HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0_Draft Mintues of April 18, 2024
Page 1 of 6
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2024
REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER - 6:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE– Secretary Harris
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Tristan Harris,
Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, Commissioner Lee
Lowrey, and Commissioner David Salene
ABSENT: None
Staff Present: Acting Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murillo, Assistant City
Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Principal Planner
Ben Zdeba, Assistant Planner Jenny Tran, Administrative Assistant
Clarivel Rodriguez, and Department Assistant Jasmine Leon
IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jim Mosher informed the Planning Commission of the opportunity to call up for review the project
approved by the Zoning Administrator at 1300 Bristol Street in the airport area.
V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES
None
VI. CONSENT ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 2024
Recommended Action: Approve and file
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Chair Ellmore to approve the minutes of March 7,
2024, including Mr. Mosher’s edits.
AYES: Ellmore, Langford, Lowrey, and Salene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Barto, Harris, and Rosene
ABSENT: None
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 2 THE RESIDENCES AT AIRPORT VILLAGE (PA2023-0223)
Site Location: 4540, 4570, 4600, and 4630 Campus Drive, and 4525, 4533, and
4647 MacArthur Boulevard
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2024
Page 2 of 6
Summary:
The applicant is requesting approval for the demolition of seven commercial buildings and
surface parking and the construction of 444 for-rent residential units atop an 806-space parking
structure (Project). The following approvals are requested to implement the project as proposed:
• Major Site Development Review (SDR): An SDR in accordance with the Newport Airport
Village Planned Community (PC-60) and Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), for the construction of the Project;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP): A plan specifying how the Project would
meet the City’s affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 35% increase
in density. The applicant seeks two development standard waivers related to the overall
residential project density range and private open space for each residential unit, and a
development concession related to the mix of affordable units pursuant to Chapter 20.32
(Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law);
and
• Tentative Parcel Map: A tentative parcel map to consolidate five lots into one 6.44- gross
acre (6.16-net acre) parcel, pursuant to Chapter 19.12 (Tentative Map Review) of the
NBMC.
Recommended Actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find that all potential environmental effects for the Project have been adequately
addressed in the previously adopted Newport Airport Village Environmental Impact
Report Addendum No. 3, and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document
for the approval of the Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-005 approving Major Site Development Review,
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, and Tentative Parcel Map for the
Residences at Airport Village Project located at 4540, 4570, 4600, and 4630 Campus
Drive, and 4525, 4533, and 4647 MacArthur Boulevard (PA2023-0223).
Commissioner Lowrey and Secretary Harris recused themselves due to business interest conflicts.
Assistant Planner Tran used a presentation to review the project location, background for the
Newport Airport Village Planned Community, project description, dwelling unit summary,
entitlements requested, density bonus and AHIP, project location with respect to Safety Zone 3 and
65 dBA CNEL noise contour, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance memo,
project’s development agreement obligations, revisions to the conditions of approval, and
recommendation.
Ex parte communications shared by the Commissioners disclosed Commissioners Barto and
Ellmore spoke with a representative to the developer and Commission Langford spoke with a
representative of the applicant.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2024
Page 3 of 6
Satish Lion, representative of The Picerne Group, used a presentation to review The Residences at
the Airport Village, thanked staff and partners, introduced the project team, and described The
Picerne Group. Cory Bitting, Associate Principal at TCA Architects, provided an overview of the
project design highlights by first presenting pictures of the current condition, then relaying the
challenges and opportunities using a context map, ground level and podium level plans, and
Macarthur, Birch & Macarthur, and Campus perspective elevations. Mike Meyers, Senior Principal
at Lifescapes International, reviewed the overall landscaping plan and plans for the ground level,
podium level, wellness pool, and pool. In closing, Mr. Lion shared letters of support, reiterated their
commitment to the community, and agreed to the recommended conditions as stated in the report
including the updates to numbers three and eight.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s question, Mr. Lion clarified that the easement by the southeast
side against the existing medical facility which provides access to the parking area will be maintained
during the construction period. Vice Chair Rosene suggested staff discuss Condition No. 21
regarding a deed notification.
In response to Chair Ellmore’s interest in noise cancellation efforts, Mr. Lion stated that the
preliminary acoustical analysis revealed that the noise from the airport is less than the noise from
Macarthur, noise within the courtyard is less than the perimeter of the building, and that during design
and development a more detailed analysis will be completed. He relayed that the determinations are
consistent with other projects they have developed.
Jim Mosher thought there was a clash between luxury apartments in an anticipated workforce
housing area, expressed concern for the noise environment and impact to the balconies facing
Macarthur, and suggested measuring the noise level at that location.
Acting Deputy Community Development Director Murillo noted that the project is consistent with
legislative approvals for the Newport Airport Planned Community approved by the City Council and
General Plan Policy N1.5 allows higher exterior noise levels for infill projects and the project includes
measures to ensure compliance with City noise standards.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Langford thought the project was thoughtful and thanked the staff. He expressed his
inclination to vote in favor of the project. Vice Chair Rosene concurred.
Commissioner Salene thanked The Picerne Group and appreciated the extra parking being provided.
Motion made by Commissioner Barto and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve the item
as recommended by staff.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Langford, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None
RECUSED: Lowrey and Harris
ABSENT: None
ITEM NO. 3 HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AMENDMENTS (PA2022-
0245)
Site Location: Citywide
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2024
Page 4 of 6
Summary:
As required by state law, the City adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element for the 2021-2029
planning period (Housing Element) on September 13, 2022, which was certified by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022.
To implement the Housing Element, the Planning Commission will consider a recommendation
to the City Council of the amendments and actions described below which must take effect by
the statutory deadline of February 2025:
• General Plan Amendment. Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to support
housing production in the focus areas identified by the Housing Element;
• Zoning Code Amendment. Amend Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) to implement the Land Use Element's policy changes
by allowing housing development through new Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay
Zoning Districts, establish appropriate development standards, and create objective
design and development standards for multi-unit residential and mixed-use development
projects; and
• Local Coastal Program Amendment. Amend the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use
Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC to include
new Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts to support housing
production in the focus areas identified by the Housing Element within the Coastal Zone.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-006 recommending City Council certify the Program
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identified by State Clearinghouse Number (SCH
No.) 2023060699, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP), and approve the Housing Element Implementation Program Amendments
all collectively referred to as “PA2022-0245”.
Commissioners Landford and Rosene recused themself due to business interest conflicts.
Principal Planner Zdeba utilized a presentation to review a brief background, why are we here,
implementing action for the Land Use Element update and new policies, City Charter Section 423,
and related to traffic and density; implementing action for the overlay zoning and development
standard, recent posting, and overlay zone maps; implementing action for the objective design
standards and table of contents; implementing action for the local coastal program amendment; and
implementing action for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) clearance, and program
environmental impact report (EIR) topics and impacts. He noted the opportunity for public review of
all documents, comment letters, expected next steps, accountability, and key takeaways.
Commissioner Barto suggested greater clarification of mitigation efforts in conflicting areas of the
EIR and specifically noted Sections 4.2, 4.26 (table), 4.21, and 4.17. In response, Ace Malisos of
Kimley Horn addressed the 3,000 metric ton threshold for greenhouse gas emissions, mitigation
screening level to gauge further studies, conservative approach to analysis, and flexible threshold.
He noted considerations for air quality consistency including a programmatic analysis, conservative
approach, and specific analysis and mitigation requirements for future development projects, plan
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2024
Page 5 of 6
consistency criteria, and water supply plans that will be included in the urban management plans in
the next round.
In response to Commissioner Salene’s question, Principal Planner Zdeba expected that the Airport
Land Use Commission will not sign off on the plan due to a conflict with the provisions in the Airport
Environs Land Use Plan that discourages residential in sensitive noise areas or safety zone areas.
In response to Secretary Harris’ question, Principal Planner Zdeba noted the difficulty predicting the
impact to the plan from legislative changes, the proposed policies in the General Plan are matching
the housing elements implementation, and a General Plan amendment and zoning code amendment
would be required to curtail this back.
Chair Ellmore opened the public comment.
Jim Mosher thought the amendment is not ready for adoption, noted his membership on the General
Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), relayed that the recommendation by the GPAC for the Land Use
Element policy changes was not unanimous, stated the Land Use Element changes are the only part
included in the vote, indicated areas not ready for adoption in the zoning implementation, and
expressed concern for a permanent entitlement in the General Plan without a sunset provision, a
plan not tailored to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), and restricting opportunities
to a few sites.
In response to Chair Ellmore’s inquiry, Principal Planner Zdeba relayed that there are statements
relaying that the density bonus units not being included explicitly in the analysis within the project
description for the program EIR and can be clarified by staff in the findings from the EIR and will be
provided to the City Council for consideration.
Chair Ellmore suggested replacing the word “parcel” with “sites” in the noise Section 4.11. In
response, Acting Deputy Community Development Director Murillo relayed a change to the
implementing section of Zoning Ordinance Section 20.30.80.F that clarifies that the intent is to look
at the development site as a whole, including those consisting of multiple parcels, and the zoning
ordinance language is clear.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Lowrey thought the City has done a good job on this matter and expressed support
for the recommendation.
Secretary Harris thanked staff and volunteer groups and supported the recommendation.
Motion made by Secretary Harris and seconded by Chair Ellmore to approve the item as
recommended by staff.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Lowrey, Harris, and Salene
NOES: None
RECUSED: Langford and Rosene
ABSENT: None
VIII. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO. 4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 18, 2024
Page 6 of 6
None
ITEM NO. 5 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR
MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED
ON A FUTURE AGENDA
Acting Deputy Community Development Director Murillo noted that during the April 23 City Council
meeting, the appeal of the Orange County Sanitation District Pump Station will be heard. He stated
that a legislative approval and a variance are scheduled for the May 9 Planning Commission
meeting and several items are expected for the May 23 meeting. Lastly, he congratulated Principal
Planner Zdeba for winning the OC Real Estate Challenge.
ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES
None
IX. ADJOURNMENT – With no further business, the meeting was adjourned by Chair Ellmore at 7:21
p.m.
The agenda for the April 18, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, April 11,
2024, at 4:23 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of
the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City’s website on Thursday, April 11, 2024,
at 4:53 p.m.
_______________________________
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
_______________________________
Tristan Harris, Secretary
May 23, 2024, Planning Commission Item 1 Comments
These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by:
Jim Mosher (jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229).
Item No. 1. MINUTES OF APRIL 18, 2024
The passages in italics are from the draft minutes, with corrections suggested in strikeout
underline format.
Page 3 of 6, paragraph 1, sentence 2: “Cory Bitting, Associate Principal at TCA Architects,
provided an overview of the project design highlights by first presenting pictures of the current
condition, then relaying the challenges and opportunities using a context map, ground level and
podium level plans, and Macarthur MacArthur, Birch &Macarthur MacArthur, and Campus
perspective elevations.”
Page 3 of 6, paragraph 3, sentence 1: “In response to Chair Ellmore’s interest in noise
cancellation efforts, Mr. Lion stated that the preliminary acoustical analysis revealed that the
noise from the airport is less than the noise from Macarthur MacArthur, noise within the
courtyard is less than at the perimeter of the building, and that during design and development a
more detailed analysis will be completed.”
Page 3 of 6, paragraph 4: “Jim Mosher thought there was a clash between luxury apartments in
an anticipated workforce housing area, expressed concern for the noise environment and
impact to the balconies facing Macarthur MacArthur, and suggested measuring the noise level
at that location.”
Page 3 of 6, paragraph 5: “Acting Deputy Community Development Director Murillo noted that
the project is consistent with legislative approvals for the Newport Airport Village Planned
Community approved by the City Council and General Plan Policy N1.5 allows higher exterior
noise levels for infill projects and the project includes measures to ensure compliance with City
noise standards.”
Page 4 of 6, paragraph 3 from end: “Commissioners Landford Langford and Rosene recused
themself due to business interest conflicts.”
Page 4 of 6, paragraph 2 from end, sentence 1: “Principal Planner Zdeba utilized a presentation
to review a brief background, why are we here, implementing action for the Land Use Element
update and new policies, City Charter Section 423, and vote related to traffic and density;
implementing action for the overlay zoning and development standard, recent posting, and
overlay zone maps; implementing action for the objective design standards and table of
contents; implementing action for the local coastal program amendment; and implementing
action for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) clearance, and program
environmental impact report (EIR) topics and impacts.”
Page 5 of 6, full paragraph 5: “In response to Chair Ellmore’s inquiry, Principal Planner Zdeba
relayed that there are statements relaying that the density bonus units are not being included
explicitly in the analysis within the project description for the program EIR and can be clarified
by staff in the findings from the EIR and will be provided to the City Council for consideration.”
Planning Commission - May 23, 2024 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of April 18, 2024