumptions and
limiting conditions, and development alternatives, set out elsewhere in this report, as
of August 1, 1990, were as follows:
FAIR MARKET VALUES
1A) 212 Units, 2.4 Acre Park Dedication:
$68,200,000
1 B) 212 Units, 4.0 Acre Park Dedication:
$67,200,000
2) 212 Units, 9.0 Acre Park Dedication:
$56,500,000
.S
ResL
Ric
Andrew Brooks
RAF/AB:jhz
90-22
Newporter North
18
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
QUALIFICATIONS OF RICHARD A FULLER MAI
APPRAISER AND CONSULTANT
Orange County San Diego County
Suite 255 Suite B
3 Civic Plaza 5122 Avenida Encinas
Newport Beach, California 92660 Carlsbad, California 92008
(714) 644-4040 (619) 434-7050
Education:
Degrees:
University of Southern California B.S. 1961
University of Southern California M.B.A. 1963
Special pr) isal Courses:
American Institute of Real Estate Ap raiser :
Theories and Principles
1965
Real Estate Appraisal Problems
1971
Single Family Properties
1971
Leasehold Interests
1972
Litigation Valuation
1981
Professional:
Member, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 1972
Member, California Association of Realtors 1984
Member, National Association of Realtors 1972
Member, International Right of Way Association 1986
Expert Witness:
Superior Court of California:
County of Orange
County of Riverside
County of San Diego
United States District Court:
Central District of California
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
.. r
Circuit Court of Oregon:
County of Douglas
Classification:
California Savings and Loan - Class IV
Licenses:
State of California:
Real Estate Broker (Active)
General Building Contractor (Inactive)
State of Oregon:
Real Estate Appraiser (Inactive)
Experience:
Real Estate Appraiser - Associated with
American Savings and Loan Association
Real Estate Appraiser - Associated with
George Hamilton Jones, MAI
Independent Real Estate Appraiser
Fuller & Associates
Credentials:
California Community College - Real Estate
Faculty:
Instructor, Advanced Appraisal,
Mira Costa College
Instructor, Advanced Appraisal,
Orange Coast College
Senior Lecturer, Real Estate Valuation.
University of Southern California
Instructor, Real Estate Development,
Lane Community College
1966
1970
ifti77i;
1964 - 1966
1966 - 1970
1970 - Present
Lifetime
1973 - 1974
1974 - 1975
1976 - 1977
1980
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Approved Faculty Member, Capitalization Theory
and Techniques, Case Studies in Real Estate
Valuation Analysis and Report Writing, Basic
Valuation Procedures, American Institute of
Real Estate Appraisers 1983 - 1989
Publications:
"Appraisal of a Proposed Residential Subdivision
Development", Encyclopedia of Real Estate Appraising,
Third Ed., Published in 1978, Prentice Hall, Inc.
Partial List of Clients:
Lggai and Accounting Firms:
Belcher, Henzie & Biggenzahn
Butler, Husk, Gleaves & Swearingen
Carlile & McDonough
Cox, Castle & Nicholson
John C. Cushman
Daubney, Banche, Patterson, O'Neal, Nares & Reed
Drummy, Garrett, King & Harrison
Endeman, Lincoln, Turek & Heater
Ernst & Whinney
Flint & McKay
Higgs, Fletcher & Mack
Jennings, Engstrand & Henriksoh
Johnson, Bannon, Wohlwent & Johnston
Lanak & Hanna
Michael Kenney
Krusemark & Bertani
Layman, Jones & Dye
Latham & Watkins
George Lenahan
Manoukian, Scarpello & Alling, Ltd.
Martin, Bischoff, Templeton, Biggs & Ericsson
McColgan & Vann!
Minihan, Kernutt, Stokes & Company
Raphael Metzger
O'Melveny & Myers
Paone, Callahan, McHolm & Winton
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker
Penney and Penney
Poindexter & Doutre
Price Waterhouse & Company
Roberts, Cormack & Johnson
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Rogers & Wells
Rutan & Tucker
Tully H. Seymour
Saxon, Alt, Dean, Mason, Brewer & Kincannon
Simon & Sheridan
Robert Waldron
Wallace & Deatherage
Wenke, Burge & Taylor
Wright, Finley & Behrens
Banks and-Savinas and Loan Associations:
Alcal Financial Corporation
Central Savings & Loan
Coast Savings & Loan
Crocker National Bank
Farmers Savings and Loan Association
Financial Federation
First Credit Bank
Great Western Bank
Home Capital Corporation
Home Savings of America
Imperial Savings and Loan Association
Newport Balboa Savings
San Diego Trust & Savings
Santa Ana First Federal Savings and Loan Association
Santa Monica Bank
Sears Savings Bank
Security Pacific National Bank
Sterling Savings and Loan
Surety Savings and Loan Association
Torrey Pines Bank
Union Bank
Wells Fargo Bank
Corporations:
Acme Rents, Inc.
Aluminum Precision Products
AMFAC Garden Products
Beacon Oil Company
Best Western Hotels
Beckman Instruments
Catalina Swimwear
Celanese Corporation
Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
Chrysler First Business Credit Corporation
iv
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Cities Services Company
Dairyland Insurance Company
Deutsch Company
Electra Motors
Eugene Sand and Gravel, Inc.
Fireman's Fund
Guild Mortgage Company
Gulf and Western Corporation
Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company
Hercules, Inc.
Hughes Aircraft Corporation
Interstate Brands Corporation
Liggett and Myers Corporation
McCullough Oil Corporation
McKesson Corporation
Meade Instruments
Mesa Verde Country Club
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance
Prudential Property Insurance
Retirement Center of America
Retlaw Enterprises, Inc.
Royal Insurance Company
Salomon Brothers
Standard Oil Company of California
Stone & Youngberg
U.S. Amada
Village Green Corporation
Western Electric Corporation
Woolley Enterprises, Inc.
Churches and Foundations:
Father Flanagan's Boys' Home
Foundation to Assist California Teachers
Sherman Foundation
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints
Hospitals:
Greater El Monte Community Hospital
Hoag Memorial Hospital
Kaiser Permanente
McKensie-Willamette Hospital
Sacred Heart General Hospital
Southcoast Medical Center
Tri-City Hospital
v
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
.. .
Government Agencies:
City of Carlsbad
City of Corvallis
City of Del Mar
City of Laguna Beach
City of Newport Beach
City of Oceanside
City of Pomona
City of Poway
City of Roseburg
City of Santa Ana
Costa Real Municipal Water District
County of Orange
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation
Internal Revenue Service
Metropolitan Water District
Ramona Municipal Water District
State of California
United States Postal Service
Real Estate:
Aldor Corporation
American Diversified Companies
Barrett Irvine
Beacon Bay Community Association
Bentall Development
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
Betker-Fredricks Development Company
BSI
Cedra Properties
Chevron Land' and Development Company
Chicago Title Company
Coldwell Banker Management Corporation
Continental Mortgage Insurance
Daon Corporation
DIGiorgio Corporation
DKS Associates
Hermosa Homes
Huntington Beach Company
Investors Mortgage Insurance Company
The Irvine Company
Lawyers, Title Company
The Lusk Company
vi
FULLER & AsSOGIATES
• 0
Manchester Development
Mission Equity
Ord Properties
Safeco Title Insurance Company
Standard Pacific L.P.
Signal Landmark, Inc.
Techbilt Construction Corporation
Title Insurance and Trust Company
Transamerica Title Insurance Company
William Lyon Company
Schools:
Eugene School District No. 4-J
Oceanside Unified School District
Brigham Young University
Mountain View School District
Pepperdine University
Saddleback Community College
Scripps College
Solona Beach School District
Utilities
Eugene Water and Electric Board
Pacific Northwest Bell
Southern California Edison Company
Appraisal Functions Include:
Acquisition
Ground Rental Revaluation
Bankruptcy
Income Tax Appeal
Bond Financing
Inverse Condemnation
Condemnation
Litigation
Disposition
Mortgage Financing
Donation
Negotiation
Estate Tax Appeal
Park in Lieu Fees
Exchange
Partnership Dissolution
Excess Land
Portfolio Review
Federal Grants
Property Tax Appeal
Foreclosure
Redevelopment
vii
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Partial List of Appraisal Assignments:
P li
Airport Extensions, Assessment Districts, Corporate Yards, Dedicated
Streets, Electrical Transmission R/W's, Improvement Districts, Libraries,
Open Space Properties, Park Sites, Prisons, Post Office Sites, Public Right -
of -Way Dedications, Railroad R/W's, Recreation Centers, Reservoir Sites,
Sanitary Land Fills, Sanitation Line R/W's, Sanitation Easements, School
Sites, Sewer Easements, Sewage Treatment Sites, Storm Drain Easements,
Street Widenings, Transportation Centers, Water Line R/W's.
Private:
Agricultural Acreage, Apartment Buildings, Automobile Dealerships, Banks,
Bulk Plants, Church Sites, Commercial Buildings, Condominium Projects,
Equestrian Centers, Historical Buildings, Industrial Buildings, Industrial
Subdivisions, Marinas, Medical Buildings, Mobile Home Parks, Motels,
Ocean Front Properties, Office Buildings, Office Condominiums, Parking
Lots, Private Beaches, Ranches, Residential Subdivisions, River Front
Properties, Sand and Gravel Lands, Service Stations, Shopping Centers,
Subdivision Acreage, Tennis Clubs, Tidelands, Trucking Facilities.
Partial List of Special Appraisal Assignments:
Coyote Hills West - 292.6 acre residential development located in Fullerton.
(Chevron Land and Development Company)
Deutsch Ranch - 250 acre ranch located in Oceanside. (Deutsch Co.)
4-S Ranch - 634 acre Specific Plan Area in North San Diego County. (Ralphs
Family)
Gypsum Canyon - 2,678 acre undeveloped acreage in Orange County. (The Irvine
Company)
Indian Head Ranch - Portion of a 640 acre desert subdivision located in Borrego
Springs. (The DiGiorgio Corporation)
Ivey Ranch - 750 acre planned unit development located in Oceanside. (The
Estate of L.O. Ivey and Home Federal Savings & Loan)
James Musick Facility - 100 acre prison facility with potential industrial farm uses
located in El Toro. (The Irvine Company)
John Wayne Tennis Club - Tennis club located in Newport Beach. (Ticor)
viii
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
" .J r •
Laguna Niguel- 4,600 acre planned unit development in Southern Orange County.
(Avco Community Developers)
Montebello Town Center - Regional shopping center located in Montebello.
(Chevron, .U.S.A.)
Newberry Ranch - 2,260 acre remote desert parcel. (Father Flanagan's Boys'
Home)
Norco Hills/Woodlake Development - 712 acre residential development located in
Corona. (Grant/Owen)
Rancho Bernardo - 986 acres within a planned unit development in North San
Diego County. (McCullough Oil Corporation)
Reeves Ranch - 490 acre residential development located in San Clemente. (The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints)
Retlaw Ranch - Six ranches totaling 3,605 acres located in Riverside, Los Angeles,
and San Diego Counties. (Retlaw Enterprises, Inc.)
San Luis Rey River Flood Control Project - 23 parcels within the Floodway and
Floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, Oceanside. (City of Oceanside)
Shadow Rid9e - 189.3 acre (Phase I and II) residential developmentlocated in
Vista. (Dann Corporation)
Tech Business Center - Proposed 67 lot industrial subdivision for Mello -Roos
financing. (City of Poway)
Interests Appraised:
Fee Simple Estate
Leased Fee Estate
Leasehold Estate
Sandwich Interest
(October, 1990)
ix
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
" .)
Q�IFICATIONS OF ANDREW U AOKS
Orange County
Suite 255
3 Civic Plaza
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 644-4040
Education:
Degrees:
B.S. Stanford University
M.S. Stanford University
Real Estate Courses:
Licenses:
San jalecio Countv
Suite B
5122 Avenida Encinas
Carlsbad, California 92008
(619) 434-7050
American Institute of Real Estate Ap raisers:
1984
1985
Real Estate Appraisal Principals (1A-1)
Basic Valuation Procedures (1A-2)
Standards of Professional Practice (SPP)
Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A (1 B-A)
Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B (1 B-B)
Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation (2-1)
Others:
Real Estate Principals
Real Estate Appraisal
Legal Aspects of Real Estate
Real Estate Finance
Business Law
Real Estate Practice
Property Management
California Real Estate Broker
California General Building Contractor - Class B
Professional Affiliations:
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers - MAI Candidate
Experience
Real Estate Appraiser
Fuller & Associates
Richard A. Fuller, MAI
1986 - Present
i
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
q rJ • •
Partial List of Appraisal Assignments:
600 Acre Mixed Use Development:
600 acre mixed use development comprised of industrial, commercial, and
residential sites located in Rancho Bernardo. (4S Partners)
Residential Lot Pricing Study:
Market pricing studyfor 16 custom residential lots within Irvine Cove, Laguna
Beach. (The Irvine Company)
Anaheim Office Buiidinq:
37,000 sq.ft. office building located in Anaheim. (Kaiser Permanente)
Regional ShoR{�ing Center Site:
Leased fee regional shopping center site located in Montebello.
(Chevron, U.S.A.)
Retail/Office Complex:
Retail/office complex located on Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach.
(Newport Balboa Savings)
Orange County Office and Industrial Buildings:
One office and three industrial buildings located in Orange, Irvine and
Huntington Beach. (LDS Church)
Waterfront Residence:
Single-family bayfront residence located in Newport Beach.
.(City of Newport Beach)
Right of Way Condemnation:
Condemnation of land for road right of way purposes, Laguna Niguel.
(Mission Equities)
Proposed Mid -rise Office Building:
Proposed 3 story, 38,600 sq.ft. office building located in Rancho Santa
Margarita. (Manchester Development/La Jolla Bank and Trust)
ii
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Residential Duplex:
Residential duplex located on Newport Peninsula. (City of Newport Beach)
87 Acre Roodway Site:
87 acre site within the floodplain of the San Dieguito River, San Diego.
(FSLIC)
City
of Oceanside Improvement District:
3330 acre Morro Hills Improvement District for financing of water facilities.
(City of Oceanside/Seidler, Fitzgerald Public Finance)
Leased
Fee Industrial Parcel:
Leased fee interest of industrial parcel in Kearny Mesa.
(San Diego Trust & Savings Bank)
Water
Reservoir Site:
Partial taking of land for proposed water reservoir site located in Carlsbad.
(Costa Real Water District)
Corona
del Mar Residential Lot:
Hillside residential lot located in Corona del Mar. (City of Newport Beach)
Proposed
Residential Development:
384 unit single family residential development in Sun City.
(Ord Properties)
Andrew U. Brooks
(July, 1990)
FULLER & As50C;ATES
h o 11 T 0 0
CERTIFICATION
We, the undersigned, do hereby certify that to the best of our knowledge and belief
except as otherwise noted in this report:
1) That the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2) That the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by
the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal,
unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
3) That we have no present or prospective interest in the properties that are
the subject of this report, and we have no personal interest or bias with
respect to the parties involved.
4) That our compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting
from the analyses, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of, this report.
5) That our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this
report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code
of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the
American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, of which Mr. Fuller is a
member.
6) That the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers relating to review by its duly authorized
representatives.
7) That we have made a personal inspection of the properties that are the
subject of this report.
8) That no one provided significant professional assistance to the persons
signing this report.
9) That as of the date of this report, Richard A. Fuller has completed the
requirements under the continuing education program of the American
Institute of Real -Estate-Appraisers_
(March, 1990)
U. Brooks
FULLER & ASSOCIATES
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public
hearing on the application of The Irvine Company for a series of approvals related to the Circulation
Improvement and Open Space 19ro ment - Development Agresmnt No. 6. In addition to the Development
Agreement, the approval of a Traffic Study pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance is requ *%**d -
Traffic study No. a2. site specific approvals are also included, as follows: ,
Amendment No. 763: A request to amend the Harbor View Hills Planned Community District Regulations and
Development Plan to allow for the construction of 48 dwelling units at 1501 Ford Road - Freeway
Reservation East. The site is located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard between Ford Road and the Nature
Park adjacent to the Harbor View Homes area.
Amendment No. 7641 A request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
Upper Castaways. This request would provide for the construction of 151 dwelling units at 900 Dover
Drive, the site located easterly of Dover Drive between the Restoliff Grove Planned Community and the
Castaways Marina Planned Community.
Amendment No. 766: A request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
Newporter North/Newporter Knoll. This request would provide for the construction of 212 dwelling units
on Newporter North and open space on Newporter Knoll. The site is located at 1501 Jamboree Road, on
the westerly side of Jamboree between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newporter Resort.
DDeevelopment Plan to allowgfortto the amendconstruction oof 3th 00 dwelling unianned ts tit3200District
UniversityyDrive -ns Ban
Diego Creek south. The lite is located northerly of University Drivi between Jamboree Road and Bonita
Creek.
Amendment No. 7471 A request to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for
Bayview Landing. This request would provide for the Construction of either a 10,000 sq-ft. restaurant
or a 40,000 sq.ft. athletic club at 951 Back Bay Drive. The site is located an Jamboree Road between
East Coast Highway and Back Bay Drive.
Amendment No. 768: A request to amend portions of Districting Maps MO. 44 and 66 so as to reclassify
property from the U (Unclassified) District to the P-C (planned Community) District. Also requested
is the adoption of Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan to provide for open
space and public facility use of these sites- The property known as Jamborea/Naohrthur located at 3600
Jamboree Road is bounded by Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and 6R 73: the Property known as San
Diego Creek North located at 3500 Jamboree Road is bounded by San Diego Creek, Jamboree Road and OR 73.
Amendment No. 769: A request to amend the Block 800 Planned Community District Regulations and.
ClementeaDri :an to allow
800,the
construction of Newport Center. 245 The site. iisulocated on senior
theoeasterly corner of at 55 Son
Santa
Barbara Drive and San Clemente Drive.
Amendment No. 7701 Request to amend portions of Districting Nap no. 48 so as to reclassify property
from the U (Unclassified) and O-s (open space) Districts to the P-C (Planned Community) District, and
to adopt Planned Community District Regulations and Development Plan for the Corporate Plaza Nest
Planned Community. This request would allow for the construction of an additional 94,000 sq.ft- of
office development
(115,000rtq.ft. total) at 1050uDr
ive.
Center Drive. The sit* is located on East
Coast He
rt
connectionwith the applications noted at a above. Environmental
theapr*sent intact ent ono of 4the city to prepared
acceptthe
Program Environmental Impact Report and supporting documents. The City encourages members of the
general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the Environmental Impact Report
and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Department,
City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92659-1768 (714) 644-3225.
Notice is hereby further given that said public hearing will be hold on the ,J= day Of _aU L-, 1992,
at the hour of 7:30 P•m- in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City inHta:330 ted y air
Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time and place any and all persons
and be heard thereon. if you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those
cissues orrespondence delivered to theiCity at, r prior to,lic the hear
ing
eib ring. For information calin this notice or in lr(714)
644-3200.
Norma J. Glover, secretary, Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach.
=TE: The expense of this notice is paid from a filing fee collected from the applicant.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
3300 Newport Boulevard
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach. C/A, 926"-1769
Yu Ron Chung
.,
Alt;:Wl9S:a�^•4 C-�h-ctr_i'i CftO.�'aSU-^:.i2.i.5.�._�
IMPORTANT
Public Hearing Notice 161h11sill dlIId6IIIIIIlIIIII
a 0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
X TRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: May 15. 1992
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: IAmendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records.map.
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW: June 4, 1992
COMMENTS:
Signature: Date:
NEAPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904
Planned Community District Regulations for Newporter North
Ordinance No.
Beach City Council on
adopted by the City of Newport
12/31/91
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Introduction
1
Section
I
General Notes
4
Section
II
Definitions
g
Section
III
Residential Development Standards
9
Permitted Uses
9
Site Density
9
Maximum Building Height
9
Setbacks From Major Streets
9
Setbacks
9
Coastal Bluff Setbacks
10
Streets
10
Landscaping
11
Parking
11
Fences, Hedges and Walls
12
Section
IV
Signs
14
Section
V
Site Plan Review
15
List of Figures
Figure
I
General Site Location
2
Figure
II
Land Use Plan
3
Figure
III
Statistical Analysis
7
Figure
IV
Bluff Setback Exhibit
13
12/31/91
C�
PURPOSE
INTRODUCTION
The Newporter North Planned Community (P-C) District Regulations
have been developed in compliance with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan. This P-C has also been developed pursuant to
Chapter 20.51 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
The purpose of these District Regulations is to provide for the
development of the site as a coordinated, comprehensive project.
This will take advantage of the superior environment which
results from community planning.
Whenever the regulations contained conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained
herein shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate
this development when such regulations are not provided within
these District Regulations. All development within the Planned
Community boundaries shall comply with all provisions of the
Uniform Building Code and various mechanical codes related
thereto.
� ity
INTENT
It is the intent of this P-C District to permit the development
of the Newporter North site for residential dwellings and
associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space.
The units will be located in close proximity to Newport Center
and will provide additional housing opportunities within the
City.
LOCATION
:! e3 c�oa qu,i �� 1S d
Newporter North is bounded by Park r tmen�t-s_tn, the
north, John Wayne Gulch to the southwest, Jamboree Road to the
east, and the Newport Back Bay to the northwest.
1 12/31/91
NEWPORTER NORTH �►�
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
Ll
JOAQUIN
��tsK
Y
G
RESIDENTIAL
PARK
OPEN SPACE/NATURAL AREAS
a
LAND USE (CLAN
NEWPORTER NORTH
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
4
0Z
NOTTO SCALE
r]
SECTION I
GENERAL NOTES
1. PARK STANDARDS,
Parke'requirements shall be in accordance with the adopted
Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement.
2. WATER SERVICE
Water within the Planned Community will be furnished by the
City of Newport Beach.
3. SEWAGE DISPOSAL C OM
Sewage disposa facilities within the Planned Community will
be provided by Orange County Sanitation District No. 5.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, it shall b
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Public Works yx t`(c��,
Department that adequate sewer facilities will be available.
Prior to the occupancy of any structure, it shall be further
demonstrated that adequate sewer facilities exist.
4. GRADING AND EROSION
Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in
accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach
L Grading ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by /
/ ,the Building and Planning Departments. eK�f J. ' .� 6
Building pads adjacent to sl >raising
asAmay be raised
to an elevation not to exceed en (10)above natural
q� grade. This provision does not p pad
J elevat' ove 10 feet on interior portion of site.
VJ Development area slopes may extend a maximum of twent 0
n (20)
i� feet outside the properly line defining the development
area.
Manufactured slopes, if any, shall be stabilized as soon as possible to reduce erosion. �\
Poe-
5. SCREENING
If mechanical appurtenances are to be built on building �y�n�
rooftops, they shall be screened from street level view in a
manner compatible with the building materials.
12/31/91
•
6.
7.
EM
ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the sites shall be
examined to determine the existence and extent of
archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance
with adopted City policies.
A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade
meetings to inform the developer and grading contractors of
the results of the study. In addition, an archaeologist
shall be present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant
cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall
have the authority to stop or temporarily divert
construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess
the significance of the finds.
In the event that significant archaeological remains are
uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall
stop in that area of the subject property until an
appropriate data recovery program can be developed and
implemented. The cost of such a recovery program shall be
the responsibility of the landowner and/or developer.
A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner
and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform
inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be
allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific
area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
The final design of public on -site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation serving viewpark and coastal bluffs shall be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department;
Planning Department; and Parks, Beaches and Recreation.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing provisions shall be consistent with City
standards. Affordable housing requirements may be satisfied
off -site.
NOISE
Detailed noise studies shall be conducted for the
residential development for on -site impacts. Residential
development shall comply with the standard of 45 dBA CNEL
for interior noise levels and 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor living
areas. Noise mitigation programs shall be based upon the
recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in
acoustics and be approved by the Planning Department.
5 12/31/91
0 •
10.
11.
12.
13.
STREETS
Streets within the development may be either public or
private. Public or private streets shall meet City
standards. The Newporter North development may be a private
(gate guarded) community with secured access surrounding the
development.
REFUSE COLLECTION AREAS
a. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually
screened from access streets and adjacent property from
street level views. Said screening shall form a
complete opaque screenj,k SG ( Ao__ vjtlkl` to
5c 5t� 1 ✓��5`F�` tG< �✓� n/4 Sf v 6�^J (Qraa,{ 14C7 "ezc_c,�
b. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City
of Newport Beach approval.
TELEPHONE_, GAS, AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE
All "on -site" gas lines, electrical lines, and telephone
lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal
equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets
and adjacent properties from street level views.
LIGHTING
Lighting systems shall be designed and maintained in such a
manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light
spillage and glare to adjacent properties. The plans shall
be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,
with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his
opinion, this requirement has been met.nt
`Qu io t� c ce,�e �c �r �� �I.•�t�1( ,o��
a," S(AA 6e
peps,
5 V22 u
Pdo
12/31/91
0 0
FIGURE III
Newporter North
Type
Residential
View Park
Open Space,
Natural Areas
and Future Roadway
Right -of -Way
Total
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Acreage
Area (Net) DU/AC Du
1 30.0 7.1 212
2 4.0 0
3 55.2
89.2
i
0 0
212
12/31/91
SECTION II
DEFINITIONS
1. Streets - Reference to streets within the Newporter North
development shall mean either public or private streets.
Design of streets shall meet City of Newport Beach standards
2. Bluff - As used in this document, "bluff" is any natural
landform having an average slope of 26.6 degrees (50t) or
greater, with a vertical rise of twenty-five (25) feet or
greater.
3. Viewoark - For purposes herein, a viewpark represents an
area of natural character with provision of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway and passive viewing areas.
8 12/31/91
SECTION III
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. PERMITTED USES
a. Townhouses
b. Condominiums
C. Apartments
d. Single-family detached units.
e. Model homes and sales offices
f. Recreational uses ancillary to residential uses.
2. SITE DENSITY
Residential development area shall not exceed thirty (30)
acres with allowance for 212 dwelling units.
3. MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
The maximum height of all buildings shall be thirty-two (32)
feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach
Municipal Code and determined from the finished grade
approved in the site plan review and subdivision approval.
4. SETBACKS FROM MAJOR STREETS
Street Setback from Ultimate
Right -of -Ray Line
Jamboree Road Minimum 35 feet to property line.
San Joaquin Hills Road Minimum 35 feet to property line. G�
5. SETBACKS f y / /v
rd , Front vard Uv
Fro any public or p Nate street the minimu uilding
setbac hall be fiv (5) feet from rig h f-way or
curb, whi ver is reater.
0-c3a garages ' th direct
from five (5) to se (7)
average of twenty (20) et
— _the. -eve .
back of sidewalk. minim
measured f=b of curb__
a ss shall be setback
eet average or a minimum
measured 4r-emha�cakef � r1T,l
c tuvueted; from \V/
um o hteen (18) feet
sietew - 3d, from back oi''
be permit d with roll -up or other type
approv by the City Traffic Engineer.
g-sgaees-need--Wotan
0 -�
k shall
doors
• 0
b. Side Yard
Where property lines are created a minimum fiv, (5)
foot side yard setback shall be required.
A, Architectural projections may be permitted ject to
he Newport Beach Municipal Code. Zero (0 foot
tback will be permitted where a minimum ten (10) feet
1 bu' lding to building setback is providedd' UM (ems �J 1 }o(
� Laf e, O' ty a S¢�}—iDc�sy SfZu��f
C. Rea and �?je_ �jY6lit
Where roperty lines are created a m' imum of ten (10)
�0 X feet re yard setback shall be re red.
Architec ral projections may be pe itted subject to
the Newpo B Municipal Code. Decks and balconies
Q t)� greater tha 8' above grade may tend into the rear
CP yard setbac up o 3 f �
A� 6. COASTAL BLUFF SETBA KS -�w
'OGt-r` 49�-ZO'440
The property line se ack from the edge of a bluff shall be -t,- V
located no closer to tXie edge of a bluff than the point at 5(oppi which the top of the bl ff is in rsected by a line drawn Y
from the solid toe of th bluff t an angle of 26.6 degrees
to the horizontal. In no ci
located closer than forty
bluff. pv, as v�,?
VO STREETSe4 S CS A
Interior streets shall be
may be 32 feet with p
side or 36 feet with
sides. Street widths
Sidewalks are req
system. /
a.
Access dri
maintain a
parallel A
and
serving
hall a property line be
feet from the edge of
4P
�um width of feet. �8-
sion of p&
1 be measu
as a part
park},, Streets
1 parking on one
el parking on both
from c3�,-�loJY_.�t1Y�O
interior circulation 1bo�
2�
driveways serving par 'ng lots shall
m travel way width of eet with no
allowed within the travel Y.
four or m re dwelling units all
�trave y of 24 fe Dri ays
fou wel ing unitshall in in a
travel way of 16 fedt_paral
in the travel way in `ei her case
10 12/31/91
8.
9.
Driveways between rows of back -out perpendi
parking shall maintain a minimum travel way
feet. Driveways between rows of covered ba
parking (carports) shall maintain a minimum
width of 28 feet. Driveways between rows o
shall maintain a minimum travel way width
measured from garage face to garage facye�yg�l
b. Street DesignIV"���o��c�� DP
within t
CVA'der/j�criteria
"Design
edition
he Planned Community Dist
as specified by the City
Criteria for Public Works
within the Planned Community D
in compliance with the private
City of Newport Beach.
LANDSCAPING
Project landscape concepts are
maximization of views from res
greenbelt concepts are encoura
shall be submitted as a part o
subdivision approval. PD r_al
PARKING
Standards shall provide
a.
b.
A minimum of a.r
unit, imelt2ds
parking shall be
minimum rate of
be provided on tr
aprons (minim 201
to the City Tr ffi
may be provid d on
shall
open t
of 24
�ravet way
garages
28 feet, it
c
conform to
onea a -
private streets
shall be designed
standards of the
tended to allow for
ential areas. Interior
d. A landscape concept plan
site plan review and
s�-r" � 57--. S t s V—M&A- V)0,
Me,
m ees "
ing spaces shall be provided per
Cd-sgase. In addition, guest
r v'ded within the development at a
�s ace per unit. Guest parking may
eet, in parking bays, or on driveway
in depth), in a manner acceptable
c Engineer. one of the guest spaces
the driveway.
A minimum f two (2)ga ar ge pa
provided er unit. In addition
provided within the development
two (2) spaces per unit. Guest
on str et, in parking bays, or
11
rking spaces shall be
, guest parking shall be
at a minimum rate of
parking may be provided
on driveway aprons
12/31/91
(minimum 20 feet in depth), in a manner ac ptable to
the City Traffic Engineer. One of the gu t spaces may
be provided on the driveway.
10. FENCES, HEDGES AND WALLS
Fences shall be limited to a maximum hei t of eight (8)
feet, measured from finished grade. Wh a the fence is
required to protect a swimming pool, t fence shall be
constructed so as to meet the require nts of the Uniform
Building Code for pool safety. Wing ails, where an
extension of a residential or access ry structure, may be
six (6) feet in height. At street 'ntersections (to include
driveway intersections with street no such appurtenance
shall exceed thirty (30) inches i height above street
pavement grade within the triangl bounded by the right-of-
way lines and a connecting line raven between points thirty
(30) feet distant from the inte ection of the right-of-way
lines prolonged. _` ,`(�
C9d' C'- ��SI wC� A- V06
D e'ugveA
EA-
12
12/31/91
GREATER DISTANCE OF TWO
CASES WILL APPLY
MIN PROPERTY LINE
MK PROPERTY LINE SETBACK
TOP OF BLUFF
MIN. BUILDING
LINE SETBACK
h pao��°�
TOE OF BLUFF
( -
ADAMS • STREETER
CIVIL ENGINEERS INC.
ins �.uunr.. kAw. CA 1)3? •QI/)414.2))0
BLUFF SETBACK CRITERIA
PER CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN
JANUARY 2; 1991
SECTION IV
SIGNS
A sign program for Newporter North, approved by the Irvine
Company shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
14 12/31/91
0 •
SECTION V. SITE PLAN REVIEW
A. Purpose
0
14
D.
The effect of this section is to establish a Site Plan
Review procedure for Newporter North to insure that the
project conforms to the objectives of the General Plan.
Findings
The Site Plan Review procedures contained in this section
promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
community by ensuring that:
(1) Development of Newporter North will not preclude
implementation of specific General Plan objectives and
policies.
(2) The value of property is protected by preventing
development characterized by inadequate and poorly
planned landscaping, excessive building bulk,
inappropriate placement of structures and failure to
preserve where feasible natural landscape features.
Application
Site Plan Review approval shall be obtained prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit or a Building Permit for any
new structure, including fences, and the establishment of
grade by the Planning Commission or the City Council in
accordance with Section 20.02.026.
Plans and Diagrams to be Submitted
The following plans and diagrams shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval:
(1) A plot plan, drawn to scale, showing the arrangement of
buildings, driveways, pedestrian ways, off-street
parking, landscaped areas, signs, fences and walks.
The plot plan shall show the location of entrances and
exits, and the direction of traffic flow into and out
of off-street parking areas, the location of each
parking space, and areas for turning and maneuvering
vehicles. The plot plan shall indicate how utility and
drainage are to be provided.
(2) A landscape plan, drawn to scale, showing the locations
of existing trees proposed to be removed and proposed
to be retained; and indicating the amount, type, and
location of landscaped areas, planting beds and plant
materials with adequate provisions for irrigation.
15 12/31/91
11
(3) Grading plans to ensure development properly related to
the site and to surrounding properties and structures.
(4) Scale drawings of exterior lighting showing size,
location, materials, intensity and relationship to
adjacent streets and properties.
(5) Architectural drawings, renderings or sketches, drawn
to scale, showing all elevations of the proposed
buildings and structures as they will appear upon
completion.
(6) Any other plans, diagrams, drawings or additional
information necessary to adequately consider the
proposed development and to determine compliance with
the purposes of this chapter.
E. Fee
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution
of the City Council to the City with each application for
Site Plan Review under Chapter 20.01.070. (Ord. 1686, § 11
1976)
F. Standards
The Site Plan Review procedures established for Newporter
North shall be applied according to and in compliance with
the following standards:
y
(1)
Sites subject to Site Plan Review under the provisions
of this section shall be graded and developed with due
regard for aesthetic qualities of the natural
terrai Back Ba and landscape, giving special
sidera waterfront resources and unique
landforms such as coastal bluffs or other sloped areas;
trees and shrubs shall not be indiscriminately
destroyed;
(2) No structures shall be permitted in areas of potential
geologic hazard unless specific mitigation measures are
adopted which will reduce adverse impacts to an
acceptable level or the Planning Commission or City
Council, on review or appeal, finds that the benefits
outweigh the adverse impacts;
(3) Residential development shall be permitted in areas
subject to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL only where
specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels
in exterior areas to less than 65 CNEL and reduce noise
levels in the interior of residences to 45 CNEL or
less;
16 12/31/91
• 0
(4) Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas,
pedestrian and vehicular access ways, and other site
features shall give proper consideration to functional
aspects of site development;
(5) Development shall be consistent with specific General
Plan policies and objectives, the adopted Circulation
Improvement and Open Space Agreement, and shall not
preclude the implementation of those policies and
objectives;
(6) Development shall be physically compatible with the
development site, taking into consideration site
characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes,
and sensitive resources;
(7) Archaeological and historical resources shall be
Protected to the extent feasible or appropriate
mitigation measures shall be implemented.
G. Procedures regarding Public Hearing notification and
Planning Commission and City Council actions shall be
pursuant to Chapter 20.01.070.
17 12/31/91
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
KTRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: Map 15, 1992
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: Amendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records map.
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW: June 4, 1992
., R
10 " - 4 saAR &alt wx
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
X TRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: May15, 1992
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: Amendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records map:
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW: June 4, 1992
b. Side Yard
Where property lines are created a minimum five (5)
foot side yard setback shall be required.
Architectural projections may be permitted subject to
the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Zero (0) foot
setback will be permitted where a minimum ten (10) feet
building to building setback is provided.
C. Rear yard
Where property lines are created
feet rear yard setback shall be
Architectural projections may be
the Newport Beach Municipal Code
greater than 18" above grade may
yard setback up to 3 feet.
6. COASTAL BLUFF SETBACKS
a minimum of ten (10)
required.
permitted subject to
Decks and balconies
extend into the rear
The property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be
located no closer to the edge of the bluff than the point at
which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn
from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 26.6 degrees
to the horizontal. In no case shall a property line be
located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of a
bluff. 1n
7. STREETS 0 V
_�o�_min3�tum-width-of-2 a,e�—A--2-8
--foDt-width-shal-l-not a-1-l-ow for-para-lle-l-parki-ng: Streets
sidb3feet
with
provision oparallel parking
eor36feetwithprovisionofparallelparking on both
sides. Street widths shall be measured from curb -to -curb.
Sidewalks are not required as a part of interior circulation
system.
a. Private Drives
Access drives and driveways serving parking lots shall
maintain a minimum travel way width of 24 feet with no
parallel parking allowed within the travel way.
Driveways serving four or more dwelling units shall
maintain a minimum travel way of 24 feet. Driveways
serving less than four dwelling units shall maintain a
minimum travel way of 16 feet. No parallel parking is
allowed in the travel way in either case.
10
12/31/91
6 0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
X TRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: May 15, 1992
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: Amendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records map.
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW: June 4, 1992
COMMENTS: <; l-)E YAA b k 59,ej '! m,. aid DLO( f_
i,
M-MAM111
M-0
r
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
X TRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: May 15,199
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: Amendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records map.
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW: June 4, 1992
COMMENTS AA&E
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW REQUEST
_ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION
X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
X TRAFFIC ENGINEER
X FIRE DEPARTMENT
X BUILDING DEPARTMENT
X PARKS & RECREATION
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_MARINE SAFETY
X GRADING
Date: May 15, 1992
X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN)
_PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT.
APPLICATION OF: The Irvine Co.
FOR: Amendment No. 765 (Newporter North - Newporter Knoll)
DESCRIPTION: Request to adopt PC Text to establish land use regulations.
LOCATION: That portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, as shown on a
map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous records map.
REPORT REQUESTED BY: May 22, 1992
COMMISSION REVIEW. June 4, 1992
COMMENTS:
Signature: