The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCDP_013Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T0: Planning Commission FROH. Planning Department SUBJECT: &._Traffic Study No. 53 (PuJ)1J.g Ifearingl Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the construction of five mixed use commercial/residential buildings to be constructed on property located in the C•1 District; and the acceptance of in environmental document. AND B—Use Eumit No._3337 (Public Nearinv) Request to permit the construction of a com11111od residential/commercial development containing five d elliny, units over commercial development on five individual lots located in the C-1 District, The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem parking spaces for the cosmercial uses where the Zoning Code requires that all commercial parking spaces bu independently accessible. AND Request to adjust the interior contiguous lot lines of five lots located in the C-1 District. AND Request to alloy one of the adjusted lots on the subject property to have a width of less than 25 feet where the Zoning Coda requires a minima lot width of 25 feet in the C-1 District. AND TO: Planning Commission-2. E. Constal ResidentiaL DeY-tISPmenC rernit<%, 11wNs--1 Request the Approval of a Coastal Residential I)evulupmnrit Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the Implementation of the State law relative to low and moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone in conjunction with the proposed construction of a combined residential/commercial development an property located in the C-1 District. IDCATION: lots 4.8, Block 8, Balboa Tract, located at 607.615 fast Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of fnnt Balhen Boulevard and Washington Street, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C-1 APPLICANT: Balboa Associatem. Newport Beach OWNER: Balalis Corporation, Newport Roach im 1 V414f' These applications involve a request to permit the construction of a combined residential/commercial development containing five dwulling units over commercial development on five individual lots located in the C-1 District. In accordance with Section 20.35.020 of the Hunicipal Code residential uses are permitted in the C-1 District, subject to the approval of a use permit in each case, Use permit procedures are not forth in Chapter 20.80 of the Hunicipal Code. The proposal'also includes: a request to approve a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the implementation of the State Law relative to lov and moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone; a request to adjust the Interior contiguous lot lines of the five lots constituting the project site; the approval of a variance no as to allow one of the adjusted lots to have a width of lees than 25 feet; the approval of a traffic study; and the approval of a modification to the Zoning Coda so As to allow the use of tandem parking spaces for co®ercial use where the Zoning Code requires all commercial parking spaces to be independently accessible. Traffic study procedures are set forth'in Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code; modification and lot line adjustment procedures are set forth in Chapter 20.81 of the Municipal Code; variance procedures are set forth in Chapter 20.82 of tho Municipal Code; and Coastal Residential Development Permit procedures are net forth in Council Policy P-1. Environmental Sirnif ggnce In accordance with the California Environmental Act (CF.QA), the State CEQA Cuidelinea and City Council Policy K-3, an Initial Study has been prepared TO: Planning Commission-3. for the proposed project. Based on the information contained in the initial study, it has been datermined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project and is attached for the Planning Comnission's information, LocAl rgnetal Program. _Lanrl Us 1M The Land Use Element of the General Plan and the local Coastal Program land Use Plan designate the site for "Retail and Service Commercial• uses, The proposed residential/commercial development is a permitted use within this designation subject to the approval of a use permit. Inasmuch as the subject project is located in the Coastal Zone, a Coastal Permit will be required prior to the issuance of building permits. E The subject property is the site of the old Balboa branch of the Bank of America which was converted into a restaurant in 1985. Said restaurant is not currently in operation. To the northeast, across East Ralbon Boulevard are commercial buildings and related off-street parking areas; to the southwest, across a ten foot wide alley, is the Rendezvous Condominium development, which contains 24 residential units; and to the northwest is a single story commercial building. Backv=nd At its meeting of August 22, 1985, the Planning Commission approved Use Permit No. 3164 which permitted the establishment of a restaurant with alcoholic beverages and live entertainment. Said approval also permitted the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunction with a'full time valet parking service. The action of the Planning Commission was taken with the findings and subject to the conditions set forth in the attached excerpt of the Planning Commission minutes dated August 22. 1985. It should be further noted that the Planning Commission limited the hours of operation of the restaurant from 11:00 a.m. to' 2:00 a.m, daily. At its meeting of October 15, 1985, the City Council sustained the action of the Planning Commission with the changes set forth in the attached excerpt of the City Council minutes dated October 15, 1985. Subsequent to the City Councils approval, the applicant obtained the approval of the Coastal Commission and - completed' the' restaurant improvements. However, the applicant was not able'to obtain the necessary license from the State Office of Alcoholic 'Beverage Control and' the restaurant closed shortly thereafter. !l,FLY s i s The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building and construct five individual residential/commercial developments on five individual E" Planning Comission-4. parcels, Four of the parcels will contain 1,000 floor area (607, 609, 611 and 613 East Balboa smallest parcel, located at the southwest corner Past Balboa Boulevard, will contain 500 square fee (615 East Balboa Blvd,). The residential unite parcels will contain 2,020 square feet and maii which includes three bedrooms, three baths, a dining room, The residential unit on the corner square feet and will have four bedrooms, three dining room, square feat, of commercial Blvd.). ar«1 t)1e last aruf of 'Washington Street and t of commercial floor area on each of the interior Cain the ppme floor plan living room, kitchen and parcel will contain 1,575 baths, a living room and In accordance with the commercial off-street parking requirement of one parking space for each 250 sq,ft. of floor area, each of Parculn 1.4 require four off-street parking spaces and Parcel 5 requires two parking, spaces for a total of 18 commercial parking spaces. As shown on the Attached site plan the applicant is providing the required parking on each situ; however, he is using a tandem parking design which provides only aims independently accessible commercial parking spaces in the total project, whereas the Zoning Code requires all commercial parking spaces to be independently accessible. The parking requirement for each of the residential units on each parcel is two parking spaces, one of which must be covered, As shown on the attached site plan the applicant is providing five two car garages which are in a tandem configuration. Tandem parking for residential uses is permitted, provided the tandem parking space is used by the same unit using the independently accessible parking apace directly behind. In conjunction with their review of the proposed project, the City. Traffic Engineer noted that the applicant was proposing 8 foot 6 inch vide commercial parking spaces, whereas .the now .universal commercial parking standards requires a minimum 9 foot width for. parking spaces adjacent to valls. In discussing this design deficiency with the applicant, it appeared that in order to provide the required parking apace width for Parcels 1-4. each parcel must maintain a minimum width of 28 feet -to inches± which in turn reduces the width .of Parcel 5 to approximately 19 feet-8 inches±. Inasmuch as it is staff's opinion that such a width is inappropriate, the applicant has agreed to withdraw his variance application associated with the substandard lot width on Parcel 5. and as a condition of approval of his use permit, obtain tha approval of a resubdivision so:as to consolidate Parcels 3, 4 and 5 (611, 613 and 615 East Balboa. Blvd.) into a single building site, The raquirement for a.resubdivision will also eliminate the need for the subject Lot Line Adjustment .inasmuch as the adjustment of the lot lines for Parcels 1 and 2 say be accomplished on the same parcel map. It should be noted that the following outline of the major characteristics of the project is based on the above described revisions to the project. TO: Planning Comission-5. The following outline has been prepared which sets forth tho major design characteristics of the project. Land Area: Parcel 1 (607 E. Balboa Blvd.): Parcel 2 (609 E. Balboa Blvd.): Parcel 3 (611, 613 b 615 E. Balboa Blvd,): Buildable Area (established by Cenral Plan): 2,739 sq.ft. 2,139 sq.ft. 7,346 sq.ft. Total 12,824 sq.ft. Same as land area Permitted Cross Structural Area (established by General Plan): Each of Parcels 1-2: 1,369.5 aq.ft, of gross retail floor area, provided the combined gross floor area includLng covered parking does not excnad 4,382 sq.ft. Parcel 3 3,673 sq,ft. of grove retail floor area, provided the combined gross floor area including covered parking does not exceed 11,753 sq.ft. Proposed Gross Structural Area: Parcel 1 (607 E. Balboa Blvd.): 4,055 sq.ft. Parcel 2 (609 E. Balboa Blvd.): 4,055 sq.ft. Parcel 3 (611, 613 6 615 E. Balboa Blvd.): 10,915 sq.ft. Total 19,025 sq.ft. Permitted Floor Area Ratio (established by General Plan): 1.6 Proposed Floor Area Ratio: Parcel 1 (607 E. Balboa Blvd.): 1.48 Parcel 2 (609 E. Balboa Blvd.): 1.48 Parcel 3 (611, 613 b 615 E. Balboa Blvd.): 1.49 Total Project: 1.48 Required Setbacks: Front (East Balboa Blvd): 0 ft. Sides: 0 ft. Rear (allay): 10 ft. Proposed Setbacks: Front (Parcel 1): 5 ft. on ground floor: 5 ft. on second floor (Parcel 2): 0 ft on ground floor; 5 ft. on second floor I • • TO: Planning Commission-6. (Parcel 3): Sides (Parcels 1 & 2): varies 0 ft. to 5 ft. on ground floor; 5 ft. on second floor 0 ft.l (Parcel 3): 0 ft. on interior property line; varies 0 ft. to 3 ft. on the ground floor and second floor, adjacent to Washington Street Permitted Building Height: Proposed Building Height: Permitted Dwelling, Units (as establishes! by General Plan): Proposed Dwelling Units: Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 26 ft. average; 31 ft. maximum ridge 25 Et.-6 in.± average height of parapet; 30 ft J maximum height of parapet Total 1 DU for each 2.375 ail.ft. of lot area or 1 dwelling, for each of Par- cels 1 & 2; and 3 unita on Parcel 3 I dwelling 1 dwelling 3 dwellings 5 dwellings Required Commercial Parking: (For each of Parcels 1 & 2) 4 spaces each; 8 spaces total (For Parcel 3) 10 spaces Total: 18 spaces Proposed Commercial Parking: (For each of Parcels 1 & 2): (For Parcel 3): Total Commercial Parking Provided: Required/Proposed residential Parking: 4 spaces each; 2 of which are tandem; 8 spaces total 10 spaces, 5 of which are tandem 18 spaces 2 spaces for each dwelling; 10 spaces total . As shown on the attached plans the applicant has designed his commercial off-street parking spaces in a tandem configuration whereas the Zoning Code requires that.. all commercial parking spaces be independently accessible. 1 It should be noted that Parcel 2 maintains a 5 foat northwesterly side yard setback on the front portion of the parcel. Said setback is to be used for pedestrian access from the street to the adjoining residential units. TO: Planning Qmwission-7. requires that all commercial parking spaces be independently acoessible. However, it should be noted that the Planning Commission has in the past approved tandem parking in conjunction with small commercial devolopmrents in Cannery Village, Balboa Island and KcFaddsn Square. The basis of these approvals is that the tandems spaces would be used by emsployeaa atul that tJW Independently accessible would be available for customer or visitor parking. Staff has no objections to the proposed tandem parking spaces. In accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, the applicant is required to obtain the approval of a traffic study for the proposed residential/commercial development. Said traffic study has been prepared and is attached for the Planning Commission's review. The proposed project is expected to be completed in 1989. Analyses were therefore completed for 1990. The City Traffic Engineer identified six (6) intersections which could be affected by time project at full necupancy. The first step in evaluating intersections is to conduct a It Traffic Voluae Analysis, taking into consideration existing traffic, regional growth and the traffic of previously committed projects. For any intersection where. on any approach leg, the project traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of the projected morning and afternoon peak two and one-half hour volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) is required. Results of the one percent test indicate that the project traffic did not exceed 1% of projected traffic on any approach leg of any of the inter- sections evaluated. 'Therefore no further analysis is required. Inasmuch as the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone and contains more than two dwelling units, the applicant must comply with Council Policy P-1 which requires the inclusion of low or moderate income housing in the Coastal Zone, where feasible. As indicated in the attached foasibility analysis performed by Tarantello and Company, it will not be feasible for a low or moderate income unit either on -site or off -site in conjunction with the development of the proposed project. Therefore, in accordance with Council Policy P-1, no affordable units are required. Section 20.80.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that in order to grant any use permit, the Planning Commission shall find that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use or building applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. TO: Planning Coersission-8. Should the Planning Comission wish to approve these applications, it is ■uUested that such action be taken with the findings and subject to the conditions of approval as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A". Should the Planning Comission wish to deny those applications, the findings are net forth in Exhibit "Bo. It should also be noted that the attached exhibits do not include Variance No. 1149 and Lot Line Adjustment No. 884, inasmuch as said applications have been withdrawn as it result of the revised parcol configuration of the project. PLANIIING DEPARTMENT .TAMES D. N EWICKER, Director r6o SvvQ ) 1 W. William ward Senior Planner Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "a" Vicinity Nap Excerpt of the Planning Commission Minutes dated August 22, 1988 Excerpt of the City Council Minutes dated October 15, 1985 Negative Declaration Traffic Study Feasibility Analysis Letter of opposition Colored rendering Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevation TO: Planning Coemission-9. LKHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. FOR USE PERMIT NO. 3337, COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 110. 13. TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 53 AND REUITED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT A. : Accept the environmental document, making the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and Council Policy K-3. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the varLoun decisions on this project. 3. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. B. Approve the traffic study with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: 1. That a traffic study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Nevport Beach Municipal Code and Council Policy S.I. 2. That the traffic study indicates that the project - generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any "major", "primary -modified", or "primary" street. 3. That the traffic study indicates the project• generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes at any approach of any intersection analyzed. • 0 TO: C. Planning Commission-10.- Use Permit a. 3337': Approve the use permit with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Fll1dinrQ 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Central Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will comply with all applicable City and State Building Codas and Zoning requirements for now building applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located, oxcept those items requested in conjunction with the proposed modifications, 3. That the design of tho development or thn proposed improvements will not conflict wLth nily ensoments acquired by the public at large for accnns through or use of property within the propoxnil development. 4. The approval of the modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem coiamercial parking spaces will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare Of' the City and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title'20 of this Code. The approval of Use Permit No. 3337 will riot, under the circumstances of this case, he detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfaro of the City. 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as noted below. TO: Planning Cosxsission-11. 2. That prior to the approval of building permits the applicant shall obtain the approval of a resubdivision from the City and titre Coastal Commission so as to resubdivide the five existing lots into throe parcels in accordt,11ca with the approved site plan. 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from Washington Street, the alley and adjoining properties. 4. That all signs shall conform to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. That this Use Permit shall expire unlaaa exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Kunicipal Code. 7. That the lighting system for the proposed project shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties. The lighting 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. 8. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 9. That a standard use permit agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 10. That each dwelling unit and commercial unit be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 11. That the on-stto parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to • • To: Planning Comission=12. further review by the Traffic Engineer. 12. That the intersection of Washington Street and the alley drive be designed to provide si&t distance as approved by the Public Works Department. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. 13, That a 15 foot wide radius corner cutoff at the corner of Washington Street and Balboa boulevard be dedicated to the public. 14. That deteriorated curb and sidewalk be reconstructed along the Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street frontages, that the drive apron on Balboa Boulevard be removed and that the curb return at the corner of Washington Street and Balboa Boulevard be reconNtructeri to a 25 foot radius with a handicap rasp included_ All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 15, That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown of standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer, 16. That all vehicular access to the property be frog the adjacent alley. 17. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 18. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid, 19. The interior noise levels of the residential units will be reduced to achieve a maximum sound level of 45 4 A, through proposed mitigation measures. These measures shall include, but not limited to, sound insulation and double glazed glass. Sound level measurement shall be taken and a certificate of sound verification shall be submitted to the City before the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 20, A photo survey of the building will be conducted before the issuance of the demolition permit. and these photos will be maintained in the photo collection of the Balboa Pavilion. TO: Planning Coaseission-13. 21, That a minimum of two garage parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit. 22. That the existing utility poles located adjacont to the alley shall be relocated or undergrounded so as not to interfere with required access to on•aits parking spaces. Said relocation shall be a+il,Ject to the approval of the Public Storks Departmailt and any affected utility company. 23. That an easement for pedestrian access be granted from Parcel 2 for the benefit of Parcel 1. 24. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 1. That a feasibility analysis has been performed which has indicated that it is not feasible to provide affordable housing on -site or off -site in conjunction with the proposed project, 2. That the proposed development has met the requirements of City Council Policy P.J. 1. That all conditions of approval of Use Permit No, 3337 shall be fulfilled. TO: Planning Commission=14, EXHIBIT "B" FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF USE PERMIT 110. 3337, COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 13, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 53 AND REIA'TW ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT A. EnX1r2DM2ntal Document: 1. Take no action on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration; and 2. Make the findings listed below: Findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negntivn hnr.iaration have been prepared in compliance with Ills, Environmental Quality Act (CP,QA), the State CFgA Guidelines, and Council Policy K-3. 2. That the contents of the envirotwnp ntal document have boon considered in the variruia decisions on this project, 3. That the guidelines indicate that environmental documents are not required for projects that are denied, The findings made in regard to the environmental document described above also apply to the traffic study and Use Permit No, 3337. B. Iraffic Study No. 53 1. Take no action on the traffic study; and 2. Hake the finding'listed below: Finding: 1. That traffic studies are not required for projectr that are denied. C. Use Permit Ne, 3337 1. Deny Use Permit No. 3337 with the findings listed below: TO: Planning Cosimission-15. Findings: 1. That the proposed development of three individual parcels as proposed by tho applicant is inappropriate inasmuch as the c0mhin4d ownership of the five existing lots provides tlw opportunity to combine said lots into a single building site. 7. That the proposed parking design is inadequate inasmuch as one-half of the cowercial parking spaces are in tandem configuration and are not independently accessible. 3, That the required number of handicapped parking spaces are not being provided in conjunction with the project. 4. That the us* of direct access parking from the alley makes the access to said parking somewhat difficult. 5. The approval of Use Permit Ho.3337 will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. .. :t"'"+ ..: '.vim /11 .� >. : a{,,� i q, �_��.i.�, .�p�y�� r j{� � � f. •Ss}{�+t� y�c � A4AP «. R1 cy c .v �� \ ,� R•a k cl t •, rr tsf �\\ 'gyp. r .p t• \ de ,SAP M 4 IKAM l!q Alar N A ! I / ,�/r, aw /. nor IR raw *Is Il III 1 U.wil w Yry / AR Nwr w �w rw. �� ry �ws � w.Nl/ • � ♦ N�1 I fM.r+`L�Ir.rr�IrH r•I{{�♦rw A' Y . r . r ./ wrl .w/ter a. M � � '•._ . wr I./,N yYwr M� I.w��rwi.r RAW= ■ I /F/•Iww,M� I ,YWi I R r�� r 1' DISTRICTING MAP NEWPORT BEACH -- CALIFORNIA 0-4 "ou ►"w? Atfrxwn4L 416wT 64NOCAW1 0-1 woos K3co AAl o-1 "boost COOMMIA4 Ot / 9T 6-1 SWU waTOU FARM 140OUI1ML w•-4 h~"lua lmo •rr . - R+rwwf eatMclf MckA 0118 and d♦ �n /sa• Fars Tlws - �'�� J I1r . 33� T Biel' //d L�Tl✓ J J A4v%m&/r e041mW Aw Aiuwlr Aloo /3 A COM 1 A r . r • : c w ppl�yy �� //'�' AA'' RaI CAL 111 11 1 " August 22, 2985 = `'�'M'.�,",^ MIAffES maxWre the number of on -site parking spas -es available for each business. 7. 'fiat Planning Commission may add to of srodify conditio f approval to this use pormlt, or recowssnd to City council the revocation of this use permit, n a determination 00 the operation which is t ject at this use periait, causes injury, or is de ntai to the health, safety, peace, worals, caste or general wrltare of the community. S. This use parsit shall expire unles* xercised within 24 months frost the data of appr 1 an specified in section 20.90.090 a of the N t Beach Municipal Code. * a * A. Use Permit No. 3166 (public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a restaurant with on -sale aloobolic beverages, live entertainment and outdoor patio dining on property located in the C-1 District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Toning Coda so as to allow the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunction with a full tine valet parking service. J11 a. Resubdivision No. 015 (Public Heari Request to rean)divide five existing lots and eliminate Interior property lines so as to create 'a single building site'in conjunction with the conversion of the previous Balboa Rank of Aasrica building 'to a rest- aurant ilea. tMATH Ms Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 6, Block:9, nalhoa Tract, located at. 611 Last . Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of Last Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street, on the Balboa Peninsula., n%X Item Ho.? UP3164 R815 rc ve d C A = i s ce p s .a s =ra: c1t w ago O o w l a in dW w r _ August 22, 19665 .•_ .' • i ZONES APPLICANTS OWNER 3 IMIW..Rr a C-1 Griswold's Development. N",r)rt Beach Grievold's Development, costa Mesa George P. Jenkins, Diaarond liar Chairman Person stepped dorm from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, c-i inted that the applicant has advised staff that outdoor dining is no longer being proposed in conjunction with the project. The public hearing opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jerry King, go. 1 civic Plaza, Suite 250, Newport Beach, appeared before the planning Coanission. Mr. Ring reviewed the applicant's proposal, and he further commented that the applicant was attempting to design a restaurant that would utilize the existing space in the previous Balboa Bank of America building so as not to require off -site Barking or in -lieu parking, Mr• Ring added that with the revisal of handicapped spaces and other oanstraints, the applicant was xequir*d to, redesign the original proposal. He said that the applicant is roquestinq a p+ king ratio of one parking space for each 50 squars:fwet of "net public area". Fir. zing stated that the applicant did not originally intend to alter the parking lot, and they intended to utilize the existing 25 toot wide driveway instead of a 26 foot wide driveway. The original structure will remain with the main entrance in the front of the building and an emergency opening on the side of the structure. Fir. King stated that staff requested that the driveway be widened in order to accommodate the original 8 foot 6 inch wide parking spaces, :However, the parking spaces have been widened to 9 feet, except for three compact parkinq spaces. tie explained that staff requested one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area' becauso of the site's increase in activity. He said that the area is the destination point and that the restaurant would serve the public that would. already be in;the area, and local residents. Mr. fling commented that therm may be a slight -difference of opinion between 'the applicant and the City regarding the actual 'net'public area" of the building, and the applicant is willing to comply with the reduction in space after the: applicant is certain what the actual square footage is. Mti1NUTES -21- 0 corm ] �o a w w A"ust 22, 19es _ MIMIIES -I ROU CAU f I I y- t j+j INM llr. Xing advised that there will be no patio dinlro;, that there will be no dancing on the premises, that the resubdivision is not a guise for an office building or parking structure, that the applicant agrees with the conditions which include a 6-2/2 foot wall adjacent to the alley to mitigate noise or the glare of automobile lights. He said that the applicant requests that the condition be nowW ed to have only a general reference to the entertainment and not the specific number of persons that would be a part of the entertainment. In response to a question posed by Condesioner Knpipalman asking if the restaurant could encourage patrons to wait inside the entry of thn restaurant instead of outside wherein the noise could affect the neighbors, Bar. icing replied that this 1n possible, however the main entrance is on Cast Balfx)n Boulevard and there is a sizeable patio outside of the restaurant. He said that while the patron is paying the restaurant bill the valet could be retrieving the automobile and the automobile oould be waiting outside the restaurant. Mr. King commented that the all of the quests will be advised of the operational characteristics of the restaurant to protect the residents. Mr. Ring advised that the restaurant vault at the back of the baildiag will use used for refrigeration and storage which will also be 'a sound barrier. He said that the best operating function for the, restaurant valets will consist of one valet handling the automobiles in front of the lot ', and one valet retrieving the automobiles. In response to a question posed by Comissioner Kurl.nndar regarding Condition No. 10 stating that all doors and windows be closed during live entertainment, 1{r. icing replied that the applicant mould agree if the condition were amwvW to state "that the doors and windows shall be closed at all times". in response to inquiries posed by Coeminsionor Goff, Mr. King replied that the valet service could accommodate 100% of the patron parkingr and that even during peak periods, all of the autorinhiles would be able to movie forvard onto Zast Balboa Boulevard without disruption. Kr. Icing said that the applicant also intends to provide entertainment durirvi brunch hours of 11100 a.m. to 2100 p.m. on weekends. -22- I q 31R = c a y s 2 M= r a x Ca • nKoo >A 0 a3p V w s s a Z s w w August 22, Qr of New rt Beach' INGE Vice -Chairman Turner asked staff if the conditions would be adequately covered if the applicant's square footage would differ from the City's records. ler. Havicker replied that the applicant will have to reduce the square footage on the plan to comply with the requitement of one parking space for each 40 square feet of 'net public urea', and if the 36 on-aite parking spaces are allowed, then the restaurant will be permitted to contain 1,440 square feet of *not public area". Commissioner Turner confirmed that the parking area Will licit the "net public area" and not the square footage of the building. Mr. Xing cited that before the applicant eliminates 270 square feat of "net public area" from the proposed resturent In order to maintain on -site parking, the applicant wants to snake sure that the figure is accurate. Vice -Chairman Turner said that he van satisfied that the ctmAitions Were covered. Mr. Nevieker advised that Condition No. 11 refers to the hours that live entertainment shall be pwrmitted but does not limit the number of entertainers, and that the staff report's reference to a three piece instrumental combination originated from the applicant's request. Kr- Jack Prebicim, 600 East Ocean front, appeared before the planning Cosmmission, stating that a business In the hank of America building will be an asset] however, he expressed concerns that the sale of alcoholic beverages in the restaurant could add more alcohol -related problems to the area, and that the noise eminating on the back side and on the side of the restaurant facility could be a disturbance to the residents of the Rendevsous Condoainiubc, fir. prebicim reoosmended that the applicant be required to permanently close the windows, that shrubbery be planted adjacent to - the 6 foot wall separating the condominiums from the proposed restaurant to eliminate the noise and the glare of the lights, and that a wall be constructed on 'the side of the proposed restaurant so that the entire parking area'will be enclosed. Mr. A. L. Fishman, 600 Past Ocean front, appeared before the planning ' Coasission, stating that he supports a business on the site) however, be expressed his concern regarding the proposed restaurant noise and activities. Mr. Fishman recoemended a retail business for the site. MWl1TES -23- 00 Conn J►ex;ust 22, 196s MINUSES s v it w a0 er w s o a a � of Newport Bea& e+ o L o 0 ppl�yy �� i i ; i � � Mr. Dale Post, a resident of Tustin and arl owner of a Rendezvous Condominium, appeared before the planning Commission recommending denial of the applltatiAn, ltr. Post stated that he objects to the restaurant's Sala of alcoholic beverages, lire entertainment aM that the establishment will be open until 2:00 a.m. Xr. post stated that these concerns have been voiced by all of the residents of the Perdezvous Condominiums. Mr. poet said that because the applicant had not submitted a model or plans, the residents did not kn w what the proposed restaurant would look like. Mr. Ed Lynch, 600 East Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission expressing his concern regarding the number of 'gars' that the Balboa area currently has, and the proposed "bar -restaurant". Ise commented that according to the restaurant's proposed plans, the "bar" will be larger than the restaurant'a vault which will be used for refrigeration and storage. In response to a question posed by Coss+issioner KoppelS&O, Mr. Lynch replied that the Dank -of Asrerica parking lot was open on week -ends. Mr. Jerry King, reappeared before the Planning Commission. Itr. Xing replied to the residents' concerns that the restaurant's windows will be permanently closed as stated in Condition go. 10, that the exterior of the proposed restaurant will not change in order to maintain the character of the bank and that the applicant has applied for a "historical designation' of the frank of America building. Mr. King stated that the vault containing the refrigeration and storage is considered a service portion of the restaurant. Vice -Chairman Turner asked Hr. King if the applicant would consider landscaping along the wall. Mr. King replied that there would not be rooms for landscaping adjacent to the alley, and that vegetation is no longer considered a noise barrier. Commissioner Coif asked Mr. King 'it Condition no. 4 stating "that the operation of the, restuarant will not increase the ambient noise levels beyond the boundaries of the'subject property' could be adhered to, and will the managesrent of,the restaurant control the valet noiae, and asked Mr. King if the applicant could give the residents assurances? Mr. King replied that the proposed restaurant has two entrances - the' main entrahee and an emergency door only on the side of the 0 -24- i ii ,;21 Conn Aoguat 22, 1965 ,MNUrES C 0 ! i V 10 s w i s C a[ s ow ' w M o ' r ow s p aa; 0 0 � ' of N w C 0 a t Beach . s s i a a '� w �p�yy l J JLL{ c ^ `w` Motion building, that the parking lot will be small and that the valets will be supervised by on -site restaurant management. in reply to Commissioner Winburn, Mr. King replied that the applicant in proposing a 'thexa* restaurant, that the decorating will be in keeping with the structure of the building, and that there will be 'period" music. Mr. Prebicin, reappeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Prebicin confirmed that the alley is very narrow, and that scow of the condominium's bedroom are on the edge of the alloy. He stated that more traffic will be generated at the intersection of Washington Street and East Balboa Boulevard because of the restaurant's parking lot and that the impact on East Balboa Boulevard will be greater. The public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner loppol asaa asked staff if the emergency side door could stay locked. Mr. Hewicksr replied that he did not know what the Building Code would require, and that Condition No. 10 only requires that doors and windows be closed during the live entertainment. Mr. Hericker cited that the Rendezvous Condominiums are in a commercial zone grad not a residential son*. Commissioner Koppelmn cited that Condition No. 19 provides that if the restaurant would not be compatible with the community, that the use permit could come back to the Planning Comission for review. Commissioner X.oppelmn made a notion to approve Use Permit No. 3164, subject to the findings and conditions in exhibit "A", amending Condition No. 4 to state that the applicant shall locate the valet parking station so as to elindimto the necessity for patrons to enter the parking lot. She explained that if the valet station is kept toward the Yost Balboa Boulevard exit and: away from the Rendezvous Condominiums, and the patroni who are picking up their cars are in the front of the building, that there would be less noise than if patrons would be standing and talking in the parking lot. Mr. H*wicker stated that it the valet station would be positioned near East Balboa Boulevard, 'traffic could be blocked on the street, but if the valet station would be moved towards the alloy, thorn may be conversation , near the condominiums.. Mr.: Rewicker r*eommended that the automobiles could be moved towards F f 1 � F 09 # i CONVASSCNERS 22, 398 FE MTES sly ZC a to i._ w O a►= o QY of. VtI�+�R.1 t a 1 i i i 2 i i v RM CAU1l�DEX the alley as ,they enter the parkiug'lot, and as the automobiles exit, they could be move4 towards, cast Balboa Boulevard. Kv. Rich Edwrogston, traffic engineer, recosasended that the valet could bA notified as the patron* are paying their bills and the automobiles would be delivered to the fmnt of the lot. Vice -Chairman Turner reoommen"ded that Condition No. 4 be amended to stag "subject to the 4pproval of a valet parking arrangement satisfactory to the City traffic Engineer" whereby Commissioner Koppelman concurred. She continued her notion by recomending that Condition No. 10 be amended to read "that all door* and windows shall be closed at all tisMs" # and to delete "during the live entertainment") add Condition go, 21 "that the applicant shall construct a 6 foot high amsonry wall in the parking lot along the rear property line, adjacent to the alley"l and add Condition Igo, 22 "that the project shall be so designed to eli.sinate light and glare spillage on adjacent uses in accordance with plans to be approved by the Planning Department'. Cbswissioner Xoppelm n suggested that Finding No. 4 be amended to iucluds the 6 foot high masonry wall, as approved by the Planning Department. The motion further stages the approval of Resubdivision Ito. 815 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A'. Coersissioner Gaff commented that he could support the motion on the basis that the approval of this use permit includes Finding No. 6 which states `that the approval of this use permit will not be detrimental to the health# safety, peace, 'morals, comfort'and general welfare. of persons residing and' working in the neighborhood"#' and he further commented on the ,importance of this finding to the citizens. He said that Grisvlold's reputation for responsible business practices will support that finding.' Corals' stoner Goff pointed out that Condition No. 9 and Condition No. 10 will protect the citixcns from the restaurant noise and he added that the 6 foot high wall will protect the residents from the noise and lights in their bedrooms. Ise commented that Condition No.; 19 'states that if Finding I4o. 6 is not followed,, then the Planning ccMission can call the item backup far review or recommend to the City Council the (revocation of this use permit. Cosmismionor Ninburn recamended that Condition No. 2 requiring "that a minia m of one psrkisg,spaoe 'shall be provided on -site for each 40 square feet of "net public area" within the restaurant" he left as is. 1 ! ! 1 -26• ; Q i-� S ffI` C'. 1 s� - 1. August 22, 1965'ti ... IM NWES c • o Z 0 OR c a s a r 0 ! Ayes Absent x1 xi ` • • i a • "W motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No, 3164, rubjsct to the findings and conditions in Exhibit -A including modified Finding NO. 4, Condition No. 4, Condition Na. 10, additional Conditions No. 21 and 22, and to apgrovs Resubdivision No. RIS, subject to the fi» dings aM conditions in Exhibit *A*. tit7 rrON CARRIED. Use Perait go. 3164 FIMDM e 1. That the proposed restaurant facility is consis- tent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program and is roapatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental inspect. 3. That the number of compact parking spaces consti- tutes only 25• of the total number of parking spaces provided on site, and that valet parking attendants will be present to ensure that maller cum sets parked in the appropriate spaces. 4. That the use of tandem parking spaces in conjunc- tion with a valet parking service and the related six toot high masonry mall adjacent to the alley, will not, under the circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and 'general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighbortwod of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the nei ,t•.borhood or the'general welfare of the City. further, the proposed modifications are consistent with the legislatfve intent of the Municipal code. 5. That due to the limited number of parking spaces available .in the Balboa municipal parking lot during the daytime hours, all required parking spaces should be provided on -site, 6. That as conditioned, the approval of Use Permit No. 3164 will not, under the circumst4nces of this case, be datrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons -27- Mxx ,a 'V CQM {►ciqust 22, i9a5 N11iTS C • A 3 r � �c w aw s •a a ar•s C, h M CAL residing and working in the neighborhood or' be detrimental or injurious to 'property ' or improvements in the neighborhood' or the 'QeneraI welfare of the city. CON TTIONSt 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- Nance with the approved plot plan and floor plans, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. That a minis m of one parking space shall be provided on -site for each 40 aq.ft.,of 'net public area' within the restaurant. 3. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the Traffic Xngineer. 4. That valet parking service shall be provided at all times during the restaurant's hours of operation, subject to the approval of a valet parking arrangement satisfactory to the City Traffic Engineer. S. That no more than 23% of the on -site parking spaces may be ccepact spaces. S. That all employees shall park on -site. 7. That the operation of the restaurant shall be restricted to the hours betwiets 1100 a.m. and 200 a.m. daily. 0. That live entertainment shall be permitted between the hours of 8 m OO p.m. and 12 i 00 widnight ' daily, and from 1100 a.■. to 2tOO p.m. on weekends. J. That a licensed acoustical engineer shall certify to the Planning Department that the operation of the restaurant will mt increase the rammbient noise levels beyond the boundaries ' of - the subject property, especially during the hours when live entertainment in featured. ! k 10. That all doors and windows shall be cloaid a� all tines. i -20- € 7 COMNVSSK)NEJ r � Z C w „s s w a a s r O Z c s • logo 0 Box a w i ss *a+o. August 22, &C" N1NWES ity.of Newport Beach 11. That a. washout area for the restaurant's trash containers shall be provided in such a way as to insure direct drainage into the sewvr system and not into the Bay or the storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 12. That graasv interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facility ut»re grease way be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 13. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and moka, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 14. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from Bast tiolbaa eoalevard, Washington Street, the alley and adjacent prop- erties. 15. That a trash compactor shall be installed in the restaurant. 16. That any larAscaping to be installed adjacent to the public right of way shall be approved by the Public forks and Parks, beaches and Recreation Departsoants. 17. ftat all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 1B. ?bat outdoor dining shall not be permitted unless an annAu t, to this use permit is approved. 19. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of this use permit, or reea�nd to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, aafaty,.peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 20. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.00.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -29- G T c• n _ r- w . - a z , e z s# Q w i y s z z _ w t August 22, , .....::.. k . � r, t MMl1TES 1. Bea�0..h , ROIL CALL INDEX i 21. That the applicant shall construct a six foot high masonry wall in the parking lot along the, rear property lime, adjacent to the alley. 22. That the project shall be so designed to elisinate light and glare spillage on adjacent uses in accordance with plans to be approved by the Planning Departoant. Rasubdivision no. 815 TIMINGS t 1. That the map meta the requiremnts of Title 19 of the N*vport reach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Comission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the prapasod resubdivision presents no Problem frow a plauaing standpoint, 3. That tine design of the subdivision or the proposed irproveamta will not conflict with any e4sments, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. XM ITI01[5 u 1. That a parcel asap shall be recorded. 2. That all isprovements shall be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Depart- ment. 3. 4. 5. That a subdivision agreewent and acconganying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory oasepletion of the public • iet e"Ments if ` it is desired to rv=rd the parcel rap 'or obtain a building pamit prior to'completion of the ' public isprovesenta. That a tea foot wide radius cornet cutoff 'at the corner of East Balboa eoulavird =and:Washington Street be dedicated to the public.:, That the deteriorated curb and sidewalk be racon- structed along the Washingtoe Street frontage, that deteeriarated portions of cuib "arid ildei alk be -30- �y Atn"t 22, l ' . COrM MINUTES i c w r s 0= r' O= Of t V�rVR+i Cz r~ d� 00 a2 O ire w w as s �=ww AaICAUI III ill IMX rvooistsvc Ud along the Cast Oallmm bodevsrd froatsge in front of the existing building and that the carts return at the corner of Washington Street and Bast -Balboa Boulevard be aaconstructed on a 15 toot radius with a curb access ramp incorporated within the curb return. All work shall be perforsied under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. That this resthbdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 year* of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planninq Commission. * * , at to permit the construction of a two unit res till condominium development and related garages L located in the R-2 District, a portion of the basic height limit in the 24/28 loot nation district. The proposal also includes ca to the Zoning Code •o as to allow the gar and second floor decks to encroach 1 foot, 2 inches into the required 4 foot side yard setbacksn and to low the construction of 7 foot high slumpstons malls on the side property lines where the Zoning Code allows on 6 foot high walls. R. Resubdivision No. 816 {Public N ari Request [eaabdivide one lot and a po on of two other ;lots sad eliminate interior property, nes so as to create a single parcel of land fo residential condowin, parpoess. LOCATION: A portion of Lots 13 and 17 and bkt 15, Block 539, Corona del. Mar, locatiq at 515 begonia Avenue, on the northws ly aids of Begonia Avenue between Saco Avenue and Third Avenue, in Corona del Mar. TY111Es R-Z -31- Item No. a UP3165 R816 WE$ \A4 Rf1CMAIL COVXCIL KgrrC 'FIACLt Council Chambers MEET Jt30 DAT93 october 15, 1"S \ ?resent ?fees tion oi.1984 8pscial Citation Award to City Newport beach for outstanding Pedestrian tivitisa was made by 0. E. Schroeder. D ,IV Kanagar of American Auto Association. A. ROLL. CALL. R. The reading of the tit tea of the Mesting of September 2 1985, was waived, approved as wricte and atdered filed. C. The resding in full of all ordlw cis and resolutions under consideration 1,40 waived, and the City Clark was direct, \ to read by titles only. ' — __ D. MPJIAINGBt 1. Mayor Kautsr opengd the public hearing and City Council To -slew of an appeal by RENDEZVOUS COK'fMIMIL?t ASSOCIATION, INC., Newport Beath, from the decision of the planning Corn ission on August 22. 1985, approving USE PP"17 N0- 3164, a requeut of GRIVOLD'S DEYELMIENT to perstit the astablishmmnt of a restaurant with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live ontertainsent on property located at 611 Past Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly totter of East Balboa Boulevard and Vashington Street. on the Balboa Peninsula; soned C-1. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so ae to allw the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunction with a full -tins valet Parking service. Report flog the planning Department, was presented. Appesl Application from landeivous Condomintua Association, inc., wag presented. The City Clark reported that after the agenda was printed, a letter was received Crow the Rendezvous Condominium Association, the appallaat. rsgvasting this hearing be continued to November 120 1955, for the reasons not forth in their latter. Voluse is - ?aga 373 u/P 31rd. pa,vlatvoue Cum1.al f,1 ml fan} All i. A-L Mumem TY 4F� SNEW�'tT-'B..ACH WOurEs D ROLL sP►9 s-�'� oeteaer 1S. 1935 The Ctty Clerk also 64vt►s4 thel a letter wag received fry Festa Moiel, 600 E. Ocean front. oppasl+y I%e propooed devslopeutnt. 4" tim letters In support of the project tips the 141boo lxprovamtnt Assactativn a" Wbl os Peninsula Point Assoctsrtr4. Jerry King, No. 1 Civic ►less, Ilevport leach. representing tip atoltcsnt, Criswold's Development, aetrassed the COUACll and requested thsr "phold the decision of the Plannt*4 tassalsolon and approve the proposed realserant. Se stated it vas the appticeae's intent to convert the Sant of Aaerita building to A sit -dawn rutsurant OIL a lnctdaacal tntsrtainstnt and al<o#ollt beverages. He stated that they rive ►erked wtth various asenclatione to 04 area* such an the Balboa Imptovew at Aaeoclation and Balboa Peninsula Point Association. and have their endorssaests for the project. 11e stated that 11e applicant has volunteered to coeslr#tt a block vall at the alley an.i dzv7 the stile prriperty llua to furthet r..,:lose the parking area and re4u<■ r-atsa to adjoining prupertirs, tl Chair project is approved. they wosid like to be able to step the wall dowse, as the rail reaches the front of the lac. tolerance wee erde to the request for continuance by the tos4srvsus Condowtntua Aesoclattse by Mr, lint, noting that said sasotlatton would like to have an acoustical 0e614ee11116 evaluation of the ealotltg lank of Aaerica building prior is City Council action. The applicant /aas not tool such s study is rertvirN at this time. lnaawch ss C011419t9a of Approval M. 9 states "that a license! Kaustical engineer *hall certify is the Planning Departatnt that the operation of the restaurant will not lntfs,te the Ambient notes levels beyond the bi-.edartes of Lb* subject property, eslectally during the hours when live eatertainaeu is featured." and that the a{oustttal test should be done at the ttae the restaurant to to ales. Mr. King stated that they are to agreement with the f LMIs{e arrd rocoseandations of tbo stiff. and would hope the City Council approves the proposal. volume 39 - Pala Vt Ilendesvous Condoainlus/ Crisvold's to- Caul. t,.T1�F ,"EWP-0R1 UWAUM YEMBM `i .; OnES October 15. 1985 Raymond Sanford. representing the applicant Criavold'a Development, addressed the Council and stated that Griswold': have a reputation of operating "fine" restaurants and hotel&. He stated that they have never had Soy probime with the State Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, and they are also toted for their restoration of hLetortcSl buildings. They are presently restoring the Balboa Inn and would like to restore the Bank of America building. They want to improve the quality of life in the Balboa commercial area. With respect to live ontertaLowsnt, they will be catering to the 40-years old and up age group. and will have no asplifted music. Jack 1'rebicln. Yraeldant, Rendssvcua Condominium Association, addressed the Couotil Snd regUeste.l continuance until an acoustical •valuutiun has brcn completed by John J. Van Houten, Professional Gnginasr, who they have hired at their *xprnss. He stated their sain Concern is that their building to only separated by a 10-font alley from the bank of America buiidlag. and the 6-foot wall proposed will be below many of their bodroom windows. They are very concerned about notes they feel will be heard an ■ result of the proposed restaurant, and vould urge :he City Council to not approve the proposal until the acoustical report has been submitted. The following residents of the Bandexvoue Condominiums addressed the Council and spoke in oppoeitlon to the proposed restaurants Hazel Jones Ed. Lynch Mary Jens Sanborn Mr. 1'rebicln addressed the Council again, and ■ubsltted a map shoving the location of the Rendezvous Condoatnlusa in relation to tha Bank of America building. A list of suggested additional restrictions oe the Use yerrtt was also presented by Mr. Ytabicto. Mr. Kin= addressed the Council again, in response to the suggssted additional conditions, and :rated that the1 are willing to meet with the acoustical engineer and staff to order to resolve voluswt 79 - lase 360 endesvous unduminival rtevold's it r CAL MEMSm G1TY" F NEWot �•-.NCH ell Hotton MMTEs ' October IS. 1995 any posatble noise pr,ihlrs, and to comply with City gt4nd4r4s and a`'A=a roue conditions Ispoeed by tl,e planning °data Cowtosion, With regsr4 to live must', .rlwold'a tb*Y propose to have only $14s-013sic such as a piano playar, "4tPlet sad the like. Fertoining to sloaure of vindws, they have no ob)setlon to parmansntly voiding the wlndawe in a closed position. prov141n1 that it A dstermiaation of tho C11y g Fire Department. pertaining to the ride entry door, it vlll be used only as an emergency fire exit and will remain closed at 411 times durind normal operations. !fearing no other■ visiting to Addrass the Council, the public hearlag woo cl000d. Notion was Bads to suetal" the 4eclelon of the Planning Cosnlasluw At'd Approve Use Permit No. 3164, ruh)xc� to tit• following changeat 1) That the clog,,, h,,,,rs of Operation be It 1I,14 4.11. on weekdays, and llf)D a,w in wwskendsl 2) That windovg be psrwansntly Hided to a closed position, subject ro Approval of 'he Fire Da➢artmentl 3) That prior to the issuance of a building permit, a IItensed acoustical engineer Shall prsecriba the $tops required to maintain the sound outside of the bullding at existing aablent leWlal prior !o the finalteation of the building Poralt, the same scoustical engineer shall certify to the Planning Department that Bald Proscribed measures have been Incorporated into the design of the building and that existing aJtolde =tsnt noise levels will not be •xeeededl ♦) That removal of trash, empty bswerags containers 444 other Items assoclated with the restaurant/bar bugloss* from the building and corerclal trash pickup from the algae shall be accomplished on11 between the hours of g a.m, and i P•11.i Volume 39 - tale 311 -� L (lotion Ares x goes Ayes x Noe a r;--TYT#O,-N.9�IPORT BEACH October 15, 1985 5) The applicant eh4ll Construct a oasoary wall adjacsac to the parking lot along the rear property Ito* and dove the wraterly rids property line. The wall shall be six last in height, except for that portion adjacent to the existiag front yard sstb4ck of the coeasercial building to Cho vast whore said well shall bs reduced to a height of three feet. Moticq wee cads to aaend the.foregoint •cam to c�►angt th0 hourp.gf closing on weekends to 2 a.*. The above aaendaent was voted on and carried. The nation, as aaer►ded, was voted on and carrisd�' �Flayor,Maurer opened the public hearing - and City Council review of a TRATTIC STUDY and USZ PrIXIT %0. )164, regueate `ot MrWOBT LIDO KWICAL CRT-U. 1,06 ngalss. to peratt the construction of 6S.110 aq, ft. *edtcal office bu ldiag on propartr Painted 1n A-P Dis ict rhich exceeds the basic height lini In the 37/50 loot gsltHt Liiait ion Dtatrlct. The proposal also taclwd a erodiflcatioa to the Zoning Cads so to allow the use of cvapact acne par g spaces fora portion of the required o-strsat park lag. sad the accoptancs an [nvlroewsetal Document. Located on p srty at 35t goapltal Is4d, as the n rtheaetorly corner of Hospital Road a Placentia Av4nus, across twos Hoag rial Bospital. Import frost the P14\Chmappl rtw4t, vas protected. Lettsta iron Darel.avid and Hansel Nnvenuti reenial of Use lernit No. 3166m4mtsd, ,ferry Hint, No, 1 C, gswport Beach. reprsaantiaant. addressed the Couns ibed the proposal as exhibited !a a et kd n display. go stated that the project iactu410 60 additional offices MA toeptsheesiv remodeling of the existing stt'utture. sad a three leral subterrsaeara par in garage which will hours "I vebistsa. Holum 39 - Page 382 UIP PIN Npt Lida Medical/ Trattic stsy (Ba) f.: 33 GiTY OF 'kWP . �' BEACH COUNCIL MEMBERS maim Oi ROIL C `� *� sP ~October IS. 11dS Discussion ensued, wherein Mr. King opt Lido anevered questions regatdlast 1) Msdicall Condition No. 75 t144tr164 applicant to Trafflc Stdy regard a covenant, 2) access into the roperty Iroo Hospital Road, and 3) ltton me. T portalnlas to sroston, ltation and dust control plan. Dr Norman W. Specht, ISt Hospital Road, set! the Council end statad that he has d his practice In the ?ark Lido bull ag for over 16 years, and is very cone about the proposed coast tloa, particularly the noise, and t foss of parkins during the constry Ian perlod. Me statad he felt some t of safeguards skovld be Imposed t protect the patients that use their but ing for madlsal treatment and service. Dr. Arthur rick, 3S1 Itneplial Road, addressed th Council s44 stated that he has had his o tee In t%4 ?ark Lida bulldtal for o at 16 years, and that he Was 61e0 vary c ncernad ehnut Chair parting lot bai "torn „p" during the construction per . No stated that many of their pat onto ere very old and shouts not be sub cte< to the incanyonlenee the 0p+sad project will tiring. me doss pot eel that the Patients Will sppret ate perking away froand being "Shutt d " to their office, and than back o their ears spin. as also stated did not lost tbat all the doctors to the park Lido building were in We t with the proposal. Ns further to the construction will affect he norm41 course of business sod the practices of every tenant in the buildl , in addition to Increasing the at of medical care. Mr. King addressed the Counei again and stated that they are cagnttant f the eoneerns of the medical profess opals In the park Lido building; however, It will take 0 cooperative effect of all arties conearned to mintmlts the proble and Spew the development of the proje t. They are takins what step* they fo are necessary to Oaks It a smooth trsmettion. ilurtmg no others Wtshtng to address the Council, the public haarlog was closed. Yalu" 39 - ►sea 383 3� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. SOX 1768,14EWPORT BEAM CA 926"15 NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO, Office of Planning and Research a1400 Tenth Street, Roos 121 Sacramento, CA 95014 County Clerk of the County Elof Orange P.O. Box 838 Santa Ana, CA 92702 tlAKE OF PROJECTe Use permit No. 3337 FROM: planning Department City of Newport Aan01 P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-0915 ppw ECT wcniON: 611 East Balboa Blvd., Balboa, CA 92661 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct five commercial/residential buildings in the C-1 district pI?:DING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. MITIGATION }MEASURES: See attached Initial Study. INITIAL STUDY PREPARED By; City of Newport Beach INITIAL. STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT 3300 Tlewport poulevacd, Newport Beach, CA DATE RECEIVED FOR F II.ING: nvironmenta rd nator DATE: Decenber 19, 1988 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach APPENDIX H Date Riled December 2, 1988 Environmental Wormation Pone (To be completed by.applicant) GENERAL RWMNATION 1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: Balboa Associates, 3471 Via Lido,__ Suite 213, Newport peach, California 92 fi63 2. Address or project: 6 1-615 a t Dalb2award . �a lboa o CA Assessor's clock and Lot xmber Lots ,• , , an in 111OCK U of the a a ract 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to bi contacted concerning this project: Paul Balalis, 3471 Via 1,id 5uito 213, Newporr beach, California 9 .. 4. Indicate number of the permit application far the project to which this form portalns-.N,-- 5. ' • -and MUM any o •r related peralts and other public approvals required for We project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: 6. Existing zoning district: C-1 .7'�i Proposed use of site (Project for.whlch this. form is filed): PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8. site size. 135' x 195' 9. Sqjare rootage. 12,825 square feet 10. Number of floors or construction. two (2) u . meant or orr-street parking provided. twenty-eight (28) 1 12. kctach plans. lj. Proposed scheduling. Construction to commence in March, 1909. 11:. Associated' projects. none 15. Antielpmted incremental development. -0- fie )1 / I� Y:.��• .�4i i ��. 1� f � I J �sy K2 16. If residential, include the number -or units, schedule of unit sizes, range or gale prices or rents 'and type of household aiie expected. five (5) residential units each approximately 1,800 square feet 17. it commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. Five ( 5 ) commercial , spaces -- four ( 4 ) of which are 1 00 q a e fe t o l� ss and one s ce o 50 square feet. t�. I' �ustr�al,ndicate type, es�■ate eap�oysn per shift, and loading facilities. NSA 19. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment par shinestimated , estated occupancy, loading facilities, and communibenefits to be derived tram the project., NSA 20. If ths'project Involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application Is required, requires a use permit for residential portion of use in C--1 district. Are the following iteaa applicable to the project or, its effects? Discuss below all itaw.checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES No X� 21., Change in existing.feature■ of any bays, tidelands, .beaches,, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. X 22. 'Change in secnie'views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lauds or roads. 230• change in pattern; scale or character of general area of project. Y--,24. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. X 25. t Change in duet, ash, awoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. X 26. Change in oaean, bay, lake, stream or ground wastf quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage pa,t to rns . 27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. X 28. Site on filled land or on slope or 10 percent or more. . _X_ 29. use of disposal of potentially hazardous matcl-JaJ3, such as toxic substances, flammablea or explosives. 03 Y E ; NO X 30. Substantial change.in demand for municipal *ervices (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). ._« __x 31. Substantially Increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,.ete.). 32. Relationship to a leirger project or aeries of projects* ERVIROIiq MAL SETTING 33. Describe the project site as it: exists before the project, including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and Animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures. on the site, and the use or the'structures. Attach photographs -of the site. Snapshots or polaro$d photos will be accepted. Site has 2,900 square foot commercial building and a parking lot in a commercial district. 34. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic a-pects. Indicate the type of land use (reaidential, commercial, R eta.), intensity of land use (one -family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid pho¢oa will be accented. Please see-palns and answers 2, 16, 17 and 33 above. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished a"rm5ovo,a5FTn"the attached exhibits prescut the data and infor- mation rtqulred for this initial evaluation to the best or ay ability, and that the facts, statements, and inrormation presented are.true and correct tp the best•of my ledge and belluf. Date December _2. },2Q8_ (Signaturel Paul L. Balalis kor Balboa Associates a California Partnership • • I, Background 1. Name of Proponent 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 3. Date Checklist Submitted 4, Agency Requiring Checklist S. Nana of Proposal, if applicable II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all 'yea' and `maybe" answers are required on attached sheets,) Yea Will K2 1. Barth. Will the proposal result in: A. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b, Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _ C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? �... .� d. The destruction, covering or modification / of any unique. -geologic or physical features? _ e. Any increase In vind'or water erosion of Soils., either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or 'erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation. -deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river ; or'siia" or• the bed of the ocean or any" bi�y, inlet 'or' lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes. landslides, ./ mudslides. ground failure. or a mllar hazards? -1- ■ 4 3. 1 Air. gill the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ,._. b. The creation of objectionable odors? C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? .�.... — b. Changes in absorption rates. drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ..... _.. C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ._. d. Change in the amount of surface water in any vater body? e. Discharge into surface raters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? ..,._. .� f. Alteration.of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? .�.. .� g. Change in the quantity,o,f ground.vaters, either throw direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer. by cuts or excavations? ...... ._._� .... h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?., — L. Exposure of people at.property'to water related hazards such as.floodingror tidal waves? — Y 2 . .'IA Y 2 fin fs 4. plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species. or num- ber of any species of plants (including trees J shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal . replenishment of existing species? -.-.• .---►/ d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num- bers of any species of animals (birds. land animals including reptiles. fish and shell- 1 fish, benthic organisms or insects)? . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique. ` rare or endangered species of animals? — �J C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area. or result in a barrier to the migra- tion or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ---. j 6. Boise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? — ]L b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? G. Lind Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? MIE x= l RA, a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? _ C. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? c. Kaintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? ..__ 15. Fner©. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development /+ of new sources of energy? lb. Utilites. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas?, b. Communications systems? C. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in? a. Creation of any health6"ard or potential health heazard (excluding mental health)? b. exposure of people to potential health hazards? .� 5 - l .7 • YJAMAXU K2 4. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 10. Mak of Upset. Vill the proposal involve:. a. A risk of an explosion or the release,of. hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, cheaieals.or radiation) in the event of an accident or Upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emstgoncy response plan or an emergency evacuation f plan? ...�. �. 11, Population. Vill the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? .`. 12. Housing. Hill the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? _ 13. Transportation/Circulation. Vill.the•proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? II _ b. Effect's on,1existing parking facilities,' or - f demand `for 'nev "parking? ; i i,�... V .._. c. Substantial impact upon existing trans».. portition' systems? d. Altercations to present pattsrns�of;circula.- tion or movement of>people and/or,goods?, e. Alterations to vaterborne, rail or air traffic?,_._ Y f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists. or pedestrians? ...�. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for now or altered gov- ernmental services in any of the following areas: 4 - • 0 XU Maft M4 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction'of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. a, Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site?. b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? r/ _ C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will this proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses with the potential impact area? 21. Mandatory Findings of Mignificanee. a. Does the project have tha potential to degrade the 'quality of the oviron mt, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop,belov-self.sustainiM levels,.threaten to eliminate a plant or anival cgam=L ty, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or. endangered, plant, or; animal or.elistinata important, examples •of,the, major periods of. California history or prehistory? 6 - "' 611 AAiBOA DISCUSSION OF tNVIROMENTAL EVALUATION 6.b. Construction of the project will result in short term occurrences of high noise levels. This unavoidable adverse effect is can. sidered to be insignificant due to the united nature of the affect. Isplexrentation:of the project will result in the exposure of the new residential units to traffic noise. however this sxposuro,can be.reduced to a level of insignificance by proposed mitigation measures.' 13.a. The project will generate additional traffic in the peninsula area., L,T1w increase :in traffic generated by the project is 223 trips/day, which is loss than It of the total daily traffic of 27.000 An on Balboa Boulevard. The Circulation Element gives the road capacity for this road as 34.000 ADT. therefore the addition. al traffic generated by this project is considered insignificant. Vehicular movement related to the site will be altered silica the existing access point on Balboa Boulevard will be closed. and all access will be taken from the rear. through the existing alley. The increase in traffic on the nearby arterial roadway system is an insignificant adverse impact. 13.c. The project generates a need for additional parking, but includes the construction of parking spaces which will offset the demand. No adverse effects on parking are anticipated. 20.b. The project Will result in the destruction of an architecturally distinct building presently on the site. Uhile the building is not registered as a'historic building, it is distinct enough to require some mitigation measures to preserve a historical record, No adverse impacts are anticipated. PLT,611- BAL. EIR rSfi V 0 0 HITICATIO14 MEASURES 1. The interior noise levels of the residential units rill be reduced to achieve a naxioun sound level of 45 DBA, through proposed mitigation measures. These masure■ shall include, but not limited to. sound insulation and double glazed glass. Sound level measurement shall be taken and a certificate of mound verification shall be submitted to the City before the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, 2. A photo survey of the building will be conducted before the issuance of the desolition permit. and theme photos will be maintained in the photo collection of the Balboa Pavilion. Mitigation measure 01 requires the submittal of a certificate of sound verification which satisfies the mitigation measure monitoring and report requirements. Mitigation measure 02 must be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a demoliton permit. and that permit will serve monitoring and report requirements. PLT\611-BAL.EIR 04, C7 • ► r. BALBOA/WASHINGTON TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ANALYSIS Prepared for. City of Newport Beach Prepared by: Austia-Forst Auoclates, 10c. 1450 Nonh Tustin Avenue, Suite 108 Santa Ana, California 92701 January 17.1989 .7 • CONTENTS Project Description l Trip Generation and Distribution I Traffic Impacts 7 Conclusion 11 Appendix ;J:16111 to# 1 941 ► �..P•h�.i.n.rw �e+1�lw.'lw sai/•+••R+'�IPr4V�.L �•r'y.Nw� i The proposed residential and retail site is located on the southwest corner of Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street. The project consists of five single fansily attached units as the second floor of the two-story project and 4,444 square feet of retail uses as the first floor. The project site is currently comprised of a restaurant and parking lot, Figure l ! illustrates the location of the project site, and Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. 4 Access to the proposed project will be provided by an existing alley located off of Washington south of Balboa. Adjacent to the project site, Washington is a one-way street northbound. Covered parking for the residential portion will be provided for ten vehicles and c off-street parking for the retail uses will be provided for 18 vehicles. Coast Highway is a regional east -west arterial through the City of Newport Beach. North -south regional access to the study area is from Newport Boulevard (SR -SS). Which ' connects to several freeways to the north providing access to Orange County and beyond. South of Coast Highway. Newport Boulevard enters the Balboa area where the highway ; terminates at Balboa Boulevard. Balboa Boulevard terminates within the peninsula area and provides the only direct route into and out of the peninsula. Tiip G NERAT1ON AND DISTRIBU TJ IQN i i Appropriate trip generation rates for the proposed land uses were obtained from the City of Newport Beach peak hour generation rates for attached medium density dwelling units and for retail uses. For attached medium density homes, the City of Newport Beach has derived an inbound rate of 0.2 trips/DU and an outbound rate of 0.4 trips/DU for a total of 0.6 trips/DU in the AM peak hour. In the PM peak hour. the City has derived an inbound rite of 0.5 1 trips/DU and an outbound rate of 0.3 trips/DU for a total of 0.8 trips/DU for attached medium 1 V M ct N IES a.r BALBOA BLVD /r'l1'O 410ewAL.106 19'. 1 '1 Oar Goo all 613 615 sl 1. r �I,► L)64 ' V M 14Fmr.11111.11.40.111T At6QCIAT66, INC. Figure 2 PROPOSES SITE PLAN �g...r.wr..•r.n :v w.a.awau•.�+.rww. ^..,....w..�4aw...`...+..,a �-.+ra...rr -". 1 1 i density homes. For retail uses, the City has derived an AM pak hour Inbound rate of 0.7 trips/TSF and an ASI peak hour outbound rate of u tripsfTSF for a total AM peak hour rate of lµ trips/TSF. In the PM peak hour, the City has derived an inbound retail rate of 1.5 tripsrTSF and an outbound retail rate of 2.0 trips/TSF for a total retail rate of 3.5 trips/TSF. These rates and the resulting project trip generation are summarized in Table 1. As the summary indicates, the proposed project will generate eight trips in the AM peak hour and 20 trips in the PM peak hour. The restaurant currently at the project site is not generating traffic; therefore, the proposed project Is not given any credit for existing traffic generated at the project site. The trip generation was factored to obtain a peak 2.5 hour volume for the AM and PM peak periods. The peak 2.5 hour volumes were based on an estimated factor of 2.0 to account for the extension of the usual one -hour peak period, Distribution of project generated traffic was derived from observed travel patterns in the vicinity of the project site as well as from locations and levels of development in relation to the location of the proposed project. The general trip distribution is illustrated in Figure 3. An estimated 45% of project traffic is assumed to travel north along Newport Boulevard to the Newport Freeway (SR -SS) and out of the study area. Along Coast Highway, 20% of project traffic is assumed to travel west out of the study area, and 30% is expected to travel east out of , the study area. Five percent of project traffic is expected to remain in the area of the project site and will not impact any of the study intersections. s i i { F 66' 4 a.rWR•{'.�.f�ly WM�rrYy 1. ew.M:utit+�a�f rti' W.q.�.,y�y4b.'M1�/ti+W MYNW�vr'+/.,rwiw-fi../.•M/MrrW W..e.M.'M 1`�!� I ��iRW�a.iw'w I!M d i4r 5 a. I TABLE 1 i TaIP Gi:MERATIOM SLIWMT • • APO PEAK HOWI la of TOTAL PH PEAK WA Attached Medium Oenalty S DU Hourly Trip Rate 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.8 Hourly Trip Gsnaration t 2 7 2 2 4 Retail 4,444 Tip Hourly Trip state 0.7 0.5 1.2 1.S 2.0 3.5 Hourly Trip Generation ] 2 S T 9 16 "MLT TOTAL 4 4 a 9 11 20 2.5 HONK TOTAL a a 16 td 22 40 i t ' !7 ' 3 i C ti � Y i r i r � 4y� The City of Newport Beach identified six intersections for 2n3lysis to determine the impact of the proposed development. These intersections are: Newport Blvd./32nd St. Newport Blvd./Via Lido Newport Blvd./Hospital Rd. Coast Hwy./Balboa Blvd. -Superior Av. Coast Hwy./Riverside Av. Coast Hwy./Tustin Av. The 1988 peak 2.5 hour volumes were provided for each intersection by the City staff. Since the project is expected to be completed by 1989, the ambient growth rate for regional arterials was applied to the existing 1988 volumes to reflect 1990 uafric conditions one year after the completion date. A growth rate of one percent per year was added to all volumes along Newport Boulevard north of Coast Highway and along Coast Highway east of Newport Boulevard. A factor of 2.5 percent per year was added to all volumes along Coast Highway west of Newport Boulevard. The peak 2.5 hour volumes of all approved projects, also provided by the City of Newport Beach, were added to the peak 2.5 hour volumes. The resulting volumes represent the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes prior to the addition of project traffic. A list of approved projects is given in Table 2. One percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes of each approach of each intersection was compared with the peals 2.5 hour distributed volumes from the proposed project. A summary of this comparison is shown in Table 3. If one percent of the 1990 peak 2.5 hour volumes of, each approach were larger than the peak 2.5 hour project volumes, no further analyses were rethtired. If project peak 2.5 hour volumes were higher than one percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes at any approach 65 7 TAME 2 APPMAD PROJECT$ SUHRUT T Y a euphet Aircraft !1 100% 1Ir W" t tavIM Mind Loon I00% Aerorutronlc lord WX lack I&Y Office 100% lcyt• bq(neertnq 100% Cal tamed I an Banat 100% Civic ►lon 75% Carwste data 30% Call Canter Newport 100% MacArthur blurt 32% Orchard Office 100% Pacific Mutual plaza 100% 1701 Birch Office 100% Newport place me Bank of Newport 10" leyside S4Are 100% See Island 37% lsayrood Apartments toot MarGar ►olm mows 25% low's card" ion teevlew Lutheran Plats 100% ludy lsron toot ouait Business Center 100% ttt Newport Blvd. 100% COW gualmss Center Mix lost Moltard 40% Miushel Aircraft 92 Boot llagshlp Mospital 100% 1 i g Carryon 10 24% fun Zane 100% Marriott Motel 1004 St. Andrews Church 100% Allred Cordos 1002 mores oevetop"nt 100% Vow Masons NOW ion llniv. Ath. Club 100% Stock 400 Medical 100% Amend tb I McArtiwr Court 52% AmWXh ant So 2 lord Am 100% Carrrr Grar+vitt• Office 1D0'% Coma Dot MAP km" 1002 loran's Development 40% Bloc* S00 apt Ctr Prof IOOx I0*WWt A4AtIcI Center J6WAl ►Wk Boot TABLE Z (continued) APPROVED PROJECTS SLIMARY PROJECT N� - .��.T_ ll T En sewporter Im Eapwwlon 100% fashion Is Renaissance YM Celt Senior ►roject 100% Point Dal Mar 100% Pacific Club 100% Riverside Retail Building ix Newport Seacrest Apt 100% 20th it Bed/Bre0fast Inn 11Z 3M Campus Or (M•Storage) 1: Edwards Newport Center 1% Seaslde Apts (Mesa 111 100% Victoria Station (Office) 100% 3780 Carpus or (M•ltoraye) 1% Newport imports 1% Newport Place Towr 1% Fidelity National Title 1% Mariner's Mite Marine Ctr 40% 15th Street Apartments 100% Awndsnt No. 1 ford Aero 100% Asentaent No. 1 North ford 100% 9 TAILS 3 SLIMMARY OF ONE PERCENT ANALYSts AM M(CT PEAK 2.9 HOUR VOLUMES LESS INAN 1% OF 1990 r r v Newport Ilvd./32nd St. 6 6 0 0 YES Newport Ilvd./Via Lido 6 6 0 0 its Newport Itvd./Hospital Rd. 4 4 0 0 Tts Coast Hwy./Iatboa•Supsrlor 2 0 2 0 its Coast Hwy./Riverslds Av. 0 0 2 2 its Coast Hwy./Tustin Av. 0 0 2 2 its /N PROJECT PEAK 2.5 HOUR VOLUMES L9111 THAN 11 OF IWO LITsRSiCalCa1 .,, GIs is t# MR PIAK 2.3 HOUR "Ex Newport Blvd./32nd it. i7 14 0 0 TES Newport Blvd./Via Lido 17 14 0 0 its Newport Itvd./Hospital Rd. 10 8 0 0 YES Coast Hwy./tatbsa•superioe 4 0 4 0 its Coast Nwy./Rlverside Av. 0 0 7 3 YES Coast Hwy./Tustin Av. 0 0 7 S its 10 c;G • • Comparison of the one percent of the pear 2.5 hour volumes with the project peak 2.5 hour volumes resulted in each intersection analyzed passing the one percent analysis and requiring no further analysis. The one percent analysis sheets are included in the Appendix. CONCLUSIOy'S The proposed residential and retail development would generate 16 trips during the AM peak 2.5 hour period and 40 trips during the PNt peak 2.5 hour period. Six intersections were checked to determine the marginal impact of project traffic on the street system. All six intersections passed the one percent analysis; therefore, the proposed project has no marginal impact an the study intersections. 11 61 APPENDIX CONSOLIDATED REPROGRAPHICS MICROFILM DIVISION intlrsl i:n : 1♦l.: •: 31v7 3 ;:n; it alst:a: 'rii-:: rs:ass ?isl:vt ::!•i:! J3:Ir 'rilfl; �:-;1•:_:►:•r e? -+� .it'1 :5:.'i .r1;:711i 'r:llCtS �r7JlCtf: 1::� �►:!!::l:rr;;l:. .:re:t:cn ;lit ? _ ; 6r:.t' ;111 : W. Harr 9fi► : 112 a ;lit 40 : 1l: �-.Jr 'V. +::ali iC10+.lf .;;lilt rl1 --------------- Mi ►r i I M 1. Eaitacss: 3?: � 9 3i: � i �ffltCCunC :i'% � `� :1ri r':'l:: *rii':: 1S 1st:litec t: u Ins tur 1: 7! rr;lf:tF: Fr::f:t Tri•;:: is istl3itl::r :l ;Ilitlr thin :Z 7; ;r;;#c m Flit :'. a;;r Triii;: v1'.ji, ,�'1►flalCn as;:tr 'atliltit::1 +,...i.• ei.m.i is rrjurf:. H lil:ouliia:n4t:rs � Ct:af+1�C! tE►�:i+ ... .... y� ••r........ err•r-•M••-•IM-II•NI•••.. •ww.�...... . •......•. i11 .. ... .. ......... :s:it:r; 'rift:; 'r::.tii :iSi: �: 4rK1;i :i:li iriiT:: ♦::t2!�:,ri.1Y 3c fl: .:tI.t.:r, i+: K:jr rljk ;i: n Fiji : i+: nur �ii+ : ; M::• *:::J! 'iCitilf '10i1li 'r',rltilf "i01�!! �0�.11 Zjit:.:ns $3 ;r3;t:::ri";' :i ii::wn t. 3i :ils ov 1z Lt 'ii:: ;.: r:.r :titfl: 'iC1411. 1,un: *ry ;: a iinsitic !: :f ;,rlitlr LISA :. 7t '.rlictel �i.r :f< ":.' �riifiC '.C1Wf. lnti'ii:tl0'I aOi::Lr Jtli:at:7� PECII 161bultwo;t:.: FAQ CCVJFMCY (EAA 3i � ............... ....Vi.................... • is T►ti;:; • Ktacar: lira 1 '!:a Lit: Ec: w-ij Tfiii:: :isi: an Aoeragi Daiiv TrW is mints, I:orin; ci 10 Plat : ;;2 nxr Accroitl a90f:1:•: �Slstl•:� A'#:::Zli Rr7je:tS �:'t:t1�z ieic 2 k c'':4:h Nell 2 U2 aver Plat W y Pelt Ill r.:'.' rtac : A;y' 1;Iat 1:1at Jaya 1:;.3e Uc.vst North: v:! 1:11 Eli:::_:: 0 0 T!vi 1. 11 istl7i:t: :7 �e .tt; tr.lr. l: 8+ :rLllitt4 rr:;t:; r3ti1: :1 is::laty t: 3t 3rwlf ;"Lr 1: ai �'7fft:YO ;oil ,narst:ttcn ciaic::4 tfh:::atur. 11 rt:11f3:. G fR?JEcTs �li:allYli�i��t:n = _ ( OAND TEAAzP ................... M �1M..1 •.1 M. t':1`.'* �!I`•:. f;:17li 711#! :.A +�1�i�P }ii1'f �I;•�:: A:"tN:?7ti•� '3 %r ;iii :.i: 6�o M:Cr:,#: A:Cruo Ens-:14 '-fpvii Fri!#Ctl 11. 7f prom-1: ir;jItt 7:►#ct.zr : ,i2 N Sr2110 441 : 1t1 nor ► m : Ii: ►141 : 1:: n"r %#it 2 1/7 nl'ir t71.3# �7113# 103�1P o41.m f:I:IP !71'i11 Nit C C7 .::: :e 17 r #st».sad 1410 1410 .i :s ►•:i#:. '►ifi:: :1 ISt:/1:1: :: t# :ill tun �� Cf %•.;1:'r: %lif :.1: nur 'r#;f:: '1:.;:rP. •r;'#C: "WIC :t Ist:Mato: td C! 0►lit#r Own 1::4 ►►r•#:U: �Ilr 1/2 M:-r 'riff:: l,;::11. :nter sec:::: ��± aRi+3E�:s i11.��t�u�ler:u► .. :j;; �wPi�Kr rf;�i��i IIIIIIIIINNNINIIII IIIII NINIMIIII4MNawIIII IIaYWIMII.. NN IIIIIIIIII M IIIIIIIII111Ia III• , 1pwlntiLh: AfiDort live ! ncintii R: �stfai'y Sri;it: i:Itiflf iiw 33 Aargt 26111 ifiiii: Mt LtYr'.:r:.:� es A? hil 2 it: f:ur A;;rcV*: �3:roi;3 istf::•; 4ponil rr3Jlttt �r:+IC:i: I, :i ►r:)i;;i3 ?•:)I: t �irn-.;.i Fit, 9r AO hit 2 112 i:.. F44% 2 i1. H Fit" !1►':u' 'ilk Y0i.i1 i*.Ijl ANC r I:� 4bQ5 Id 1 a7u:•::. :�Zo �i i;i 21I1 2 INN $3, ::t:: '•�:•:: :1 Il::iitl: :i .1li tZi' iY 3f ?r7)1::1: '•::l:: �'iiit: if iit:fitl7 :: :@ yrlit!• tun 1% of irointi: ;fit ::r :rir;:: Waa. Ihtfrintiv enaltY uuluit;v PAUMS iii �i$fbi"�t3A i�LL tk:I+ih+1�Y Yftiiit8�. 63 Intl'}t:::.!: Nwmr: 514.4 # na nti: a: �C:1:;•, �fi�f:. ',:1::eS ?1Se::C erttiTt li::r �!i�t:C 1:' a.'lS:f:R. ., i! rlil : tJt YCI.• N:�r:rt: +::r:i:' C::S::'; �tt::`iI '!7;t:ti ?r:;t!'.1= t1 at >.•:1 Ktl. ••:11:: :if#:,:cf. igii : 11: arC•t: post ; ::: li-w :tit ri 'tit ;:: MCL• Clio l::m ti'::tif iai.st LiSt:c�dV it ,Ti ('.�: ♦: i Yt1t.CunO 1Q�� J lfi7 1119 It s;� "911!t Trif+;; :S ISt: N a: tC :! itSti '.':'. :� ;► •+r,;iLSeJ =tip : ;r: Nc:• '•ifis; v:t��et. -ej1:: 'rrii;;: is tl im e: t: it :rwir vw 1: ai :•;�t:�a: PeiC Z 112 H:6r '•iif:: '1:1+��. :nLi•il::::. �i:i::k'r 7t1l::it::S tI.i ''.k k.1101:1 .s •I:JlNE. �.�'t P�:+:�T� 3il:.i«Ilthingt;,a rci: OCCW»�ty ►"c�:3} (�� w............. ............... ♦.... f.I NON.w.1.MM.M............ ......... ......... ....�..�..1.. Tfifiic iciest kilim :f.:eri#ct:vu Cult KAO I ialbul:-t1ltrw zsistiq 7riii:: !u ld r Average raiii=iraffic rix:fri5zr:4; e3 M .:12 m,;r Mphrgvf4 M:�f31CZ :Slit--; ?I;:-1aj FrDjectl Project#: !. 74 hiju tO project %rectm Fei, tr: + ;rcvth Ftik 1 1/2 +lour Feii ::12 S Feii 2 212 ficur Ftsk 1 112 ►u, '40 4 it '10:.e1 Must Voiae '10:01 '1oluse MortnbouAl 16:5 4 13 ibA$ Ib 2 :aet�acuna I.?3 :; :277 I: 0 castca�aa 9.7 :89 $is 61b1 8� i 111tNigr, !iio 3 226 22i: �: 4 ------------- a■. Fr -,;a:; IrafflC is #itlfatee t0 ►t !#$1 t1iZ IY of �rLjfCtfi 411 : 11; rTur :riff:: VOILef. ;r:jic; 'ri-nc 1s titieam to :e }reater taco I% of Praiwid Fla& 2 ;j: ra;r 'riff;; 'dupe. :Zteructlef clucltr Milisitsco lu:411s 1i m ulm. ------------w......._.._...____.........._..................��__......._...... 0 0:1 1rai:t: �al:ae :n�:,;.f M ;� :e•sa_:::�a Cast Ndy i Ilaloouiunri:r 'rirft: 'N'asas iise4 :n Averip Saily Iraiitc rlaterl5prinq H Fit • ;fit : 11: hour Appr:rtc �C?r:i;t fe:t:;rr0 :t;uaal irolects fm ictia j: a+ rrojtttes PF11 t 91reC:34 F11, ;I: A 6,"th Ptae 2 11: roar Flit 2 11. M Flat : IIZ hour hit . 11+ ,;j► '1116ee Volume ►oluse Voluet Hor;A:Nina :::. 9 10 2b23 2s i s'autnccan: :t:l i 120 3140 31 {� Ell :^c a: tell :41 S1: :::0 Sb i 4tstcc:ao iis: :i; 694 5041 SS 4 22) Fr:;rtt 'raft;: ;t 3t::satea to to lass thin 1t of %•011ttt4 �r�►�;: 4014e0. 'rafit: ;s istisatea to ce heater t:aa 11 of Projected 4i, 2 :12 hOUr Traf-I., Val'ist. Inttrsectton Cjp&Ctty Rltllt2at:31 +:.:.:. 4e410:1 is •tautred. PA�EI:tt tall iiisotn�tce FUCK. OMPAKI YEARM .s:iaZ. �.•i•�:: '�:i�tti iiLE::� 30viv 31::f �'ii�=: d:itmi2fol as AP �Eil i: �C:•' �i:r:�i: :"a if.1 ir1:tct1. 11. at f!cll::f: ;FIJf:: jr:.:r" Psi► 'Z :r: H::r ;tit : 112 r fiat : ;1: �c:► teat I :%: K:jf '.:..if '�Ci71f 1:::1f i0idif YDJWE IQE'.N ell ciittsor, ';;: 141 'riiw.: ti fttisatsc :: :f .its trio is :i ;rn n to 'ii► : ic:' •►4i�3: '14iust. :•:.!:: Sri+':: :i ist.aiti3 t: u ;•titff ttal :. 3i '•:Jf af0 ;tit ::":.:.r ?riiiic liclot. :r!=•1s:tL�- Ci:i,i:f tit:t::it37� .S.S'.;%; Trii•i:.:••stt i m: L. Awip Ci1!Y }rirt:C I.1ti�13pr. , :. r'4 :.' . -:s.r ;::r.'ri: Z:]':�: .:13:I �t .�i: if:;!{!! r►: l:ti: �i Cf I.•: irz•tt im ::1: r.,-ir ;lie ::4 i+ Flik 1!; n:lr �oi�lt :::.it rain! 'ioi•�! ia:st `taut ., 77 j ss #:: '!aril: :S �!f• :,. n v Sri,:.. .:..Rt- %+;,t;t ;rilfl: li #St:li:t: :: a tflittr :'1iz iZ �' ?'�Jlt:l3 iiiC 11: hG6f �fii+;; '1;,:14. .':t►il::::1 :iCi::lf S:7i:iitl�r. j.:.'3.1 nhal'1513 :S 't;.7rl:. ' ii,ti,;i,•; i�:30its;s�:ngts► Nw. CCUPAKI riAM ......................................................... ....«............. i :i fi+•.: '1-:.siS :3Si: :;, �+5'!;e :'t:if 'flit:{ pill : tiZ i:.r A::':vt: t:. %lay•. :t" iri.:' Feti K;4r fill :r: n Fii+ %tl► 11: ,: ,.�;, 'i' .. .i lStIeJ aC :] :2 iS's :'.i1 l: :! rfc�e►tl4 r•;,}:: +�•�:: �i 2it:titll :� to Villa. thin j::I �fajtCtl9 .all tic'. ::.. Isis is rl:ulre:. Fi,.;. OCCUPANCY 1EARA; V� .............._............_............. �,....._.........«............................«».............. 0 ::if: 404 i 7t11:r 44 Min v r'.E!il4 :a:ii Tri;+:C 'fi+ :fi JCL'• ►L ":+E: .'irfC::Cr 'Ela :!: ' ,•f:�:' 'ill :2 4J'lr ho : ;i1 �:1:":3iSS1J :iy �� :S•�0 :is:tCUM44 W, AIstt"r.4 s-r+:? ::,. 9:4 s+is 7: 73 +(:el:: (�i�'[: :f lti:a i!E: :: :� .Efi !Ci' :: :• ��:'i!:8: :1 31::fi!3: :: co yfIlty : v :.:i 'r:JlL:tJ FAWIE:'t 8i:bus twisp :r.pi:, ►:.: �::�� :;:;� ..........«...................r................................r.... ..«.«............... ._ January 13. 1989 Mr. Craig T. Blucll Planning Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Y0 MxAffts DOLAroWd = Nnw;.rn Burn, CA M60.30t0 17 t4 033.26'54 .1212 E Cameioack Ad stiole.44 it Phtxrr=. A.!+t`A318 (W1 W V01A R£: 607, 609, 611, 613 AND 615 E. BALBOA BOULEVARD, NEWPORT BEACH Dear Mr. Bluell: In accordance with your requcst and authorization, Tarantello & Company has prepared a report evaluating the feasibility of requiring one affordable rental unit within the proposed development at the above address. Included within the following report is an analysis of the Subject proposed development including five multifamily rental units above strip retail space (five tenant), with the inclusion of one 3 bedroom moderate income rental unit. The appropriate rent levels and average absorption period have been estimated and the issue of "fair return' to the developer has been addressed. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service and look forward to your continued patronage in the future. Respectfully Submitted, TARANTELLO & COMPANY fR.Tarantello, RE President eeork4 CLG !Ze'A_O11 relk4G' Catherine M. Hale Senior Consultant AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS of 607, 609, 611, 613 AND 615 E. BALBOA BOULEVARD Five Multi -Family Rental Units above Strip Retail NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Mixed Use Development By: BALBOA ASSOCIATES Submitted To: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1/13/99 _ Submitted By: TARANTELLO do COMPANY 2yl ►l1. 01 e_ r= ' STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS { I) Pre Cbirastttrls<tlra 607, 609, 611, 613, 615 E. Balbon Boulevard rt 607 Unit Description 3 Bedroom / 3 Bath 51=c I,925 s.f. 609 Unit 3 Bedroom / 3 Bath 1,923 s.f. 611 Unit 3 Bedroom / 3 Bath 1,92S s.f. 613 Unit 3 Bedroom / 3 Bath 1,925 s.f. 615 Unit 4 Bedroom / 3 Bath 1,670 s.f. TOTAL RESIDENTIAL: 9,370 s.f. 607 Retail 1,000 s.f. 609 Retail 972 s.f. -- 611 Retail i,000 s.f. 613 Retail 972 s.f. 615 Retail 544�3.f. TOTAL RETAIL: 4,444 s.f. TOTAL PROJECT: UJ2" (2) Senaflos: This study could consider two scenarios in which an affordable unit may be provided. Scenario I: Four of the proposed units are leased at market rates (three of the 3 bedroom units and the four bedroom unit); the fifth (a 3 bedroom unit) is leased at the moderate income M affordable standard rate. Scenario 2: The five proposed units arc leased at market rates; an off. site unit (a 2 bedroom unit) is leased by the developer at _. the moderate income affordable standard rate (i.e. after purchasing or leasing the unit himself). This scenario will be run should the on -site affordable 3 bedroom unit proves infeasible, (3) Lood 4,wpershia At the start of project construction, It is assumed that the land is owned outright by the developer. I J (4) Lama Cost: Purchase ` Price - provided , by , the Ownership: S l,050,o00. An additional 1 percent closing costs for escrow and title fees (510,500) are estimated and added to the land purchase prices indicating a total land cost of $1.060,500. (5) C661111111100 Period, A nine month construction period has been assumed from commencement of construction to completion of units and retail space, (6) Coastructiom Ciasts Based upon the cost estimates supplied by the project developer (Paul Balalis, Balboa Associates, January 9, 1989), construction costs are as follows: On -Site $675,000 S 48.36/s.f. Off -Site: $90.000 S 6.52/s.f. Indirect Marketing: $24,850 S 1.80/s.f. Supervision: 520,000 S 1.45/s.f, TOTAL: ssaJ52 LILULLL The construction costs appear to be reasonable based on comparison with cost estimates of other similar mixed -use (residential/retail) projects in the general market area, and based on comparison with Marshall's Cost Guide. Additional costs to be added to the retail space arc tenant improvements, which are estimated at $15 per square foot of retail space. The construction costs are assumed to be incurred evenly over the entire construction period, except for the tenant improvements. which are incurred over the leaseup period and the last month of construction (566,660 / 3 months). (7) Fla_taciaa / PCIMt Rate: The rate charged against the outstanding loan balance is 3 over prime; prime Is assumed to be an average of lo.5 Percent over the construction period. The loan fee Is assumed to be 3 percent of the total loan amount. {8) ROAZE9e1 of Lail: Proceeds from an assumed sale of the mixed use Project after completion of construction and leaseup to normalized occu• PZncy levels shall be credited to the outstanding loan; any remainder shall be credited to the capital account of the developer, constituting profit and overhead on the development project. r •` !lt r � � y � \i (9) Ai a waLk: Because ; the vacancy . rates for apartment units in the Newport Beach area are so low, the units .are expected to absorb very quickly after the completion of construction. It is assumed that the affordable unit will be the first to be leased. An absorption period of approximately 2 months following the completion of construction is projected for the apartment units. An absorption rate of 2 units per month is estimated. with the affordable unit occupied immediately following construction. The retail apace. due to the demand for retail space (and limited supply) in this area of Newport Beach, is estimated to also absorb within this 2 month time period under the pricing assumptions utilized herein. It is assumed that preleasing will begin in the 7th month of construction (2 months prior to completion), and approximately one third of the retail space will be preleased. Absorption assumptions are as follows: 615 and 607 will be absorbed in the tenth month (500 a.f. and 1.000 s.f.). 609 and 613 in the eleventh month (972 s.f. each), and 611 in the twelfth month (1,000 s.f.). The net income from rent figures are estimated by applying the appropriate square footages or bedroom count with the corresponding estimated lease rate or amount, less the percentage expenwi described in the proforma. (10) Lease Pricing of Rental Umitc it is assumed that the rental units, based upon information obtained from a recent market survey, are to be leased at the following raw; 3 bedroom / 3 bath units: S1,600 per month A bedrooms / 3 bath unit: $1,900 per month These lease prices were estimated based primarily on a per bedroom analysis of . rentals in the immediate vicinity. The subject proposed units are significantly larger in size than most of the comparables. (1.927 square feet for the 3 bedroom units), while offering very little additional utility. Bence, the lower overall, $0.99 .per square foot rate (versus many $1.00 per square foot rates, ' in the market). The four bedroom unit was priced similarly, it provides the utility of an additional room, in spite of its smaller living area than the Subject 3 bedroom units. Many of the local duplex (and other) rental information was provided by Niel Fuchs Realty, located across the street from the Subject Property. The market survey is included within the text of this report. 3 (! I) Affordable .U■lt Leak .. Ratit: The affordable unit is anumed to be a 3 bedroom unit in' the on -site scenario, and a 2 bedroom unit in the off - site scenario. The pricing of this least is based upon income Information and the affordability standard rot moderate income units provided by Craig T. Blueli, Department or Planning, City of Newport Beach. This information is provided in Item A of the Addenda of this report. On -Site Rent Maximum: $1,415 per month Off -Site Rent Maximum: $1,332 per month (lZ) Lease„ Prlclaa at Retail fisac=; The retail space, based on information From recent market surveys performed by Tarantella do Company, is to be leased at the following rates: 607: $2.50/3.f. 609: 52.30/s.f. 611: $2.50/s.r. 613: $2.50/s.f. 615: 52.75/s.f. 615 E. Balboa Boulevard has a cornet location and is considerably smaller in size, justifying the higher rent per square foot. The retail lease survey is also included within the text of this report. (13) Annual Cash Flow: The estimated annual cash flow from renting both the residential units and retail space is outlined in the prorormas for each scenario, and the assumptions are outlined therein. ( 14) Sale Price of Develogment The value of the proposed mixed -use residential and retail development at the completion of construction and leaseup or the project to normalized occupancy is estimated via capitalization or the projected net operating income to be attained at normalized occupancy at the Subject Site. The estimated net income attainable or both the residential and retail portions of the Subject Property will be capitalized separately, then added together to obtain the total estimated sale price of the development at normalized occupancy. Based on an analysis of recent transactions In the general market area for both product types and keeping in mind overall rates for recent mixed use building transactions, the capitalization rates of 7.5% and 8.5% are utilized for the residential and retail portions, respectively. Hence, the sale price or the development as a whole assumed in the analysis is as foliows: $2,287,709 (Sum of Residential Value: $64,515/.075- $960.203 and the Retail Value: 5121.339/.O85 - $1,427,506) 4 w (l5) �,;rIterl! gt _Develauntat 1Feasibift The project is analyzed utilizing ti multi -period cash flow over the" aoestrnction' � and leaseup periods or the project. The; cash outflows include the land cost, the development costs, and the repayment of. the construction loan and the variousclosing costs incurred upon sale of 'the property in the final month. The cash _inflows include the construction loan disbursements. the rents received during leascup. and the proceeds from sale at the end of the leateup period. The project is feasible if the developer receives a return sufficient to justify development. The criteria for development feasibility is a return on equity to the developer of at least 25 percent. Standard ROE's in the development industry typically run 25 to 50 percent, and frequently even higher, varying with the level of risk involved. The initial cash outflow (equity required) is calculated by subtracting the land draw obtainable ($429,016) from the total loan cost ($1,060,500). (The land draw is obtained through an iterative process of analysis or the total debt capacity of the completed building leased to normalized occupancy and the necessary draws throughout the construction period to pay for both the construction costs and financing costs (interest on outstanding balance).) The initial equity required to do the deal is then $631.494. Net income from rent is obtained through application of the absorption assumptions to the rental prices to be obtained for each unit (or portion of the retail), net of the expense percentage applicable for each product type. Hence, the total "net income from rent" figures for months 10, 11 and 12 ($4,625, $11,376 and $16,086 respectively) represent the summation of both retail and residential net income figures. The expense percentage assumptions are outlined on the proforma spreadsheet. The apartment expense estimates represent the tow end of IREM standards for the Orange County submarkct, as the Subject building will be a newer building assumably which can be expected to incur less maintenance and other expenses as a percentage of effective gross income than older, less efficient buildings. The expense percentage assumptions for the retail space are taken from experience and knowledge of specific projects held for investment purposes on a NNN basis. Last, the residual equity to be received by the developer upon property disposition is calculated by subtracting an estimated S percent closing costs ($114.385, for brokerage commissions to sell the project end the escrow and title fees and other closing costs to be incurred at that time) from the sale price calculated through income capitalisation. $2,297,709, giving a subtotal of $2.173,323, and then subtracting the loan balance ($1,478,467) from the subtotal. hence, the residual equity becomes $694.856. Hence, the return on equity to the developer is calculated via internal rite of return, using the above assumptions for net cash flow. Refer to this column on the proforma spreadsheet for the calculations. 5 ... _.... _.Ah -, r+ Adhk (16) Sutlaslaa-ai_Off-site Ugit aggeeifo�`.: The second scenario was excluded In this case due to the fact that the allowable maximum rental assuming an off -site 2 bedroom unit is actumlty greater than existing market rents for units of this type and size in the Newport Beach area. The maximum rental price according to affordability standards is not an effective constraint in this case, rendering the additional scenario Inappropriate. According to the affordability standard provided by Craig Blueli of the City of Newport Beach. an affordable 2 bedroom rental at the moderate income level could rent for a maximum of $1,332 per month. Market rents range between $900 and S1,300 for basic 2 bedroom units in the market (view premiums and extra amenities excluded, as for the Balboa Bay Club, Promontory Point, Anchorage Apartments and some of the Park Newport units). This point is illustrated especially by Comparables S (non - townhouse) to 19 (for the large complexes), and all of the two bedroom comparables (Comparables 20 - 40) without outstanding features, such as a view or ocean frontage. Please refer to the Residential Rental Survey, included on the following pages. 6 I'y iIFEWW11111141 I IRLOA.Lf_. �..i-1r{t.t 1e±.t8� 4t1RYE1 kt;('.i:.tas CRIME Erri111t:;,_ r:�IEI AREA W it Sift ts.f.l Vicincv Rental Rate R"t Per slitter ::•:ir: t:tatlon Units 1104 of Unit or Raapt Rat# or 14011e $quart toot latt +S1.F i;&.Rffq%l CWtEI£5 .......................•----.....-». 1 I£g3•t.Powit Apt$ 12: lachtlor 420 0.001 605 11.49 01105111 141: iMrlor Art. ftralMM 1-0:0 trick, CA 1 bolt 64 720 112$ $1.01 s 14-315' WVrelsheti 4 ;rr4oatcry Poiat No 1 bd/l ba 750 3.101 11,115 61.41 011051" i,") frercnto•f Drive 850 11,115 61.39 IONP1srt Brick, CA 1#1oft/l ba 810 610220 61.40 615-82ft' 1 050 1l it" 1l 4 ' c11'tea tit Cln9 liil OW1111h*ay h:rpor► track, CA t 0- Xm-') c rir: t'r.cart C'# 1,04 t/rrlort lrirt 'rr41►� Erick, CA N1.15. 1 Pa.ti. 4 i►i,rt I b412 IN r 1,060 , !till$ .S 11.13 1,185 111740 11.47 2+1oft/2 ba 1,425 II,104 $1.31 1,490 12,950 11.99 l41 Studio 130 1.341 1100" 11.40 71/05187 I1,250 11,61 foralshel 11,150 11.53 110350 11.60 unfuraish#! I boll ba 1150 111625 11.41 110125 11.5Q I bd/I ba 1314 11,115 11.31 111150 11.44 3 bd/2 ba 1600 12,100 11.31 62,600 11.83 3 bd/3 ba 2000 l3,300 11.85 l3,440 11.10 4 b4/3 ba 2100 l3,500 s1.30 Penthouse 2610 13,600 11.10 1.;06 Studio 513 •- 1135 11.43 11145/19 t bd/l ba 720 6115 11.24 l+den12 ba 10201 611240 11.03 2 bd/2 bi 1,016 Iloilo 11.08 2 1412.5 ba 1,224 111320 11.12 3 bd/2.5 ba l,518 111510 61.03 30-11 1 boil ba 110 5.201 1140 11.04 WWI" silo 11.19 2 bd/2 ba 1,015 6995 Ih.11 111040 10.15 2 04 iM/1.5 ba 1035 111300 10.96 11,34a 60.99 3 boll ba 10345 sit 10.14 11,310 11.00 3 bd 1412 ba 11525 111490 10.11 11,515 10.91 _._ _ .... ...... _ . q •.►__' _- _ _♦•. rimer •-w �...+..MF.M.'!. I saRirtnl FlI1aL S+R1Ey :51 r,lyltwl iR1AIRE M 1111' 1 ►".[ET MEA iotal site 11.1.1 Vacancy Rental Mate Rent Per S-,+erl t%•pi!rrlocatim ..................... ............................................................. units Typt of Unit or Asnye Mete or Ran" .. 1elearo Foot Otte 6 tlmlw-�I Awtaents 715 Studio 500 1.701 ........ $616 ._...................... 11.23 01/01161 lei Irrve A+tise 0123 $1.45 +'e�o�r►, fea:M. ca 1 boll ba 150 in$ 10,91 00 01.01 1 bdri ba -- F 1S0 1140 11.12 solo $1.16 2 b412 ba 11000 411140 $1.14 11,111 41.11 2 ball be -- F 1,000 11,265 11.21 mj% 11.30 J �nrl,prl;! Aplrtrrnts 39 1 ball ba 100 2.701 "?s 11.09 01105167 :k93 kw pore 9rirt 2 bd/2.3 ba 1,600 11,100 11.19 i Nmirt !'Bach, CA 9 1411 .tfde Vill4s 276 1 bdll ba m 1.101 1140 10,99 0110119 M) nett Verlt 410 O m , CA I bd/l ba 015 silo 10.94 50-91'71 1190 01.97 2 bd12 ba 1,031 1110 10.03 1930 10.90 2 b4/2 be 19235 19l0 60.71 1995 10,81 9 Farl res+ 411lis 216 Studio -- F 560 0.401 1640 11.14 01119189 f allaw. 1 Instal 1660 11.10 IW 4 Fite, CA I bdll ba 721 1105 10.98 1725 61.01 2 bd11 ba 016 s120 60.94 040 00.96 Ih'11st4 tel Up 169 Studio 410 2,00% no 11,25 MOM? ;11: rest Ver7e 1440 61.33 Eeltt "eta, CA 1 ball ba 614 1690 11413 a19'J6�1 silo 11.18 1 bdll ba 100 I130 I0.91 1110 11.01 2 bd/1 ba 912 11SS 10.94 Im 10,96 2 bdr2 ba 1,12o s91S 10.02 1910 $0.11 21den/2 ba 1,456 SI MS 60.01 f 11,250 60.06 11 f1�e:•f�1 Afartmts :42 1 bdll ba 150 2.101 wo 10,15 01/03189 t: 0i "tqa. [A 1 U11.5 ba 150 1175 10.02 tole$ 2 bd/2 ba l,02o $113 10.60 Avg "IS M.83 .. .. .. •". Y ait.�tf.FM! ithTA! S111VE'r VE5! <s ERI iRIME CQutTim.t mat AREA .total site 10.1 Vatun Rental Rate Rest per 5nt+ey r mis+flocation Units Type of Unit or Range . Rate or Range Square Foot Otte W firp ?-III Village 200 1 bd/1 be 750 L N 1 MO 11.04 01101181 1�)) R34► Verde Canto Isola, CA 1 Dd/l be 815 silo 10.14 717 5e1" 1110 10.11 2 bd/2 be 1,031 I110 10.15 N40 10.11 2 b112 be 1,235 IM 10.11 Ito! 10.11 13 "Ili Cr=t1 251 Studio -• F 560 1.16^62 1140 11.32 01/05181 555 Nli+rirto 6760 mu CIIN w+ia, CA l bdil he 130 1140 11.01 i 5�9.1:72 1710 11.05 i Hit ha 130 1140 10.11 $710 11.03 2 111/2 ba 1026 1140 10.12 6160 10.14 !i �'CCk+n1 +tllige 113 51010 525 -- $540 11.12 01101187 8l0 Pillf 1600 11114 Oita M M, CA 1 bd/1 be 725 $470 10.92 7!4-j-81 4110 10.91 2 bd11.5 be 100 1719 10." $800 10.81 15 a-1f Alptml $42 1 brill be 158 $.iti I $615 10.12 01/05/81 4j'Af0w and Flan 1100 11.06 i+nl+ Ali, CA 1 brill be 860 $750 10.11 517.01! 1150 19." 2 bdl2 ba 1+100 1130 10.15 6M 10." 2 bd12 be 1.,250 11+025 10.17 11,125 10.11 ° 15 11/111411 Stem 244 Studio $32 LIM I66O $1.70 01105/84 ' lla? flit nghae 1710 11.21 Ceti!+ rei+, CA 1 brill be 704 6815 11.04 • 1+denll w 4l6 I1S5 I1.00 1145 Il.a 2 1012 be 1,307 111200 60.9? - Il+275 10.11 11 ln+t1- M xk Vista 252 1 Nil be 760 L"I 1i31 11.01 01105/11 3 sS{tY13• /H1 11.l1 , I►Ylne, fA 2 bl12 be 1+026 I1+111 M.?1 354.1A13 11+125 11.10 2 bd11 be 11120 $934 10.93 3 N12 ka 1+327 11 o175 10.M 2 w 11111.5 11313 11+1M 11.16 1 eti wilim gIIIAL S:MYEY :$T ►(HILT fialME riEIll1'.1 rs-f 1 AREA Totel Site Is.f.l helficr Rental Rite hot Per S'Smy ;:•�Il+ lMalion Unih Type of !Unit of Rang? 04ts or Range 411af1 Foot Date ........... ............................................................................................................... 2 bd TH12.5 I'm 111245 10.11 19 411110. '111145 144 Studio 4B5 M01 1651 11,36 911101" irf:'4 fr., ;dais 11N 11.49 +.ntlnq�t� leech, CA l bill ba 765 1139 01.10 1►g.'4iF It" $1.16 bill ba 110 111051 61.04 ii,11f 11.22 26101til ba 885 MI sl.l2 11,011 u,ls 21101112 ba 11300 11,30! 11.01 u,421 1i.10 1� I";nton;+cp trelters 342 Studio 442 1.04 16l3 11.48 QW3181 Il,,ttnittr. !etch, CA i bill ba 624 100) 11.20 2 bd12 ba 884 11,013 $1.15 i ;JLI►►tl.kinM UNITS. NEOUR1 HASH .! I ^ E. I-rlrcnt 3 l bill ba 574 0.rAt 1450 10.11 61188 +fltli izl+rd 1 bill b1 • 651 14" 10.91 2 bd11.151 1 012 1100 10.16 :I ^11I frAYeue t 2 bill ba Boo 0.0'411,1l0 11.44 01188 961taf Island 22 ?!,7 1!: Agite 1 2 bill ba 11400 0.101 $111" 11.21 Will Bilboi Island 23 :►10 plate 1 3 bill ba 11100 0.001 111500 11.36 01161 Who island 24 :N E. W ba Ave 1 1 brill ba 400 0.001 1330 11.33 oil" h1bif island 29 1:t, 1 a;ate 1 3 bd12 ba 1,350 011101. 01,200 40.87 07119 3flba� Island 26 1:U 4 kite t 4 bd12 ba 1,100 0.001 111150 11.03 01111 lalbaf Island 11 11Is 4 r-%lba Ilrl I I bill ba Ilninorn 0.001 $to -- film I 1+■o7t t t:uk, CA, :a 111,01 M+r1ne St 1 2 bill ba Boo 0.001 11+200 $1.50 01111 1alblf island 21 :92 ; rarfne St 1 2 bill bi 900 0.001 $111" 11.22 01111 311b71 Island :� ` bUf 4�*Ftfl 1RIME EO"+EIIII'r_ 1f EEl AREA � local S1 E"NofWtocition Units tYle of Unit tt is.1.1 or Range M M Y Rate Rtatal Role or Reap Rent Per square loot surrty ................................ ........................................................................ 4att ::- 1"5 6': Pearl Ave ! 2 boll be yntno.a 0.001 f1J3 -- ++01/11 FfIb^r 13110 11 511 E. lal 1 3 brill IM 11100 vacant 11000 11.01 Oil" w!1007•' Ifoch, CA Si tin 1. 4ctinfrent 1 3 bd12 ba 1,600 0.001 11o134 11.03 1011 "140 •t Beach, CA nctantront 11A 1 3 bd/2 ba 19500 0.001 slow 10.17 01161 lewool t PNth, CA (rot irclnl ocfanl f3� +0'1 E. Oteaelrent 110 1 2 bd12 ba 1,100 9.001 $1,500 11.36 01119 N:wco't @lath, CA ( lot ing octal) Ss let <<t1 Street ! } bd11.3 ba 1,100 natant 11,325 19.74 01139 10prort Peach, CA 3t IUi :;th Street 1 1 bd/2 ba 21000 vacant 029000 11100 41111 1111,47rt Ifacb, CA 37 411E E. 9ctaalront l 2 bd►2 ba 1,100 vacant 11,400 61.27 Oil" N+r;r}rt Ificb, CA 39 112 E. efilt4i 11r1. l 5 bd13 ba 21200 vacant 120113 SO M 411;1 I,ftirort 4fach, CA 35 80 E. Pal/oa Blvd. l 2+den/2 11200 vacant 010100 11.17 01/1t Ntwport 8tac%, CA 40 Wit Y. b1 to Elrl. 1 2 bd►2 be 1,100 vacant 111100 11.00 01111 llfwrvt zfeb, CA Mitt ...............................................................................w............................... NO. U4I15 SURVEtE1 71031 II 1 ' l ..s.��ar i -...J __...,,.ilrrrl4.-.._..,rl� ..r.•..f ► .. 1�isr{c:.•�.. fir,--,�,.«.:.�L►+ •�....rM+ .4,.,.i�.--•- r SV,AC,t ARIA IIrlY 19141 L tQ+* Ida I'l . Y . I Li •• ... "Y a. nn •yt at k r0r/N. as b-ta La..d1..q Retail ]0 Pt{w Sa b-,* P•.tinoula VKanryl at in lfw Ion* Retail c. Say so boe Ponsneute Votencyl 1 T/ 22 A Marine Retail N a lstand 07 Vacancyl Y2 a Marine Retail ea a 1aLand OT H v or al+c It 40 •,Oa 1/.1 brflront R-t.t1 $*1 .e Island qV a ueca..Cyl wont to%asI I ai and norm* Potosi I ■ 1 and U04ancyl rk Av*nt.e Notall Ielawd I., Vacancys a fw�ato P-tall I alead Suslding42a coast ht9►wwI Ref flaw V Kaetcyi all i Square R,*taII F .q ! 4_ ao� 21. GO11 :20G-t.000� 1fi.000 0.no% �a0 0.001t sou 0.OU� -4.lOn 0.00% 2,r00 0.00% 10 4M 0.004 I'sw 0.00r. 300 o.ou% .e. s2r a. alai r0aa0 . . '1..., Hr• -. A.Y.. . i .•, ,» Y, l•l :,�.. it RC. r-optr.d-utlt Lr„ee I.rys Jaw,&. be r•newwd *TOO 00.a► no ] y*ae Lease* pays saw*. L•a,e terwinatee 6/30/61. wo-s We %%.GOO s.f. parwt,t•t leroq• 1n b..il•ling. rl..t w1•,ek spaces left with .•wlnq rent• of e9.2S-es,a�/1 ..ne ,N .0e ,f+a�• 1+It wi th Oak ,Q rent a5.2s 1,06s. so..e 11paC" hour 17ay VI•we a.W dock front 1o.tettons. 4 too rent same es •wtrt- tnq. /r** rent f-.r an day 6utl.,atat p*rI'm d. S0.60 NNN thar7*s to tenant wort*a N* parwtnp or rent 44nc-tl• �2 "as.*) s1•,ws. 60% turnover rot• according to owner. Sgwe spaces have bay vl*ws.niso includes dock • ace. Tour - se! ors-nted. Lets• raft seasanat turnau*r, -- e2.11 oroem MT" No parking; hot apartfy*nts on second ftoor.S.,tlt 1144 -- ills Oroet 3 -Ir No parking. Has .pole .tn second floor. -^ $0.61 Oroee Unwnoun Part of 1**me cont•ins IrOG Of fvel dock end -610 Dwifeont. Lea s• 1r apw a y-ert old. Below warwlt ae per ownerl shvild bo to.1r/sf. L-ased frMN *oJ1aa I•errylnat &rag lgth aroma Unknown On the bey. Net an *ewe tra.�a4tson. Le*o•d 4th "1alboa Fwry. •l.tg Srens * yr ROOM •saalatian N Stan per vow. Rot on fay. -- 81.10113 cost yr per an bay. Anntlal Cps gnome *. Z paR.lna mp*ess — s1.r! gross Uakno..n Annual Opt odJytbslent. Nat on bey. 1 pe►kl" speoo -- sa•K-sled NNM Mr11-0 /r nnnual crt sdjyseflent on awe lmare. -+ s.1.11-st.so NNM sf yr i-T; gross sale* versus ii -_�i11fCLIME SWVKY FORT ORACH AREA JNOAWV MIS ..,.----_...--•-------..._----------.......-,-_.-.-...-_....__._...__ �s-_ .&.-.. a..r.t 0.. S. �.r. %r/! to as►1 1.♦• . .r w,..r..r 1:1•f•~1!'ll,ur.f. •-•--� _ .... ._ :...:-__ ... .... • .r '.1.! J11 n.r ilK -./.IS J.\1-�- • /li / llSl .•!: 1 -- •r l .. i AG Unkr..-/.. Fi... ♦ Ir•.r ...• . .. . ..,� /• r!/ 4.'4 / .. .. \,, n... •.- '.s j • 11 i rr.: nr. •• . r .. 1 { •I'i :SGU K. G.aa■t t(JM r.w.. /•+.a{1 0.749 IJnkr.o\.n f-lR; 0@.: ofiur• :lM..• iTs-hirer/ VaCar•�/,,1 <t!O-A"o) 0.00% olirt ]�GL K. C�aat 11wy aRatatl TOO -- 103.10 Oreas Unknown rpn 4TL-i�uU Vacan.yt 0,00.; OtiR1 3621 K. Coast Cori(JIM• leuy Reta11 4 $20 -- s1.rs MNM Unknown S-&W. rent aaeat4OLnni G? t -4 f 0o V ac or.0 y t Sow• park{rq av4•! 3912 K. Coast Con 1444y molt a11 3,S00 -+ si.aa MNM Unknown 9-10% r,nt aacSlat{on 6rs-4r00 vacor►ay1 0.004 01 /" lMLI K. Coast CO" 11wy No, ta11 sat0o -- tl.ti+s1.•r NNH Unknown L-SO: rant •a44141t10n •rS-4700 VScantyl 0/002 O i/H • 2046 [. Coast Mwy Datall 3.00a -- 61.00 NNM Unkns..n far ♦ant •aaalatlon con •rli-2700 vacancyl 0.00% aw" 2010 Kf Copt Con INry Not alL 1.00a -- 91.2% NNM Unknown S-lax r.nt aacolattun 6rS-4T00 Vacantyi 0.00% a 8.0" 2814 It. S•sast COn Huy R1tas1 ].Ii11 -- 71.30 no Unknwon L-la; r7n.t •raalaelon 6r9-4Lr00 Vacan.yl ta.IW 0.00; Ot/01 3Ul K. Coast con 11.ry Ratatl • 000 •- 41401 92.00 NNM unkr.w.n In 196Map Shea*. Oahlnd •TS-4700 vacancy1 0.00% ranch warkat. VI arrwal arJuRts.ant. all„ rarrlt. teKrlltt spACK suRvmo <R.e.) ttava" :.�a.ai+..-. [-lu ..�.. �..p....t—�—`- _...� _�.,3 � .,,,,,,,�1 ..r�/"..iii. tJ�'� _ -.• . � ... � ` . I dMaYlo sasff L I i • --------._-.»---------.-._--.__ran rosl+s Cos" CLOD, sCct1Aa10 1 i- -------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- /vr-f.6I a IInl It On- 'I, to r rot ai 1'fpnrh Nwai oA+rnr r1a;rl ul ly «.J CnngrrV, Cocr: rq•.• wtu Costs Or ... arp wl Ass .n l iftpr•1 LuM/�.•iln •.NflrC. /L•/FiflfJl,q 17'•.•INS /•13."�i )L3J'23S /t:6i.ri1 /U 41 J /p lY'�•1A3 t4. J2. i•1n. U04 l'iY,. Sn'1 jfl 1ti�ll 'f ift i•1'1. pl,. 17.4G• t'ti.J1[ air. 39. 1l1 S Sol 1'f',. •.1] i11,Sh•s 79.0 4�i /•Ilf Il:' 7n lAl{.Il i 1 .• . • /'IY•S9A .•/M,1 •.. 711 17:•I,q]S 7 Yagln MarY�tlnq sU yli so7,Va3 M.'Sa1 010.733 111'a" stau. 7L• stgl,4d7 5L00./11, 11101.p4y so s0 st.gr4.T11 s3.1Sa,if31 d 1 end Consrrvettan HJ s0 1",$03 p112.203 1t3,O1"i st•I.Lro s1U2,vis s124,3rd 0102,775 s12a,3r4 30 so s1,2s1.s/i 10 tL Laasl+p Into«fo iagin■ s0 022,220 1Llc,5112 s3T,012 11371,413T so p1.3/s.170 •t.4234raS t2 seat rrejoct s0 s0 p22,220 to stL,OL/ stll,d4• p3R,23s p1L.4d11 s3•,2311 s16,44r s0 81,4Tp,46r 01.4a2.019 to •1f060'soo s•r4,510 0172.sd1 1t,0d7,4i1 s1.4T0.4f.7 s1.4r7.4ir pti,S27.9Ss ream Clr COMSTRucrIOM LOAM /ts/srtw 4.444 "two s 3% . 13.50% s1.47p.4%r Few a 3.00 : 1 •---- • -Leon t1Kr 1Mcorm CALcuLArIoMs -- ArARrn"r UNITS ----_--_____________'44T ZW-OnC - 4AI.CULar10Mi -- -- ----'--___-_-_-_-.__-_..,_.-__--- marA [ L space - cst. Mkt .ant • tlnits Maslow AtfsY4aAlo Ron% /lest! l Location 607 Ar.a (s•f.) 1,000 �17: AMM /:.sa Monthll/ ■font I s2.fio0 3 afodr.ow Unit onsltfo 601 12.50 /2,430 . cstloatfod rlarkat a.nt-s 11d 0t.aoo 3 411 $13 L,004 972 92.50 02.sO 02,,rp0 224430 [petoatod Mark.t Rent-4 sa $1,100-`----1- sts 501D J2.rs 411.3rs Total s Units 5 rorAL nOMrHLV menr rpCrMtL)t p11,2M rstal Rfonts / Month @sells FAA AL COMA ILo11 rROH Rc/1TALS 1 C !at l) o..oansfoa Ior truant fortl�atod to uo asdi" onaa $0.40 as Dfor dLseUasions yi Alan Godfrey. ColdwfolL LlanMfor, i• tnq a�ar,t for 1141baa Lansing Lose got. vacor4y CM err. *Ross 1MCOnc ra,.ap p Insurfonc. Op.r.Cir.al. rlgwt) Maint. A Nosorvog TorAL 9X0,9141991 Mtr [MCORK "t SncwsaiMo. c.pftalis• a r.s% tsr,3.0 ram As11111AL RKN'/s s134,s20 Losses.<s2,l21) Cit. vacancy <00 (>ts.r4 714, K1 Cl4,G,") 4.?0; Man"o"f1% few 2.00% t/2,fiK :pir.3r0jo 10.40% .opl. Rosarvfo/ 3.00% (02,694, t9T.ob�S'i 6-.19%. Vacancy [nprns• 1.004 <i1,3 C/21.143> st.ro% rOrAL. cvprtficst <pi,r41 944,51s MKT IMC:oncL 012163 8pf.3T6 Met Incos.fo/na. pia,I 0040,203 capitaiis+ s 6.9% •2,4a'T.sOoG SW Or vfo-ucsI i>f.2>fT/t0! SUM (f M.:./t10 4015,400 "Am MOt1TMLV MW uRVICRI <l.1 OCR) 914,000 'M oonth Otar cArActrvf 014.000 so"Ahl y >f*y"nt il.00%pw 5Nde it ai0 ~41hs pt,IrO.K7 64.63% LrV t 1. IJi I•�"4L- �fY •�L�IW�.rr fJ�w...�+PFM�maj...w . ...- I . n;i tnco"a •J 01.f'4101 a" ►1/t UrijI meuton[od /rnM Mont st ►r.,s.rfy Cash /1..0 Cu.sYlwflw " s0 :r) (1431,�n'.% !Tw31.�M5 an sp 1n cta3t.•f7l� TU :U su csi31.AS'- YU in tr1 !143t,g3lL) fU /4 !94631.M5'• sq so :4) A {1a�1.4091" I to so <1*31 "s) so rp 310 tip a31..•s) 00 to an calm,44R> 04,a2s to 04,Csi26.ss1? �11,3Ta so «a26 �11,sTa 615,4031 ta'a" oz,i73,321 rr10,s42 6"0451 $32,097 $2,173,223 655,451 (06,030,244) 1.21AI4k IRR Amr wOntT+ is . t<07t per war PROM2TV Dlsrosl rl oN t >t22s7,T01 P*ICC M14,3tTsattssI St 41a94no costs a2273323 ftarar11t t* %:4rS:4*"LO M1 BALAHCC iN,, Ka at{1I DUAL awi rY LAID AcanslTION sl,pso0*0 rusCMA3t PUCK lto:5w glusT 1% 430slno costs ii 040,000 surraf11L t�s39,la)LMW DSR4 rayt.Mt tpnriAt. coinTY ,I_ ....:I . _ j i Cfk -- I — SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS As evidenced by the preceding Proforma Cash Flaw Analysis, the estimated return on equity to the developer of this project would be 15.5 percent, assuming that the developer leases one of the three bedroom units at the affordable rate. Under the assumption that the developer leases an off - site unit at the affordable rate for two bedroom units, his return would improve, as he will not take a lost on the two bedroom unit (affordable maximum Z market rents). It should be noted that the rate of return ref Iects point estimates based upon a series of assumptions detailed earlier in this report. The actual rate of return achieved by the development will depend upon to what degree variances from these assumptions arc experienced, and in what direction (i.e. positive or negative) they occur. Given the risk level associated with this type of development, it is our opinion that the only reasonable scenario is the exclusion of any affordable units on -site or off -site. Should the developer be required to lease an off -site 'affordable" unit, he will experience no real loss except perhaps the inconvenience of locating, and then leasing and subletting a suitable off -site apartment or condominium unit for a specified period of time. The return to the developer would be maximized through allowing the free market to prevail: the 15.5 percent return on equity assuming provision of one affordable unit on - site is not sufficient to justify . developrent. Based on our experience and knowledge of specific development projecu, Tarantello & Company has found that most developers would not undertake such a development without an expected internal rate of return on equity of at least 25 percent. In summation, in a financial world where Treasury bonds guarantee 14 r approximately 910 percent at the present time, with so management requirements. and elimination of construction risk, rate risk and market risk. our most recent experience in the evaluation of development projects for similar clicnts suggests required rates of return of at least 25 percent. and in many cases 50 percent. It is evident that the scenarios do not approach this benchmark, and we recommend that no affordable unit requirement be imposed' upon the subject development. rate extracted from US. Government Treasury Bonds, Notes & Bills, Wall Street Journal. Friday, January 13, 1988, p. CK 1S ADDENDA ITEM A 16 J CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92650.9915 PIANN11K) (DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 } Date ,fig Diane Joslyn Tarantello 6 Co. 3901 MacArthur Blvd. Suite 100 Newport beach, CA 92660 near Ms. Joslyn) tlithin the California Coastal Zone, residential development to govar,1111I I1y State regulations contained in Article 10.7 of the Covsrnment Code. "Low - and Hodarata-Income }lousing within the Coastal Zone." The City of IIuwP0"t Beach administers those State regulations through guidelines established Ily Council Policy P-1. Council Policy P•1 provides for the preparation of si study to determine ohather the affordable housing required by State regu- lstions is feasible in new developments within Newport Beach's Coustnl Zone. The following information is being provided to unable the preparatiull of a proposal/bid for such a feasibility study. Project Location (address) Site Size 1825 ■Q.ft.- Number of Units 3� _ Number of: . 1 Mrs. Units 2 Bdrm. Units 3 5drm, Units � 4 Bdro, .Units ,-, I Project is to be evaluated as; a rental project _ X both an ownership and rental project For purposes of this feasibility, the City of Newport Beach requests that the consultant prepare a feasibility study by analysing the provision tit --_.1 unit(s) at the ooderata _ income level on -site. if this initial analysis demonstrates feasibility for an* pr both types of tenure, the cor1u11itnllt shall continue to perform analyses for the feasible tenure type at 01101 successively lower income level until infeasibility is dessons.tratad. Current tncona information in conforuance with Attic Z . Afford#bility standard: Taro of affordability: 30_.., years. s ►or+,i90 qll 0 IM -6. r January 4o 19119 Page two Y. 1 The applicant has received a copy of this letter and understands thnt a request for a feasibility study will require additional informatloii, Including but not limited to that listed below. The applicant also under- stands that this information will be needed by the study start-up dnto aild that the availability of the information necessary to complete the feasibil- ity study could influence the time required to complete the study, ' Site Plan • Floor plan and daseription of various floor plan designs • Cost of land substantiated by a purchase agreement at other official document i Construction period • Construction cost including off -site costs and list of smenitina This letter does not constitute a oontzact, however it does constitute a request for a proposal/bid for services. A contract for services will i,a executed between the City and the consultant at sucil time ss the 1)"(0 ct applicant requests a feasibility study. Please provide below an astimatQ of cost, time required to prepare, and start-up data for a feasibility study oil the project identified above. In addition to the proposal/bid informaLioi,, please sign and date this letter, keep a cppy for your files, and reL111-11 tfio original to the City. Thank you, Cost to prepare feasibility study: 35760.- dollars. Time required to prepare feasibility study: ,, days. Date an which preparation of feasibility can begin; / 5 CITY Of U99PORT BEACH By vat L`f BAP L • iiT. B! CONSULTANT L 1 I r; ADDENDA ITEM B .e DR. R. TARANTELLO, CRE EDUCATIONt Doctor of Husines.4 Administration - Real &skate and Urban Land Economics, 1976 University of Southern California Manter of Ilunlness Administration - Financial Management and 8uwlness Economics, 1971 Uniremity of Southern California Bachelor or Science - Real Estate and Finance, 197o It California State University - Los Angelan PROFESSIONAL, Amcrlcan lloclety of Real Estate Counselor, CRE AFFILIATIONSt Urban l,nnd Institute (Full Member) American Institute of Corporate Asset Management, FCA National tntid California Axqoelation of Realtors American Iteal Estate and Urban Economics Assoclatlon Dlltl:r:TORSHIPSt Charter Snvings Bank - Huntington Beach, California Security Pacific Participating Mortgage Trust I - Denver, Colorado 11usIN1:93 1978 to Present, Presldent, TARANTELLO do COMPANY, wlth F.XPERIENCEt full responglbillty for all real estate research, consulting, Inventment advinory, and valuation services. TEACHING Adjunct Associate Professor of Real Estate and Urban Land EXPERIENCEt Economics Unlveralty or Southern Callrnrnia, 1979 to Pressnt AFmIstant Professor or Real Estate and Urban Land Economics. University or Southern California, 1976 to 1979 Assistant Professor of Real Estate, Finance, and Urban Land Development California State Polytechnic Unlveralty, Pomona, 1971 to 1976 1110NoltS, Wall Street Journal Achievement Award, 1971 DISTINCTIONS Wittenberg Fellowship for Doctoral Studies, 1976 AND AWARDSt University of Southern California "Outstandfog Faculty Member", 1976 -1979 Bata t7amma Sigma, National Honorary Fratwalty Edltor-In-Chlef, Journal of the America Society of Real Wate Counselors .qq 0 EXPERTMITNEBO DUr+e Darts, et al, vn. City of Ncwport Beach, Onw4o.County TESTIMONIESt &gmlor Court, Cane No. 32-16-U, July, 1916 Juan Segundo Jr., et aI vs. City of Rancho Mirage and Cll'r Rapp vs. City of Cathedral City, Federal District Court, Case now. CV 82-4338 AAH and CY 84-3678, June -July 1985 Oceanside City Council, Mobile Home Park Rent Control Ordinance - testimony on October 112, 1915 San Jose City Council, MobIIR Home Para Rant Control Ordinance - testimony on May 28, 1985 City of Orange City Council, Commercial Development potential - testimony on February 1% 1985 San Joao Rent Stabilization Board. The Economic Impact of Rent Control on Inventor Return - testimony on September 14 - 250 1984 President's Commisaion on Housing - presentation on October 20, 1981 LoR Angelen County Rent Control Advisory Board, Fair and Just Return in Rent Controlled Units - testimony on April 9, 1980 Lon Angeles City Council, Rent Control - testimony on July 25, 1971 ' California Amembly, Committee on Housing and Community Development - testimony on May 30 1978 U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs » testimony on January 17, 1978 SELECTED Books PUBLICATIONSt Tarantello, Rocky Ail Findlay lit, Chapman MI and Memner, Stephen D. Real 'Estate Portfolio Anal ls. Lexington, Massachusettan Lex ng on Boom pu 1 eD.C. Heath and Company, 1911 A Multl-Perlod Real Estate Investment Simulation Modeli A financlat ManastimenIRae of ReAp—p—Lq-4`cFj ff1Ui Ill. V. a"II.Y.Mr lawn we ai. rm�i 4aa, vvn.w .v .•••w. r—.w.v and Urban Land Studlea, University of Connecticut, 1981 The ` Future of the Real Bstate INJustm Center for Futures IRestarch,, UinlwiRfy-of 56utimn Qdffiownlas 1974 Rai neW JoWi l Artielem "The InWim IDepetfdertey of Lrreraged lnvestmentU," Real Estate lasuesp Vol. 10, Number 20 Fall/Winter 1986 "FMMR: A Programmable Calculator Implementation," with O. Tenzer, The Real Estate Appraiser aid Aoab*p 1981 SELECTED "RL* Analyils In Real Estate, Part It b There Even an Old IRR Puln'16AT10*6 Literature Under Risk," with M. C. Fladay andiLlUmmer, (Cont.) The Real Estate A ' raker and Anoyst July-Aupri, 1979, "Real Estate Education at U.S.C.," JouMS1 of ,gbanclnl Education. January, 1979 Abstracts "A CAPM, View of VRMP," with R. V. EaRtin and M. C. Findlay, Journal of Financial and gugatIlAilye s November, 1976 j' II Other Pubticatloaa "Continuation of Single Digit Rates Likely," Building Orange County June/July, 1986 "Mortgage Lendingo guying the A*eumptionel" Building Ora2ge Count June/July, 1985 11985 Outlook for Real E"tate and the Economy," Bulldl!N Orange County, December/January 1995 "Pont Election Interst Ratter What to $xpeot," Building Orange County October/November 1984 "Presidential Blectlons and Housing Economics," Bui_ ldl2g Orange County, March/April 1984 , "The Plight of the Thrifts," Executive Magaainer Vol. 9, No. 20 February 1992 — "The Plight of the Thrift lrx4-ttry," A,B, Laffer Assoclates, August 17, 1981 "Free Market System Solution to Housing Problemo" EIIAJOranffe County October 1980 "Rent Control and the Housing Criels In Bouthern California,' Parts I and 11, with M,C. Findlay, Real Estate glyptrated Vol. L Non. 9 and 10, March 1980 "Why Firms Leave Lon Angeles," Local Oovo nments' Decisions and the Local Tax Bass Tho Lincoln Institu to ror Land Policy, c 0 er, 1919 "Faulty ,Visions;, Tho Economic Shortsightedness of Rent Corr ,trot," Callf4Mla_Real _Estate, December 1976 "Loa :Angeles.,Houxing Cats, Economics •old Public Policy,' Southiern California Budgew February, 1171 DBA Diassrtattoin,; Variable -Rate rsa 9b- to M029aze Anr,trtimpnia, A lik"ve n eYvtie _ Maraft 11112111111111 11 PROFESSIONAL' Guest Speaker, Boclety of Industrial and Office Realtors, AND ACADEMIC+ "Economic Overview - S10R Annual Conferenee, Beverly 11111", California, Mare 13,1987, Anaheim, California, March 27, 1987 Guest Speaker National Amwciatlon of Industrial and Office Parhs," Orange County Offlec and Industrial Trendv," Newport Beach, California, February 5j 1961,' Guest Lecturer# Stanford University Graduate School of Badness, "Real Estate Development Strategies," Palo Alto, Callfornla# January 28, 1957+ Guest Lecturer, Dept, of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, "around Lease Provisions for Indian Allottea", Palm Springs, ft California, April 161986 Guaat Speaker, National Amsoclatlon of Industrial and Office Parke, "Interest Rates and Thor Economy," Los Angeles, Caltrornla, March 8, 1986 Ouest Lecturer# University of Chicago, "Real Estate Research and The Development Process," Chicago, 1111nolop November 15, 19Ab Guest Speaker, lnstitute for Real Estate Management, "The Impact of Real Interest Rates on Real Estate Returns," Coate Mega, California, November 13, 1085 Guest Speaker# National Amoclatlon of Industrial and Office Packs, "Capital Markets, and The Now Tax Propcoale," Long Beach, California# July 10, 1085, Guest Speaker, National As oolotion of Real Estate Companies, "The New Economics of Real Estate Investing," Ban Diego, Callfornla, May d, 1985 Oucst Lecturer, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, "The Business of Real Estate Consulting," Chicago, Illlnols, April 25, 1165 Moderator, Amerlean Society of Real Estate Counselors, "Fiduciary Service Opportunities for Real Estate Counselors; Chicago, Illinois# ApNU 24, 1905 Guest Spcaker,;Building Owners and Managers Aanoaiation,'The R I impact of Urban Econ6mles.on Real Estate Investment Values; Santa. Monica#'.Callfoinla, April 15, 1965 Gu at Speakerp National Association of Wkintrlal and Offlec Parka, , Iwtttutloaol, Reaction , to the Poet Election Economy; Phoenix, Arizona, Noi embi!r 7, 1951 . . 1. "ter PROFESSIONAL Quest Speaker, California Society of Certified Public AND ACADEMICt Accountants, "The Financial Economics of Real 19Rtate (Cont.) Investment," 1"Ine, Gallfornla, September 26, 1994 Guest Speaker, Union Oil Co"ratlon, "The impact of Real Estate Economics on Timing and Location Choice, Rancho Santa Fe, California, September 17, 1984 Oust Speaker, California Building Induntry Anroalatlon, "The Outlook for California Real Testate Development," Costa Mega, California, May 10, 1984 Quest Speaker, Soolety of industrial Raltorg, "Industrial Property Development Strategies; Lon Angalrw, California, March 27, 1964 Guest Speakrrf Union Oil Real FAtate Conference, "Industrial Real B+tate WendR," October 3, 1983 it Quest Speaker, International Council of Shopping Centers. "Development Trends In Retail Real Estate; September 23, 1983 Durit Speaker, Touche Ross & Co., "Real Estate Economics" Scottwdale, Arizona, May 17, 1982 Guest Speaker, California Bar AFmclatlon, "The California Real FAtate Investment Market," Palm Springn, California, April 24, i984 Guest Speaker, Los Angeles Society of Financial Analysts, "The Future for flowing+ Boom or Bunt," Los Angeles, California, October 1, 1981 Guest Speaker, County Planning Commlrarloners Conference. "SB 200 and the Peripheral Canal," Newport Beach, California, March Is,' lost Duext Speaker, Toren 11811 of California, "The Current Real Estate Investment Market," Newport Beach, California, March 1s, lost Guest Speakers Union Bank, "Real Estate Investments for the 180s," Low Angeles, California, September 24, 1910 Guest Speaker, Society of Real Estate Appraisers, "The impact of Rent Controilo Studio'Clty, Californla, January 8, 1980 Guent Speaker,' Weir' rational Association of Ansessment offi- cer*, "The 'Imppeent of Rent Control on Rertdentlal Valuer,* Las Angeles, Callrornln;`'Jtne 21, 1979 ' Oust Smkers CountXwlde Conference on Aging, "Rent Control and the Elderly," Lan Ales, California, June 14, 1979 I I .= J! , ` 44 PROFESSIONAL Guest Speaker, Lincoln Land Institute Confemee on Local AND ACADEMICS Dorernment Decisiona and the Tax Bane, •llhy Pirmn Leave Big (Cont.) Cities The Lan Angeles Area Survey," Loa Angeles, California, February 9, 1979 It 8 Guest Speaker, State Convention of the California Association of Realtors, "Rent Control: The Myopic Solutlon," Ban Fran- clAco, Callfornia, September 25, 1978 Presentations American Real Estate and Urban Economic Arsoclation Meetingsl "Single -Period re. Multi -Period Measures of Risk and Return," Chicago, Illlnola, Augot 11, 1978 Cumt speaker, Savings and Loan Executlras Comference at the Center for Management Education, Univeralty of Southern California, June 1977' Presentations Eastern Finance Assoclationl "Stochastic Doml nonce Analysis of the Fixed -Rate vs. VarlaMe-Rate Mortgagor," with M.C. Findlay Boaton, Massachusetts, April 1977 Presentatiom Financial Management Aaeoolatlon Annual Meet- Ingsl "An FMRR Real Instate Investment Simulation Model; with M.C. Findlay and S.D. Messner, Montreal, Canada, 1976 Presentation: Western Finance Aasoelatlonl "A CAPM View of VRMs," with R.V. Bastin and M.C. Fln4ay, San Francisco, Californla, 1976 Cluent Speaker$ National Convention of the National Amoolation of Realtors:, "The mum of the Variable Rate Mortgages," San Francisco, Callfornia, Novemb" 1975 B10GRAPWCAL SkETC11 Dr. R. Tarantello Dr. Rocky Tarantello joined the faculty ,of the University of Southern California In 1974. Hr cumntly holds the position of Adjunct Anaoelate Profeemor of Real Estate and Fend I.conomles, lie rreelved hie Doctor of Buxinern+ Adminlatratlon and Master of ! 11upcinn" Adminlstratlon degrees from U.S.C. and a Bachelor of Science In Business Administration from Calirornle State University at Los Angeles. Professional credentials include the CRE designation of the American society of Real E,+tatr Counselors, Full Member or the Urban Lend Institute, Fellow of the American Inxtltute of Corporate Asset N"ement, National and California Association of ltraltorx. He has extensive experience In real estate development, Investment, market research, a pQlalaal, and courNeling throughout. the United states, He is also President of Terantrlio do Company, a real estate couneeling and valuation com � pany�with offices 1n Callrornla and Arizona, and serves on the Board of Directors of Charter,Savingr Bank and Board or Trustees of the Security Pacific Participating Mortgage Trust L b F a EDUCATION: PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: BUSINESS EXPERIENCE: CATHERIN&M IAAL1 Bachelor of Arts, Economics, Cum Laude University of California, Irvine U.C. Extension Urban Planning, Light Construction and Development Phi Beta Kappa, American Real Estate Society September 1987 to Present, Semler Comsullant, TARANTELLO & COMPANY; February 1986 to September 1987, Co■soltaat, TARANTELLO A COMPANY, with full responsibility-, for conducting real estate research, consulting end valuation services; 1985, Marketing Representative, NEWPORT PACIFIC CAPITAL COMPANY, with responsibility for wholesale marketing of public and private reel estate limited partnerships. r -- REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS: Full responsibility for the analysis of macro/microeconomic influences on a specific project and/or location, and for determining future development potential and marketing strategy for the foliowing: ' Highest and Beat Use Study for 17 acre waterfront parcel In downtown San Diego, California • Market and Development Potential Studies for custom homesites, rero lot line attached homes, townhomes, and stacked flat condominiums, Orange County, California • Market Analysis of Multi -Family Residential land, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, California Real l*glgsg1&esearchend Valuatiop Servjges: Full responsibility for the production of the following competitive market profiles and/or valnatlost analyses: Residential Proposed and/or existing apartments, townhomes, condominiums, detached homes, waterfront detached homes with boat slips, mixed residential in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Alameda, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Napa and Solono Counties QmMerclsi/Office; High -Rise Clan 'A'. garden, and medical office buildings, in Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura and San Diego Counties '' ME REPRESENTATIVE CLIENTS: ;4 a � Neigliborhood shopping centers, fast food restaurants, financial buildings, service stations In Change, Loa Angeles, San Bernardino, San Joaquin and Fresno Counties Iattlla Lkk Warehouse, distribution facilities, San Diego County LggU; Single family detached, townhouse, coadomisium and mixed residential subdivisions, school sitE, planned . unit developasents (mixed use), specific plans its Los Angeles, San Bernardino, San Diego, Ventura, Riverside, Alameda, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Napa and Solano Counties The Department of the Navy Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago O'Brien and Hicks Development The Andes Group IDM Corporation Occidental Land Research Bank of America Fieldstone Company Wermington Homes R.P. Warmington Company Winbrook Development PMI Financial Brighton International Traaspecifle industries Crawford Hills Development Company • JANJ 2 *a s To: Newport Beach Planning Commission Dear Commissioners, • January '►, 1939 Concerning use Permit #3337 and Variance # 1149 ect. I strongly object to the use permit and Variance for all of the following reasons: 1. Parking on the peninsula is in such short supply that to allow ani less than code would be a big mistake. 2. I feel that to allow Residential habitat over a Co:rsnerical building on a main boulevard in asking for more of a parking input than is good for the area. 3. I refer to the two buildings now over two years old on Balboa Blvd. built by Russ Fluter about 30th Street both commericals are still for rent and I think one the residentials still vacant. The only conclusion that can be drawn iS, the idea of mixing C zone and R zone as proposed is not a practical solution from both the owners and the communities standpoint. Thanks for your considered negative lfote in this matter. Sincerely, ��- WAL25---- Curtis Herberts r r • • G January 13, 1999 Mr. Craig T. Bluell Planning Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 INVOICE Swo m k.wpon tea, CA92 eo-XK) "Ifl am-2650 4222 E. Cwroeadr fld_ Svae 200-H Phoenl., AZ MM RE: 607, 609, 611, 613 and 615 E. BALBOA BOULEVARD, NEWPORT BEACH JOB NO. 17118 Services Rendered: Research and preparation of a feasibility report of the above referenced property. Ah10UNT NOW DUE: ,3� Terms: Net 10 days. A finance charge of 1.0% per month which is an annual percentage rate of 12% is charged on all past due accounts. Please make check payable to Tarantella do Company, and remit with a copy of this invoice to: 3901 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 100 ' Newport Beach, California 92660 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service and look forward to your continued patronage in the future. Respectfully submitted, TARANTELLO do COMPANY Diane W. Joslyn Senior Marketing Co ?ultantl w 3 E CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658•8915 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 Data Januaa 4 Diane Joslyn Taranteilo b Co. 3901 MacArthur Blvd. Suite 100 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Ma. Joslyn: Within the California Coastal Zone, residential development is governed by State regulations contained in Article 10.7 of the Government Code, "Low. and Moderate -Income Housing within the Coastal Zone." The City of Newport Beach administers those State regulations through guidelines established by Council Policy P-1. Council Policy P-1 provides for the preparation of a study to determine whether the affordable housing required by State regu- lations is feasible in new developments within Newport Beach's Coastal Zone. The following Information is being provided to citable the preparation of a proposal/bid for such a feasibility study. Project Location (address) fill, 613. 615. 617.. 6. 19 alboo-glvd. Site Size _A2.825 sq.ft. Number of Units Number of: 1 Bdrm. Units 2 Bdrm. Units 3 Bdrm. Units & 4 Bdrm. Units Project is to be evaluated as: a rental project _ x both an ownership and rental project _,____ For purposes of this feasibility, the City of Newport Beach requests that the consultant prepare a feasibility study by analyzing the provision of I unit(s) at the a to income level on -site, If this initial analysis demonstrates feasibility for one or both types of tenure, the consultant shall continue to perform analyses for thu feasible tenure type at each successively lower income level until infeasibility is demonstrated. Current income Information in conformance with Article 10.7: Affordability standard: 341 Qf incom2_for reRtai 2 .jr:��, Term of affordability; 3Qyears. V_ br: 01t-sit= 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach T i • January 4, 1989 Page two The applicant has received a copy of this letter and understands that a request for a feasibility study will rhquire additional lnfornatlon, including but not limited to that listed billow. The applicant also under• stands that this information will be needed by the study start-up data and that the availability of the information necessary to complete tits Caseibll- ity study could influence the time required to complete the study, Site Plan ' Floor plan and description of various floor plan dosigns ' Cost of land substantiated by a purchase agreement or other official document Construction period Construction cost including off -alto costs and list of nme nities This letter does not constitute a contract. however it door constitute a request for a proposal/bid for servicen. A contract for sarvicen will bn executed between the City and the conoultnnt at such time sa the project applicant requests a feasibility study. Please provide below an estimate of cost, time required to prepare, and start-up date for a feasibility study on the project identified above. In addition to the proposal/bid information, please sign and date this letter, keep a copy for your files, and return the original to the City. Thank you, Cost to prepare feasibility study: 4357 0 r--- dollars. Time required to prepare feasibility study: 2 ,days, Date on which preparation of feasibility can begin: 45 CITY OF NEWPORT BFACH CONSULTMIT By Dat CTB\PI-I.ET,89 5y Glri��Lf� Date Vl1111-t L� Kwx Magary- Ir 4WE Mr.Craig Blue, 11 a am Guile mm. P120,010i Department City of Nowport Beach 3300'Nc'*j*fl.Bdul@Y9rd, Newport 'Back'. CA '92663 i4i), _A all& 11i'sibij' =Of 1L Or Crair. Pursuant to your request, Tarantella A Company is pleased,.'lo submit this brief pre - -contractual letter to . provide L a feasibility - study of Iov� 10 moderate income le i vcl units On the SubJcct Site a., specified above. More specific parameters and details shall be provided to Consultant by.ClIent. The fee for the sc0'Pc of services shall be $3,= Payment In full is due upon Completion of the assignment. Said feasibility study shall be Prepared and delivered no jater than January 13, .1989, of within 10 days of the execution dale Of"' the. formal . contract between- the City of Newport Beach (Client) and jarantella A Company (Consultant). It lhIi,:,p4*OPOU.1. letter meets 'With' below' add:,� yo Uf approval,approval,Please sign where Indicated -return, 0130 copy to this office.' Consultant ex oil a formal contract PC to be: dr'' awe by January 6,,1989.:. we' appreciate: the; unity'.40 -be .'�o service and 'look f lure* to your' '66ailaued'petidaiscii thelfu Klndist�rc TRANTELW i"COMPA'NY '"PROVED AND ACC1ErMD'FO•R:--.1- PO City o New r rt 13"ch.l. .'W rkeliai consultant 7- J L. ..X . jW A Cr I Z' 1w 5. q • J. A V R A., J'An- • •COAST■ . s 640 North Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 558-2836 UW CE MAST T MU FSC FUW 640 ti. TLstin i205 Santa Ana, California Date: IkNenber 23, 1988 Attentions Mary Ycxw 110. 0424 Order No. 151551-5 Dated as of November 17, 1988 at 7:70 A.H. In response to the above referenced application for a policy of title insurance, the insurer hereby reports that it is prepared to imus, or cum to be issued, as the data hereof, a Policy or policies of Title Inmsraroe describing the lam and the estate or interest therein twoeinafter set forth, insuring against loss ubich may be sustairx3d by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception below or not excluded from ccrjerage pursuant to the printed srles, Condition and Stipulatiom of said policy forts. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage of said Policy or Policies are set forth in Schedule 1 and Schedule 1 (continued) attached. Copies of the Policy forms Wux ld be read. 'They are available from the office which issued this report. 'This report (and arty supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is ass red hereby. If it is desired that liabili bbeaqwavW prior to the issuance of a policy of title , a 8 traertt should be requested. DM BOYNrCH Title Officer The form of policy of title insures= contemplated by this report is: "a California land Title Association Standanl awerage Policy - 1973, owner's policy". The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Report is : a fee Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: CAISMMA OVERSEAS BMrK, a California Corporation. Order No. 151551-5 � • Mm lard referred to in this Report is situated in the state of California, County of Orange and is described as follows: Parcel 1: Lot 4, 5, 6 and the Westerly 13 feet of Lot 7 in Block 8 of Balboa Tract, in the City of Hewport Beads, County of Orange, State of California, as per map reoord©d in fir ok 4, Page 11, of Mi scel l ancous Maps, in the of f loe of tho County Recorder of said County. Pwmml 2: Int 8 and the Easterly 14 feet of Lot 7 in Block 8 of the Balboa Tract, in the City of lkM=rt Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as par map recorded in Book 4, Page 11, of Hisaellani=w Kaps, records of said Orange County. 14ote: All of Central Aven►ie adjoining said Iota, excepting the Northerly 6 feet and the Southerly 6 feet was abandoned an it public highway and the portion so abandoned conveyed to the Lee Angeles inter -Urban Railway CaqpwV, and silently the Northerly 13.25 feet f:rxl the Southerly 13.25 feet of the portion so abvrd ied was conveyed to tho City of Newport Beach, a Mmicipal Corporation, for highway purposes. At the date hereof exceptions to oaverage in addition to the Fiore and Exclusions in said policy form would be ran follows: A. General and Special Taxes for the fiscal year 1988-1989. Total amwnt $13,891.40, First Installment $6,945.70, second Installment $6,945.70, Code Area 07-001, Assessors Parcel No. 048-123-08, Excerption bone. B. A prepoced assesmient for undisclosed, which will be=ra a lien if confirmed by the legislative body and seven r000rded. C. Tax Sale Dort to follow. D. Any additional amcmints of general and spacial taxes which may be assessed by reason of: (a) Reappraisal of the property values as of Much 11 19751 (b) Iuprovements added subse*wmt to lurch 1, 19751 (c) Change of ownership enr to March 10 19751 (d) Arey final judgaent determining Article 13A as added to the 0anstitution of the State of California, being invalid, unoonstitutional, or having been improperly applied. E. The lien of aippl eaental taxes, If any, assesMd p zzumt to the provisions of Section 75, at seq. of the Pavenue and Taxation 0oda of the State of California. E XEMCIS CX117MK ID ... Ir No. 2 OROM • 110. 151551-5 • 1. An earA ent for street and incidental purposes as provided in an instnzrc-nt recorded in deed recorded as Instrument No. 86-106254, of official Raoords, along Lot 8. 2. An unrtoorded Iease dated August 7, 1986, by and batman 611 E. Balboa, Itd., a California Limited Partnership and Rerderwvm Dallrom, Inc., a California corporation, recorded Augufft 81 19860 as Instnwwnt tie. 86-351401 of Official Record, subject to the tear provisicm and conditions as therein contained. 3. The of fact of doom ents, proceedings, liens, dec rer or other ■attars which do not specifically described said land, but which, if any do exist, may effect the title or ilien or enctzbranwe thezaan. 7ho name search necessary to ascertain the existence of such matters has not been ccnpleted and will require a statement of information frM new owner in order to ecnplete this report. DO:kc Policy hate: contract TIM Enclosures: Plats • SC IIEDULE 1 • CAUFORNIA IAND 71TLE ASSOCIATION STANDJIItO COVERAGE POLICY - 19" The following naatlers are expresslcy excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pal, lose or damage, cos attorneys' Ices or expenses which cease by reason of. 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental seguialien (Including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances. or regulatlor resiricling; regulating, prohibiting oar rejatinI� In (i) the occupancy, use, cu.enjoymenl W lbe land; qi) tlsa character. ofimensio of Ir,catiun of any Inprurn �veent now a hereahat erected on the land; (III) a separalian m ownership or a change In the dimensions Of area of the land of any parcel of which the land is or was a part; Of (iv) environmental protection, or the effect al any violalit of these laws, orllilunces or governmental regulations, except to the exlenl that a notice of enforcement thereof of a notice of delecl, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public recon at Uale of Policy. lb) An guvernmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the client that a notice of the exercise ihercoof or a notice a lefe[l, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged vioslation affecting the land has been recorded In the pub records at Date of Polly. 7. Rights of eminent domain linless notice of the exercise thereof has keen recorded In the publk records at Dale of Policy, but n, e%cluding¢ from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Dale ul Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser f, value wllROui knowledge. I. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matter (a) whether or not rrcurdrr) in the public records at Oatc claiming; of l'iali•ry, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed 10 by titre insure Ill Mal known to the c.urnliany, not recorded in the public records at Dale of Polity, but known to the insured claiming and ni disclosed In writing u, the Carnpany by file nssuaed clannanl pnor to the dale polir y. tl►r iI►,ureel clairnn nanl lurcet an insured under Ili (c) lesulling in no bass Of rdarrlage to the insured claimant; (d) attarlhing ur cicaled s,+hserluent to Dale of Pldlcy; w (a) Icsulliug In loss ur damage which would not hove been suslained if ilia insured clairnanl Marl paid value for the insured mortgage t lam Ilia estate car inreresl insured by this policy. 4. tinenfuicea6lity of the lien of the Insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the Insurer! at Dale of Policy. or Ili inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the Indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the $laic In whit the land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforce Ability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced E the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or Irults in lending law. In addition to the Exclusions, you are not insured against lass, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any faxing authority that levies taxes or aUsessmeni an teal property or by ilia public records. Procee(Jings by a public agency which may result in faxes Of assessunews, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown b the records of such agency (ir by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights. interest$ or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an Impaction e the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession ghereol. ]. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims lho;reof, which are not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area. encroachments. or and which are not shown by the public records. grey other fads which a correct survey would disclose S. (a) Unpalented mining claims; Ib) reservatlons or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water right, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a). (b) or (c) are shown by the public records AMERICAN LAND TITIJE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POJJCY FORM 6 _ 1970 (AMEND(D 1D-17.70) SC]IEDUIE Of EXCLUSIONS FROAA COVERAGE 2. ]. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulatlon (is"cluding but not limdled to building and zoning ordinances) restrlcling or regulallnl or pprWbiling the occupancy. use or enjoyment of" land, or regulating the character, dimensions or locallon osf any (mWovemens rsoM Of hereafter erected on the land, or prohibiting a sepmagion in ownerships or a reduction in the dimensions of are; of the land, or Ihr effect of any violation of any such law. ordinance or governmental tegulallon. Rights of eminent domain or governmental rights of police power unless notice of ohs exercise of such rights appears In the pub% records at Date of Policy. Defects. !lens encumbrances, adverse ctainss, or other mmicrs (a) created, sultered, assented at agreed to by the insured clafmats( (b) not known to the Compare and nol showts the public records but known to the Insured daimanl either al Dale of Polk or M Ilse the dale such clairnanl acqu�red an collate or &sleresl insured by this policy and not clIK cod In wsilJn to the Company prior go the dale such Inured claiby the insWed claWani rnanl became an insured hereunder. (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the lnswwd If the Ins (d) atlaimn t h created subsequent s Date of Policy; or (e) "Allni In loss Of CIA"@ which would got have been sustairsed 1f the inswed olairrsarsl had pall value for the scale or interest insured by this policy. FTC II57•F (Rev I I.1.1R) • i SCHEDULE l (Contirsued) . AMERICAN IMID Tiff E ASSOCIATION RESIDENTIAL T1TT E INSURANCE POUCY - IVS EXCLUSIONS Its additiors to the exceptions in Schedule U, you are not insured against loss, Costs, attorneys' fees and expenses tesulling from: I. Goverrsmenld police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regufatton. this Includes buildmg and Ito ordinances axis also taws and regulations concerning: land use irnlaaverner►ts on ilia land land drminrs errvirrurrsenlal protection This exclusion does not limil the zoning coverage described In Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. 2. fietlright Io take the land by condemning it, unless a nolice of taking appears In the publicmolds on the Policy Date. 3. Tie Risks: that are treated, allowed, or agreed to by you that are known to you, but not to us, ors the Policy Dale - unless they appeared In the public records. Ilsal result in no lots to you that first affect your title after the Policy Dale - Ihls dues not limit the labor and material lien coverage In Item & of Covere Title Risks. a. Failure to pay value for your title. 5. 1 ack of a right: to any fond outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A ur it, slirrls. atldrys, or waterways that touch your land. This extfinw s dire-* not boil tt,c access coverage in (tens S of Covered Title Risks. to ailifilion to the txeluuons, you are not insured against loss, culls. attorneys' fees, and expenses reselling (corn: 1. Any facts, nabs-*, interests or claims which are not shown Ivy the Public Records but which could be ascertained by making Inquf of parties in possession of the land. 2. Ads Dens or easements not shown by the Public Records. However, this does not Umll that affirmative coverage in Item li of cove Tre itle Riots. 3. Any lads al,vul the land not shown by the Public Records which a correcl survey would disclose. flowever, this does rid Urnil 1 allirsnalive coverage in Clem 12 of Covered Title Risks. {. (a) Any water rights or claims or title to water In or under the land; (b) unpatented mining claims: W resetvatlons or exception in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof, FTC 3IS7.1I1Rev I1-1•Lt11 I Is ISIUM44 by reason of vey rellAacl beraes.:...'i 4 • A" LD p/ TNT �y L 3,.q ..�.,rr �I�+i.rrLr• w+.�►•r /rww+ w dw�r Mr. ar r,...r.-. ter+ w..� ,ro..�w c—y t.•�+►-• ...rr • . n.q ..�...� •y w ./1.«• ��rr••�� LA . 40 ftA6 &.a A. .aA OR P••P•+ .mow, �r 1 A`-4� �.1 • ' �! jtttly i•• S . :► Ci.. L�JrL+++I, .a r+�.rl.,r.M..r.a a.� L�.+�•a �, i ..r., Lwr. /�, �/www �1 /d+wi•.rw•• Jam+• .. Now som.0-v OVAPPONvOlO •wf•f✓ A .ir.. aIr ti Lt�Lti/pwr M ♦4..4 /M��A •.. dL of do S 1, ••••ter LiM►w. +M 1 .'die » 1 r • � 1 r.•41 • P.O. BOX 826, BALBOA. CALIFORNIA 92661 January 17, 1989 b R�yrtl 0 h�yR CAL,.�"Ot + Planning Commission City of Newport Beach P. 0. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Mr, Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning Commission: A presentation of the proposed property development located at 611 East Balboa Boulevard in the City of Balboa (your Agenda Item #3) was made to tho Balboa Peninsula Point Association January hoard Mooting on Thursday, January 12, 1989. Following that presentation and much discussion, the Board voted unanimously to support said project/concept. Further, the Board of Directors respectfully requests that the architectural concept of this idea be incorporated into the specific area plan for Balboa. Thank you. Mo t sincarel r Dayna Pettit President For the Board of Directors CC: Mayor Donald Strauss City Council Members BPPA Board r: 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DEMAND FOR PAYMENT Date January 16, 19o9 Demand of: Tarcantelln & rnmany, Address: 3901 MacArthur Boulevard, Suites 100 Newport Beach, California 92660-3010 In the amount of $ 3, son _nn ITEM 4F EXPENDITURE BUDGET i AMOU}{T Protensional services rendered re renearch and preparation of a feasibility report re 607, 609,' 611, 613 and 615 East Balboa Boulevard, Newport Beach - Job No. 1711E 02-218-02 Approved for Payment: � TOTAL $3,500.00 0 Auditedland Approved: ea Hance rector January 13, 1989 Mr. Craig T. B1uell Planning Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 INVOICE M 11 KArttw Dmftvwd SuM 1 o 1*w,pon t3+.A cA wm-3= <m E Qme4bwA as Suita 200-H Pho"s. u &W15 RE: 607, 609, 611, 613 and 615 E. BALBOA BOULEVARD, NEWPORT BEACH JOB NO. 17118 Services Rendered: Research and preparation of a feasibility report of the above referenced property. AMOUNT NOW DUE: $3, .Q0 Terms: Net 10 days. A finance charge of 1.0% per month which is an annual percentage rats of 12% is charged on all past due accounts. Please make check payable to Tarantella & Company, and remit with a copy of this invoice to: 3901 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 100 Newport Beach, California 92660 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service and look forward to your continued patronage in the future. Respectfully submitted, TARANTELLO & COMPANY Diane W. Joslyn Senior Marketing Co ?ultantl �APPRO D FOR PAYMEN"' i By �W`NT NO.: a r x r � •ir,..nf� .. .2•?J f:tlizl,�T 1�+� .. ' j.;.,'� . s�. i1+4'4+• Al.v.tr•.:.. •' ' i I ••} :1 r PURCHASE REQUISITION , CI'I`Y OI� NEWPORT B ACI-1 P.O. NO. 32460 (if reserve SUGGESTED VENDOR: Tarantello & gmany 3901 MacArthur Boulevard, Suitu 100 Newport Beach, California QUAD. I DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES REQUIRED One Professional services rendered re Feasibility Study for 607, 609, 611, 613 and 615 Bast Balboa Boulevard (CRDP 413) as described in letter dated January 4, 1989 CODE I AMOUNT DATE .lnnuary 16. 1989 DEP7 171ING DFPAM1T SHIP TO Plot) rr .,IO?SAL 'rp#-FMI AL BLDG. UNIT PRICE I TOTAL BUDGET NO. APPROVEDAbn DEPT W (or pe v3, 500.00 102-210-02 PURCNAS ADDENDUM TO PVi M ASF Ol Dt 3t This Addendum to Purchase Orller tNunj,r.r -32-4LO_ ,. contains terms and conditions under which the work or Yezrvlcen rf4ilpired by said purchase order must be performed. Throughout thin Addendum, the term "Consultant" refers to the party providing work or services to City pursuant to the purchase! order. I. SF3tV10ES RY CONSULTANT Consultant shall prov a to C ty xuch work or services required In the Purchase Order (or any other addendum thereto). Consultant warrants and guarantees that all services performed pursuant to the Purchase Order shall be provided in a manner commensurate with the highest pro fens ionn i standards and sha 1 i be performed by quallfled and experienced personnel. Z, INDEPENDENT PARTIES City and Consultant ntend t at the relation between them created by this Agreement Is that of employer. -Independent contractor. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the control .d( Consultant, except to tine extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Agreement. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Consul'tant's services, None of the benefits provided by City to Its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance., worker's compensation plans, vacation and sick leave are available from City to Consultant, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA l,apnents, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer - employee relationship from any fees due Consultant. Payments of the above items, if required, are the resprynsibIH ty of Consultant. Z. COST OF LITIGATION If any legal action is necessary to enforce any provision hereof or for damages by reason of an alleged breach of any provisions of this Purchase Order, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive from the losing party •ail costs and expenses in such amount as the court may adjudge to tie reasonable attorneys' fees. 4. IIOLD UMMESS Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City, Its City Council, boards and commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all toss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, Including reasonable attorneys' fees, regardless of.•the merit or outcome of any such claim or suit arising from or In any manner connected to Consultant's negligent performance of services or work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City, Its City Council, boards and commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all toss, damages, liability, claims, suits, -2- ti f costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys - fees, accruing or resulting to any and all persons, firms, or corporations furnishing or supplying,► work, services, Ina ter in Is. equ ipmen t or supp 1 ies a Is ing from or in any manner connec ted to the Consu I tnnt's neg l Igen t performance of --service. or work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement. S. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSNERS Consultant shall not assign, sublease, hypothecn te, or transfer this Agreement or any interest therein directly or Indirectly, by opera tIon of law or otherwise without prior written consent of City. Any attempt to do so shalt be null and void, and nny itss ignee, sub lessee, hypothecn to or t rans fer ree sha 11 acqu I re no r igh t or Interest by reason of such a t tempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. S. PERMITS AND LICENSES Consultant, at Its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Purchase Order, all appropriate permits, licenses and certificates that may be required In connection with the performance of services hereunder. 7. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Purchase Order shall be given In writing and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally or on the second business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified, re (0 addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressee! to Consultant at the address set forth in the Purchase Order. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: City of Newport Reach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Reach, California 92663 8. TT;itM1NATiON In the event Consultant hereto falls or refuses to perform any of the provisions hereof at the time and in the manner required hereunder, Consultant shall be deemed In default in the performance of this Agreement. if such default is not cured within a period of two (2) clays after receipt by Consultant from City of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, City may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the Consultant written notice thereof. 9. REPORTS Each and every report, dra t, work product, map, record and other document reproduced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant pursuant to or in connection with this Purchase Order shall be the exclusive property of City. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by the ConsuItan t pursuant to this Purchase Order Shall be made ava i lable to any Individual or organ ixa t ion by the Consultant without prior approval by City. -4- 0 (0 Consultant shall, at such time and in such form as City may require, furnish reports concerning the status of the services required under this Purchase Order. 10. INTMRATM PURCIIASF, O111)1.7t This Purchase Order represents the full and cofrplate understanding; of every kind or nature whatsoever betwenfr the parties hereto and all preliminary negotiations and agireefrnorrts of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or IrnpIIed convenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any mod ificatIon of this Purchase Order will be effective only by written execution s Ig;ned by boar Cl ty and Consultant. II. WAIVER A waiver by City of any breach of any terirl, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein whether of the same or n different character. The Consultant has read this Addendum to Purchase Order and accepts and agrees to each term and condition herein. Qar• [/CW" DelM►"TMENT• �11mmE COAST TITLE COMPANY 640 North Tltetsn Avenue. Sulte 205 Banta Arta. Cal lornla 92705 ESCROW NO. 8424 ESCROW OFFICER glary Alexander � .t $0110 t s 50,000.00 in the form of a company check, receipt = of which Is ereby ac oY a gee, and-lbe Saiance `of 3 $1,000,000.00 In the form of certified funds one business 4 Asy prior_ to close of escrow. ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS DATE November16 , 1988 • tard ON trsoba+ 101w any trati•wmres •AMd NO •srxo■r t•OK,r•$ afros br GxW%J6 d by wr, 01 to +r+You V* Ntr. Encsnnbrant•t • bleb0 wd b we 1■0.atiled that on & b•iorst See "Agrs ise-all - 1W Wd s tb►n d ern• r tnar•arraa WO •ta WNW 0% tea a ++e•pO■. wAh ■ a•e+h or s _.14050,000.D0r_ _ corvvv 7*461 CQrq4r#1`QM i -nsn.nnL • Pre ar y cnmmonIX nom_aa:_bil-fil East Ba1.bo"aulevaid.-Balhon..____ part hereof_ 10 me Exhibir "A"- _ _. . „ —. asttepw ttr+y of or m.ws+ rasanstwon of r•axd tl As fw tea/ wF m - in boot p■ows) d rasp. to re case d r+r Courry Rwwon co OrAnge _ Cox". State on ea dw a ifw.r+p tt .....n.a k is 14 _ 19 Fr•o by m secLorrbranoss srcapt: 1e mSa-* A -rjLm n*rs.....r"sp eow taw" 1m ra swo roar is . i• . &wkx%q pwsonol prop" to es. rt •ssessad •par+st tor,.... o...w 17 m co.m+srsa owumbana rsotrrsorra momw aw trrpras..rprKa d.ay, and •as•r+,rtis d r•m.d_ s r+y N The parties hereto have entered into that certain OFFER AND AGREE1ENT FOR PURCHASE is as OF REAL ESTATE, dated November 14. 1988 and ACCEPTANCE OF COUNTER OFFCER AND ACREEMENT 21 FOR PURCHASE OF REAL ESTATE dated November 15, 1988, by and between BAL-CAT ENTERPRISES. 12 a California partnership, Buyer, and CALIFORNIA OVERSEAS BANK, Seller, referred to n herein as Agreement. and which is incorporated herein by reference. The terms and s+ conditions contained in the Agreement shall in no way be modified or superceded by these IS Escrow Instructions and said Agreement ahallcpnstitute the entire agreement to purchase the Subject Property. Escrow Holder shall comply with the terms and conditions >n as contained in the Agreement. only insofar as they pertain to Escrow. Lines 28 through 49 are intentionally left blank. as so 81 at ss 34 at; ss 37 3• sr 4s 41 at 4s w 4e !7 as N See Agreement. •0 P KOWE AS OF CLOSE OF ESCA0W THE FOLLOWY40 rTEWS ONLY. _ 91 �... U Al pw+s &W v the o7m m A twebr d►rowWV s•txpt of • copy of Ymme ttstrilom u Cieft a0v and Otea Wyet to anwLn or syvmrds. s wry, as dLwbssd by bmwbcwV st wrortr Wcx" Vw imow or t» ban of record 1H Vft arw w psl easy sass and chri•s as 04m fe SUYER AND SELLER HAVE READ AND AGREE TO THE GENERAL PROVMK)kS PRsNTEO ON INE ATTACHED. u BAI.-CAT ENTERPRISES. a California partnership. BY: CATALINA PASSENGER SERVICE. INC., a California corpora nd ILI N CO., INC., a California corporation OWWG BIWAM1 .4t Buyer's Signature Robert Black, President SIGN AND RETURN. PLEASE. Address 400 Hain Street Balboa California 92-6U _ Phone Tt+s is 0@9 9 We& rr•rraW& and •roruehOM." VOW On the ae•cnrd twso► are h r" approved gyre orcc•pt•d n r*O •rwrery tuna Cw%cwtw to by "0 t MM trrd lay nar0rtWl Mt>rs/*rafos tow soy ton" W b coos• we to b• s►u+n as abo.e. rrl rM yew era authmtt•d b dMr•r wA•n you Byre a Mare Caw*W to be Mpp* d rotas sot so" wow• rghw the Byre is ttbov prarrA Pat r" 61&0 . rhorges, my rwatoev toes. ch&0*3 kw •..00rce Ct tat• " Cat" tv...nalh•r & nwt tw "VOO a aMtswMeraaarl. o.cw tray we bw7w aprod 0 M. Yaw are ho oby &Ar a od to pay 0tr►r01. ate ivnerts. taws. and " &ww on r•mrd tr show Me as eaa•d try Asa C*ft ane t)oosaa A" Tim an tat M as ve4wec CALL IA CYERSBAB BANK senses *"two ,ay I—!"ii8 Seller's Slgnsturs 8 toll Addm" Attest WA -Garcia,, 1101-Vilahirs-llvd.. L►.. XA-9000i— ftons 211436=9106 tDCT-E.1 �J • Gas 1i4rw Aat Co-v a /. Co ,s/s ZAW JC C. i Is rN s i C• we�i!'1 Ift J tWA$dLrS S404 s AZL4Ci44 coe04.01,40-11to9 CalAPe.0 A-4AA1,d A.O.. .c s .491itrf/.a ss T/? 6dwo A 0 04A+/Ily 4ro/0-/ B".-S GAr%s119 Zvi? JIM/s 40 /, 1 3 y, r3 b j d�d� GO d 412� / Sy s'3� 0 COMJAI8SIONERS • ROLL CALL Motion All Ayes CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • MINUTES January 19, 19a9 Jame wicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant equested that this item be continued to the February 9. Planning Commission "Sting. Motion was made and voted on ntinue Use Permit No. 3338 to the February 9, 1989 Ing Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED, Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the construction of five mixed us" commercial/residential buildings to be constructed on property located in the C-1 District; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND Request to permit the construction of a combined residential/commercial development containing five dwelling units over commercial development on five Individual lots located in the C-1 District. The Proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code $o as to allow the use of tandem parking spaces for the commercial uses where the zoning Code requires that all commercial parking spaces be independently accessible. AND Request to adjust the interior contiguous lot lines of � five lots located in the C-1 District. 1 AND Request to allow one of the adjusted lots on the subject property to have a width of less than 25 feet where the Zoning Code requires a minimum lot width of 25 feet in the C-1 District. AND -S- INDEX Item 14o.3 T5 Na-53 A �rovnd UP 3337 A roved LLA 88-7 Withdrawn CRDP 13 App ro vo d Variance No. 1149 Withdrawn M ' COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES I � January 19, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CAL. INDEX E,_ Coastal Residential Development Pofaft No. 13 _ Request the approval of a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the implementation of the State law relative to low and moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone in conjunction with the proposed construction of a combined residential/commercial development on property located in the C-1 District, LOCATION: Lots 4-8, Block 8, Balboa Tract, located at 607.615 Bast Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of East Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street, in Central Balboa, ZONE: C-1 APPLICANT: Balboa Associates, Newport Beach OWNER: Balalis Corporation, Newport Beach Commissioner Persdn stepped down from the dais because of a conflict of interest, James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that the 1.6 Floor Area Ratio was established by combining .50 FAR for commercial use, .75 FAR for the residential use, and .35 FAR that was adopted by the General Plan Amendment. allowing for above grade structurized parking. In reference to restrictions on uses that would be permitted on the ground floor of the commercial area, Mr. Hewicker explained that the Planning Cosission has the right to add a condition to the use permit that would require a use permit beyond uses that currently require use permits in the event the Planning Commission had concerns regarding intensification of traffic and parking in the area. Mr. Hewlcker stated that Lot Line Adjustment No. 88-7 has been withdrawn by the applicant, and that staff has recommended a condition to the use permit which would require the applicant to file a resubdivision. He further stated that the project has been redesigned so that a variance is no longer required; therefore, Variance No. 1149 has been withdrawn. -6- COMMISSIONERS . • MINUTES s �" %vN\ January 19, 1989 \-'\-\\\\\\CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Don Webb, City Engineer, requested that Condition No. lb for Use permit No. 3337 be modified to state -..that the curb return at the corner of Washington Street and Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed to a a foot radius.." instead of 25 foot radius, Kr. Webb requested that Condition No. 25 be added to Use Permit No. 3337 which would state "that the first floor for development located at 613 East Balboa Boulevard be set back a ninlmum of 4 feet to provide vehicular night distance at the intersection of Washington Street and East Balboa Boulevard.* fir, Webb explained that the applicant does not have any objections to setting same back; however, he commented that the npplicant would like tilt' optfun to "fLip flop'ell and Gls Fast Balboa Boulevard and 615 Balboa boulevard, if nocnsmary. Commissioner bobay suggested that the parking, meters in front of the commercial site could be metered to limit the parking to thirty oinutes for the commercial uses at the subject site, He said that the site does not Include a large area where thirty minute parking is Immediately adjacent to a commercial use, and that the metered parking is used by the general public. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards, Hr. Ifewickor stated that the subject project would not have any significant environmental impact as stated in the findings in the attached Exhibit "A", Mr. Webb replied that as indicated in the Traffic Study, the proposed uses at the subject site would not have an Impact. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Hr. Paul Balalis, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Walls presented background information regarding how and why the applicants instituted the concept of the combined residential and commercial development on the subject property. He stated that during the planning stages, the applicants contacted local residents and the commercial community regarding how they would perceive a Specific Area Plan in Central Balboa. He said that the results included lower intensity projects and more individual ownership, and Mr. Balalis concluded the subject project could be considered a prototype of a future Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. •7- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES January 19, 1989 ` CITY 4F NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL. INDEX Hr. Balalis presented an overview of the proposed project that includes five buildings, each building Includes approximately 1,000 square feet of retail space on the lower level and 2,000 square feet of residential space on the upper level. He stated that two parking spaces would be provided for each residential unit, and four parking spaces for each commercial business, Kr. Balalis commented that the corner parcel Located on Washington Street would consist of 500 square feet of commercial space on the lower level and approximately 1,500 square feet of residential space on the upper level. Hr, Balalis explained that the combined residential/commercial buildings are similar to units that have been successful. in the Cannery Village area, and he commented that the Balboa community requested more of the same types of units. Mr. Balalis referred to staff's comments regarding a condition that would require a use permit for uses that currently do not require Liao permits, and he cited the additional expense and the time consuming, process that mould be required, fir. Balalis cited urea such as a walk-up bank, a full service hair salon, a travel agency, and a flower shop that are no longer available because only tourist -related businesses can survive the rent increases in the area. Hr. Balalis stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit 'A", and he concurred with modified Condition No, 14 and added Condition No. 25 as suggested by Hr. Webb. He commented that the sight distance on Washington Street would be Improved because of the project's additional setback from the front property line. Hr. Balalis explained that so as to eliminate a solid wall of buildings, the project was designed to set back some of the buildings, to landscape the front, and to extend a portion of the second floor area. Mr. Balalis requested the option to shift the project's buildings, if necessary, which would allow one building on the front property line and another building set back from the front property line. In reference to Condition No. 7 which states •the lighting 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 stet,•, Hr. Balalis requested that maid condition be modified to state that instead of an 4- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ROIL CALL January 19, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH electrical engineer that the applicants be allowed tc contact the architect of the project to do the design og the lighting and have same approved by staff, In reference to Condition No. 19 which states that "Sound level measurement shall be taken and a certificate of sound verification shall be submitted to the City.,", Mr. Balalis suggested that to eliminate an additional expense that an acoustical engineer design the product to meet the 45 dBA only. Hr. Hewicker concurred with the applicants request to modify Condition No. 7. In reference to Condition No. 19, Mr. Hevicker responded that the condition is a mitigation measure in the Environmental Document, and he explained that there have been previous projects where an assembly was recommended by a professional Engineer practicing in acoustics for the purpose of attenuating noise and the City found that the device was not successful. Hr. Hevicker stated that the City would prefer to have evidence on file that the noise levels attenuated to 45 dBA. Commissioner Edwards indicated that the condition should remain inasmuch as the Envirorusental Document, (b.b.) states that the project will result in exposure to traffic noise. In response to questions posed by Commsissioner Winburn regarding the availability of the parking spaces, Hr. Balalis explained that each of the buildings will be secured with a chain to exclude individuals who do not belong on the premises from parking on the site, and he said that the tenants would be able to control the parking. Hr. Bill Wren, 1118 East Balboa Boulevard, representing the Balboa Peninsula Point AssoCiatiOn, appeared be] the Planning Commission in support of the propc project. Hr. Wren stated that after the applic presented the project to said Association, that members regarded the project to be a prototype of future Specific Area Plan. He said that development's size, architectural features, landscaping would benefit the area. 1n response to a question "sad by Commaissioner Sdwa regarding said Association's support of the project their consideration of traffic generation, noise parking, Mr, Wren explained that the Associat supports tandem parking for the commercial ar especially if the front parking spaces are restricted .9. INDEX COMMISSIONERS ! • MINUTES �G January 19. 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX employees only. He said that the applicants are providing the required number of parking spaces, and that the parking area would be restricted to tenants and customers only and would not be available to adjacent businesses. Ms. Betty Noekel, representing the Rendezvous Condominiums, stated that the tenants have been notified of the proposed project and to date they have not received any objections. Ms. Britt& Kvinge, President, Balboa improvement Association, stated that after Mr. Balalis suede a presentation to said Association, the members supported the development and specifically, tho architectural features of the project. Ms. Kvinge concurred that the project phould be considered a prototypn of the future Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Di Sano regarding use permit applications, Mr, Hewicker explained that a use permit can be applied for either by the property owner or by a proposed tenant. He commented that the City is not always informed who submits the one time fee of $667.00, Commissioner Di Sano stated that the project has aesthetic appeal, and he compared that appeal to the Bank of America building that has been on the subject site for sixty years. He commented that the Bank of America clock will be installed on one of the proposed buildings for historical significance. Comissioner Di Sano stated that the Bank of America building is a buffer within a heavily used retail area, and he addressed his concerns regarding the intensification of commercial uses that could be established on the subject site, i.e.: a versateller mchine, nail salon, and muffin shop. Commissioner Edwards referred to Condition No. 11, and he stated that he has concerns regarding on -site parking, vehicular and traffic circulations, and he questioned if they could be alleviated? Mr. Webb responded that staff has concerns regarding tandem commercial parking; however, he said that there have been no complaints regarding tandem parking within the Cannery Village and Balboa Island areas. -10- COMMISSIONERS i • MINUTES s � January 19, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Merrill stated that he had concerns regarding the generated traffic as it was discussed during the General Plan public hearings; however, he pointed out that the project has the support of the community. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3337, Coaetal Residential Development Permit No, 13, Traffic Study No. 53, and related Environmental Document, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A', including amendments to Use Permit No, 3337 as follows; Condition No. 7 "..,plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer and/or architect, with a letter from the Engineer and/or architect....", Condition No. 14 *.,Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed to a 24 foot radius..,', and Condition No, 25. "'Chat the first floor development on property located at 613 East Balboa Boulevard be set back a minimum of 4 feet to provide vehicular sight distance at the lnternectlon of Washington Street and East Balboa Boulevard including the option to "flip-flop• the buildings located at 611 and 613 East Balboa Boulevard." In response to concerns expressed by Commissioner Debay regarding retail uses that would be permitted within the proposed project, Mr. ifewicker explained that under the provisions of the C-1 District, all retail uses would be permitted without a use permit unless the Planning Commission added a condition stating otherwise. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill regarding Condition No, 24 that allows the Planning Commission to call up the use permit, Mr. Newicker explained that the Planning Commission could call up the use permit if tandem parking or some operational characteristics of the proposed development becomes a problem. Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney. explained that it would be very difficult to evict a tenant unless said tenant does not follow the guidelines of a use permit. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Merrill and Mr. Hewicker regarding walk-up bank tellers, and any traffic congestion created by said business would become a Public Works or police problem. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards regarding the foregoing Condition No. 11, Mr. Hovicker stated that it is a standard condition that is put or► a use permit application by the Traffic Engineer in order to do minor parking and circulation adjustments. Mr. Webb explained that the original circulation plan the is submitted to the Traffic Engineer does not have -11- COMMISSIONERS ! i MINUTES 1 � January 19. 1999 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL IN DE X sufficient dimensions for the Traffic Engineer to check to be certain that their concerns are act. In response to questions posed by Commissionwr Debay, Commissioner uinburn explained that the prrilect is proposed to provide 100 percent of the parking, on•site and it is located within one-half block of the Municipal Parking lot. The public hearing was reopened in connection with this Item, and Mr. Salalis reappeared before the Planning Commission. Mr, Ealalis stated that the applicants would comply with an added condition that would require a future tenant to apply for a use permit for specific uses. and he suggested that the uses under the C-1 District may need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council inasmuch as so** uses do not require use permits. Mr. Hewicker stated that it would be difficult to compare the many different types of commercial centers within the City. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the residents of the area support the project, that the development provides the required parking, that it is not a massive project, and that it complies with the requirements of the adopted General Plan Amendment. Ayes . . . . Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3337 as Abstain modified, Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 13, Absent Traffic Study No. 53. and related Environmental Document. MOTION CARRIED. A. Accept the environmental document, making the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and Council Policy K•3. 2. That the contents of the envirormrental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. The project will not have any significant emriromental impact. s. Trgjj1r. Study- No. 53: Approve the traffic study with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: .12- COMMISSIONERS . • MINUTES January 19, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RO-L CAU- INDEX Eind: 1. That a traffic study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Council Policy S-l. 2. That the traffic study indicates that the project. generated traffic will neither cause nor stake worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any "major", "primary -modified', or 'primary" street. 3. That the traffic study indicates the project - generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes at any approach of any intersection analyzed. C. Use Permit ,No 3331: Approve the use permit with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will comply with all applicable City and State Building Codes and Zoning requirements for new building applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located, except those !teas requested in conjunction with the proposed modifications. 3. That the design of the development or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 4. The approval of the modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem commercial parkin spaces will not, under the circwstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals. comfort, and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the propose -13- COMMISSIONERS . MINUTES Nx &N \ January 19. 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL. CALL INDEX modification is consistent with the legislative Intent of Title 20 of this Code. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3337 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or Injurious to property and Improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That prior to the approval of building permits the applicant shall obtain the approval of a resubdivision from the City and the Coastal Commission to as to resubdivide the five existing lots into three parcels in accordance with the approved site plan. 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from Washington Street, the alley and adjoining properties. 4. That all signs shall conform to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Coda. 5. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the data of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 7. That the lighting system for the proposed project shall be designed In a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties. The lighting plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer and/or architect; with a letter from the Engineer and/or architect stating that, i his opinion, this requirement has been not. -14- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES January 19, 1989 f CITY OF NEWPO RT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX S. That all Improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the public Yorks Department. 9. That a standard use permit agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public Improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 10. That each dwelling unit and commercial unit be served with an individual water service and serer lateral connection to the public avatar and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 11. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be xuhject to further caviar by the Traffic Engineer. 12. That the intersection of Washington Street and the alley drive be designed to provide sight distance as approved by the Public Works Department. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed treaty -four Inches in height. 13. That a 13 foot wide radius corner cutoff at the corner of Washington Street and Balboa Boulevard be dedicated to the public. 14. That deteriorated curb and sidewalk be reconstructed along the Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street frontages. that the drive apron on Balboa Boulevard be removed and that the curb return at the corner of Washington Street and Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed to a 20 foot radius with a handicap ramp included. All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 13. That street, drainage and utility Improvements be shove of standard Improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 16. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent allay. 17. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prig to issuance of any building permits. -1S- COMMISSIONERS i MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH January 19. 1989 ROLL CALL I I I I I I 1 1 I INDEX 18. That the Public Works Department piton check and inspection fee be paid. 19. The interior noise levels of the residential units will be reduced to achieve a maxismim sound level of 45 dbA, through proposed mitigation measures. These measures shall include, but not limited to, sound insulation and double glazed glass. Sound level measurement shall be taken an+1 a certificate of sound verification shall be submitted to the City before the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 20. A photo survey of the building will bit conducted before the issuance of the demolition permit, and, these photos will be maintained in the photo collection of the Balboa Pavilion. 21. That a minimum of two garage parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit. 22. That the existing utility poles located adjacent to the alley shall be relocated or undergrounded so as not to interfere with required access to on -site parking spaces. Said relocation shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Department and any affected utility company. 23. That an easement for pedestrian access be granted from Parcel 2 for the benefit of Parcel 1. 24. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 25. That the first floor development on property located at 613 East Balboa boulevard shall maintain a minimum front yard setback of 4 feet to as tc provide sight distance at the intersection oI Washington Street and East Balboa Boulevard. Thi applicant has the option to "flip-flop• thA proposed buildings located at 611 and 613 East Balboa Boulevard. -16- COMMISSIONERS , i MINUTES i.G'` Xovo& 0\ January 19, 1989 ` - CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX D. Coastal Residential Development Permit H2"1 Findings: I. That a feasibility analysts has liman performed which has indicated that it is not feasible to provide affordable housing on -site or off -site in conjunction with the proposed project, 2. That the proposed development has set the requirements of City Council Policy P-1, �onditlon: 1. That all conditions of approval of UKo Permit No. 3337 &hull be fulfilled. 4 Item No-4(bbblic Hearing) UP 30 76 R uest to consider reviewing Use Permit No. 3076 of the No rt Landing Restaurant and Use Permit No. 3122 UP3122A (Amen d) of the Edgewater Place complex, including the Parker' Seafood Grill and the Edgewater parking Continued structure n Central Balboa, to 2-9-ri0 LOCATION: Lots 1.12, an unnumbered lot, and a rtion of a vacated alley, all In Bloc 3 the Balboa bayside Tract; Lots 22 and , Block A of the bayside Tract; an a por on of vacated Edgewater Place, located t 309 Palm Street and 503 Edgewater ace, on the northerly aide o East Bay Av ue between Pala Street an Adams Street, Central Balboa. TONE: C-1 OWNERS: Douglas L. Salisbu Irvine (Newport Landing Restaurant); N e1 B. Divaris, Virginia Beach, VA (Zdgov or Place) Commissioner Pers6n stepped dorm from the is because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, presented a rie report regarding why the subject us* permits were b n reviewed by the Planning Comsission. He stated that t .17. COLSTAL•RESIDM?InL BEL=r*T. "-CITy OF Nfi\`PORT BEACH CCUNCIL POLICY P-1 Application Rec'd by Fee: S PLAmrNG DEPARTMENT CURRHN'T PLANNING DIVISION 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 (714) 640-2218 or 640-2219 Applicant (Print) A�QoA A radlArtS Phone • Z L ! L Mailing Address 3yw Pm Lodo S�t =/3 ICI *9• G'�• �ZLL3 Property Owner A! 6 40 t Phone 4 % Z 2. !tailing Address 3i�2/ /A 4*44 sot v'Al. AS. &d- Qt«.3 Address of Property Involved `%/ Al Legal description of Property Involved (it , attach separato ahrot) Description of the Proposed Project SU•y�T I! �rAI Number of Units we taaaRarwaawRwaRlfawwRaaafRwarwfa+t\fflRaaewawww:RwwwrawRfwersrrsa*e.+rRRwRaRraawa*rRRfRRrrrrf Please attach a statement indicating the proposed selling price of the units, the anticipated cost of developing the proposed project and any other information that could affect the feasibility of providing low/moderate income units in conjunction with the proposed project. f aflfa afwffRf awwwaa \wwf\ff\frlaR\few\w■a!\a\alawf*\f!\arlw!\!Rwlw��rl �!\!w!\\f a!lwaraaRf rwa! (I) (We) &d A that (I am) JIM.„) the owner(s) of the property(ies) in D} further certify, under penalty of perjury, that the herein contained and the information herewith submitted are TO the best %0 0 (my} fol—I knowledge and beli / ,� Signature {s) I c' `"""`'`�,`� / "" c�" " "[J�! r� - depose and say iolLed in this application. (I) foregoing state= nts and answers in all respects true and correct NOTE: An agent may sign for the owner if written authorization from the record owner is filed with the applicant. Date Filed planning Director Action DO NOT COMPLETE APPLICATICH BELOW THIS LINE Fee Pd. Date Appeal P.C. Hearing Date Receipt No. P.C. Action lj r Appeal C.C. Hearing C.C. Action Date EXHIBIT A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L.LA - (LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS) OWNER EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NLMERS REFERENU NUMBER MFWmA 066FaIS BWK o48- I Z-5 - v0 Ok;rle t_ 1 FEE L_ 2 PABnEC_ 4- Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 4 in Block 8 of Balboa Tract in the City of Newport Beach.County of Orange, State of California. as per map recorded in Book 4. Page 11. of Miscellaneous Maps. in the office of the County Recorder of said County thence South 69 03'00' East, 27.67 feet: thence South 20 57'00' West. 95.00 feet; thence North 69 03100' West, 27.67 feet: thence North 20 57.00" East. 95.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 5 in Block 8 of Balboa Tract in the City of Newport Beach,County of Orange, State of California, as per sap recorded in Book 4. Page 11. of Miscellaneous baps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County thence South fig 03'00' East, 0.67 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South fig 03100' East, 27.67 feet: thence South 20 57.00" West. 95.00 feet; thence Borth 69 03'00' West, 27.67 feet: thence North 20 57100" East, 95.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 6 in Block © of Balboa Tract in the City of Newport Beach,County of Orange, State of California. as per sap recorded in Book 4, Page 11, of Miscellaneous !laps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County thence South 69 03'00' East, 1.33 feet to the'True Point of Beginning: thence South 69 03100' East, 27.67 feet: thence South 20 57'00' West. 95.00 feet; thence North 69 03000' hest, 27.67 feet: thence North 20 57.00" East. 95.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. PARCEL_4 Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 7 in Block 8 of Balboa Tract in the City of Newport Beach,County of Orange. State of California. as per sap recorded in Book 4. Page 11. of Miscellaneous Maps. in the office of the County Recorder of said County thence South 69 03'00' East, 2.00 feet to the True point of Beginning: thence South 69 03'00' last. 27.67 foots thence South 20 57.00' West, 95.00 foes: thence North 69 031000'West, 27.67 feet% thence North 20 57'00" Eaat, 95.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N.B.L.LA. (LEGAL DESGR1PTiONS) OWNER EXISTING PARCELS PROP0.SE0 PARCELS • AMWERS P REFERENCE NtMER C.AUForeNlA OW-ASF-AS 84X O¢0- I Z3 - og Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot S in Block 8 of Balboa Tract in the City of Newport Beach,County of Orange, State of California. as per sap recorded in Book 4, Page 11, of Miscellaneous !laps. to the office of the County Recorder of said County thence South 69 03'00' East, 2.67 feet to the True Point of Beginning: thence South 69 03'00" East, 24.33 feet: thence South 20 57'00" hest. 95.00 feet; thence North 69 03'44' hest, 24.33 feet; thence North 20 57100" East. 95.00 feat to the True Point of Beginning. EXHIBIT