HomeMy WebLinkAbout22 - Approving the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency (PA2022-0297)Q �EwPpRT
CITY OF
s NEWPORT BEACH
`q44:09 City Council Staff Report
August 27, 2024
Agenda Item No. 22
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Assistant City Manager/Community Development
Director - 949-644-3232, sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Liz Westmoreland, AICP, Senior Planner - 949-644-3234,
Iwestmoreland@newportbeachca.gov
TITLE: Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63:
Approving the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and
Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding Orange County Airport Land
Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency (PA2022-0297)
ABSTRACT -
The Picerne Group (Applicant) is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment
(GPA), Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), Traffic Study, and Development
Agreement (DA) for the future development of a multi -unit residential project consisting of
up to 282 dwelling units at 1600 Dove Street, in the Airport Area (Project). No specific
design for the Project is included in this application. The Project would require a future Site
Development Review by the Planning Commission prior to building permit issuance.
For the City Council's consideration is the adoption of two resolutions approving a
General Plan Amendment, Traffic Study, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
(AHIP), and acceptance of the environmental document. Also for the City Council's
consideration is the introduction of an ordinance approving a DA for the Project. Lastly,
the City Council will consider adopting a resolution overriding the June 20, 2024,
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's (ALUC), determination that the Project
is inconsistent with the 2008 JWA Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) pursuant to Public
Utilities Code Section 21676(b). Approval of the Project and the adoption to override the
ALUC requires a two-thirds majority vote of the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-62, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Newport Beach, California, Adopting Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan
Update Program Environmental Impact Report and 2008-2014 City of Newport
Beach Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project Located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-
0297);
22-1
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 2
c) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-63, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Newport Beach, California, Approving a General Plan Amendment, Affordable
Housing Implementation Plan and Traffic Study for the Residences at 1600 Dove
Street Project Located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297);
d) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No.
2024-18, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California,
Approving a Development Agreement for the Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Project Located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297), and pass to second reading on
September 10, 2024; and
e) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-64, A Resolution of The City Council of the City of
Newport Beach, California, Finding the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project is
Consistent with the Purposes of the State Aeronautics Act and Overriding the
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination that the Residences
at 1600 Dove Street is Inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land
Use Plan (PA2022-0297).
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is located within the Residential Overlay zone of Newport Place
Planned Community (PC-11) and is approximately 2.49 acres in size and currently
improved with one four-story, 60,675-square-foot office building and a surface parking
lot. The property is somewhat rectangular in shape, with a primary frontage on Dove
Street to the west, bordered by the approved Newport Crossings Residential Project
(PA2017-107) and Martingale Way to the north, Dolphin -Striker Way to the south, and
an existing commercial development to the east.
Project Description
The Applicant seeks the following approvals that would allow future development of a
seven -story, multiple -unit residential development consisting of up to 282 apartment units:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) - A request to add 49 dwelling units above
the current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating the 49
residential dwelling units to the property;
• 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 a 50% increase in density including a request for three
development standard waivers related to height, a park dedication requirement,
and overall residential density, along with two development concessions related
to the payment of park in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter
22-2
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 3
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) and
Government Code Section 65915 et seq.;
Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC;
• Development Agreement — A Development Agreement between the Applicant
and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement
Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right
to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public
benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report (Addendum 9) - Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Project.
The Project would require a future Site Development Review prior to building permit
issuance as no specific design for the Project is included in this application. The applicant
has provided conceptual exhibits showing the anticipated design types and possible site
plan that may be presented as part of the future Project (Figures 1 and 2). Should the
applications be approved by the City Council, future development of the Project would be
required to comply with the Residential Overlay development standards set forth in the
PC-11 and subject to Site Development review by the Planning Commission. The
applicant's full project description and letters of support are provided as Attachment J.
22-3
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 4
4�
�y
�Q. FF319FNTIAL �VA111MFHT4
G
� � m
DOLPHIN -STRIKER WAY
i
11114
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
LEGEND
6 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL
OVER PARKING
COURTYARD
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
1p
e-0.
. M■ Ilia,�T
PITT it
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 5
Figure 2: Conceptual Elevations
While the existing General Plan designation allows the proposed multi -unit residential
use, the applicant requests an amendment to Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table
LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to increase the number of base dwelling units allocated to the
project site by 49 dwelling units, for a total of 188 dwelling units. The base density
currently allotted to the property is 139 dwelling units. This density is based on the
conversion of the existing 60,675-square-foot office building, consistent with the City's
adopted land use conversion factors (2.29 dwelling units per 1,000-square feet of office
floor area). The applicant also proposes a 50% density bonus to increase the total unit
count to 282 pursuant to NBMC Section 20.32 (Density Bonus) and Government Code
Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The dwelling unit calculations are summarized
below in Table 1.
Table 1: Dwellina Unit Summary
Table I — Dwelling Unit Summary
Units Based on Existing Nonresidential Uses
139
Additional Units Requested via GPA
49
Total Base Units
188
Density Bonus (50%)
94
Total Units Allowed
282
Total Units Proposed
282
General Plan Amendment
The subject property is located in the Airport Area and is currently designated as Mixed
Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land Use Element. The MU-H2
designation provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional
commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel
rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses to properties in the Airport Area.
The MU-H2 designation applies to a majority of properties in the Airport Area and allows
a maximum of 2,200 residential units as replacement of existing office, retail and/or
industrial uses at a maximum density of 50 units per net acre. Any eligible density
bonus allowed by Government Code Section 65915 (State density bonus law) and
NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) and the requested 49 GPA units are not included
in the 2,200-unit policy allowance.
The applicant is seeking a GPA to revise Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table LU2
(Anomaly Locations) to allow 49 additional residential dwelling units at the Property.
Conversions of existing commercial space to dwelling units as well as density bonus
22-5
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 6
units are not tracked within Table LU2, except when associated within a GPA (Exhibit B
of Attachment B).
The Project helps to implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element and aids the City in its
goal to provide new housing opportunities. If approved and the Project is permitted, the
City will take credit for the units in its annual reporting on housing production to the
State.
The Project, as proposed, is consistent with all relevant General Plan policies, as
included in the proposed resolution (Attachment B). Furthermore, the EIR Addendum 9,
prepared for the Project, includes a comprehensive analysis of all relevant General Plan
polices.
Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Analysis
Charter Section 423, as implemented through Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for
Implementing Charter Section 423), requires voter approval of any major amendment to
the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases
allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area,
increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (a.m./p.m.), or increases
residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases
resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other
amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown
in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding 10 years.
The proposed amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the
square footage of non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial
development are allowed by the current General Plan. Reductions in commercial floor
area are not tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units
are not included in Charter Section 423 analysis because they are mandated by State
law and allowed at any site designated for housing. The Project is the second General
Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L1 within the last 10 years that includes additional
dwelling units or non-residential floor area.
The 49 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and
19 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail"
ITE 11t" Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No
credit is given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office
floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less
the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually
does not exceed the Charter Section 423 thresholds.
Traffic Study
22-6
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 7
Section 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC requires a traffic study to be
prepared prior to issuance of building permits if a proposed project generates in excess
of 300 new average daily trips (ADT). Ganddini Group, Inc. prepared a traffic study
dated August 14, 2023 (Exhibit D of Attachment B). The analysis concludes that there is
no significant impact as the Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory
level of service at any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are
forecasted to continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. Findings related to the
preparation of the traffic study are provided in Attachment B.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The applicant has prepared an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), dated
April 22, 2024 (Exhibit C of Attachment B) to illustrate compliance with the affordable
housing requirements of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community
and density bonus allowances pursuant Government Code Section 65915-65918
(Density Bonus Law) and NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus Code).
Consistent with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay, 15% or
28 units of the Project's 188 base units would be set aside as affordable units to very -
low -income households for 55 years. The 15% allocation of very -low-income
households makes the Project entitled to a density bonus of 50% (94 units) above the
maximum number of units allowed by the General Plan.
In addition to the 94 density bonus units requested, the Project is entitled to receive
three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient,
and actual cost reductions. A reduction or waiver of any City -imposed fee or dedication
of land is considered an incentive or concession, however, the decision to approve the
incentive/concession is at the sole discretion of the City Council and is not guaranteed.
The applicant requests the following incentives:
Incentive/Concession Requests.
a. Partial In -Lieu Park Fee Waiver. Pursuant to General Plan Land Use Policy LU
6.15.13, the Applicant is required to dedicate 0.50 acre of land for a
neighborhood park or pay an in -lieu fee for the City to acquire and improve parks
in the Airport Area. The applicant is required to pay $1,837,500 for the in -lieu
park fee (0.50-acre park equivalent). The Applicant is contributing approximately
$714,212 for this purpose; therefore, an incentive/concession is required to waive
the remaining fee. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would allow the applicant to
contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while providing an
identifiable cost reduction that makes the provision of affordable units feasible.
Because the request includes a waiver of a City -imposed fee, the Council has the
discretion to approve, deny or modify this concession.
22-7
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 8
b. Affordable unit mix that does not meet NBMC Section 20.32.110 (Design and
Distribution of Affordable Units). This section requires affordable units in a
density bonus project to reflect the same range of unit types in the residential
development as a whole. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term
rental subsidy costs associated with the two -bedroom or three -bedroom units
and affording additional rental income for the Project to ensure financial
feasibility.
Development Standard Waivers
In addition to the density bonus units, parking reductions, and financial concessions, the
Project is entitled to receive unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards if
the development standard would physically prevent the Project from being built at the
permitted density. In this case, the Applicant requests waivers of the following
development standards, described in greater detail in the May 23, 2024, Planning
Commission staff report (Attachment E):
1. Park dedication requirement
2. Residential density
3. Building height
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.a (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, a development agreement is required as the proposed Project includes a
General Plan Amendment and the development of 50 or more residential units.
Additionally, the Project will be required to pay public benefit fees as part of the
Development Agreement.
The applicant requests a 10-year term of agreement, and this duration should be
sufficient to implement the Project. The agreement provides assurance that the
applicant may proceed with the proposed Project in accordance with existing policies,
rules and regulations, and conditions of approval. Additionally, the agreement helps the
applicant avoid a waste of resources and escalated costs of the proposed Project while
encouraging a commitment to private participation in comprehensive planning. Staff
supports the requested 10-year term.
The DA provides vested rights to develop the Project and the City will finalize the
payment of negotiated public benefit fees per each residential dwelling unit. The total
fee will have three components: a public safety fee, a reduced park in -lieu fee, and a
general public benefit fee (Table 2, below). The public safety fee will assist the City with
the costs of an additional ambulance unit that will be stationed at Fire Station No. 7 and
will serve this area or other public safety needs. The park fee will be used consistent
22-8
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 9
with City Council Policy B-1 (Park Fee Policy) or for the future acquisition and
development of a neighborhood park in the Airport Area. The public benefit fee will be
used solely at the City Council's discretion. The public benefit fee would be subject to
annual adjustments, based on the CPI Index after two years, and would be payable at
the first building permit issuance for the new residential building(s).
Table2: Projected Public Benefit Fees
Category
Fee
Public Safety
$285,760
Reduced Park In -Lieu
$714,212
General Public Benefit
$3,555,268
Total
$4,555,240
Finally, the agreement includes all mandatory elements, including public benefits that
are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the
City's General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
The Development Agreement can be found as Exhibit B of Attachment C to this report.
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
On May 23, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the requested application. The Planning Commission discussed the merits of
the Project, the applicable park fees, and the Project's density. At the conclusion of the
public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4 ayes and 1 no (with two
absent/recused), to adopt Resolution No. PC2024-008, recommending the City Council
approve the Project. The Planning Commission staff report, meeting minutes, and
resolution are included for reference as Attachment Nos. E, F and G.
Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Review
The project site falls within the airport planning area of the Airport Environs Land Use
Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. Section 4.3 of the AELUP and Section
21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code (CPUC) require the City submit General
Plan amendments to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the AELUP. ALUC
conducted a hearing on the Project at its June 20, 2024, meeting and found the Project
is inconsistent with the AELUP due to issues with noise, safety and concentration of
people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents.
On July 9, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No.
2024-45 to notify ALUC and the California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics
Program of the City's intent to override ALUC's determination, as afforded to the City in
PUC Section 21676(b). Notice of the Council's action was sent to ALUC and the
22-9
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 10
California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024, which
initiated a 45-day comment period on the intent to override.
The City received comments from the ALUC on August 9, 2024, and Caltrans
Aeronautics Program on August 7, 2024 (Attachment H). The letter from ALUC
reiterates its concerns about the Project and outlines its response to the City's proposed
findings of the potential override. The letter from the Division of Aeronautics also
expresses concerns about noise and safety and the number of overrides that the City
has processed in the last several years.
Staff believes that the noise concern has been adequately addressed. The Project is
located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour, consistent with the updated noise
contours approved as part of the Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related
Amendments and the noise contours of the AELUP.
With regard to the safety concern, the Project complies with the policies and regulations
within the JWA Airport Planning Area and follows the safety standards of the AELUP as
it is located within Safety Zone 6 and is not within the JWA Clear Zone/Runway
Protection Zone. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conducted an aeronautical
study for the Project consistent with the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA issued a
Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation on October 24, 2023, thereby finding the
Project does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air
navigation.
As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may choose to override
ALUC's determination with a two-thirds vote if it makes specific findings that the Project
is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public
health, safety and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the
adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise
and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are
not already devoted to incompatible uses.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to General Plan Implementation Program 12.1, a fiscal impact analysis was
prepared for the Project by Applied Development Economics, dated April 17, 2024
(Attachment 1). The fiscal impact model used in the report calculates public service
impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment
base, and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues
that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes,
sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees. The fiscal
impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by
new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in
approximately the same way that existing development does.
22-10
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 11
The report concludes that the Project would generate a positive fiscal impact for the
City, compared to the negative fiscal impact of the existing office use of the site.
Annually, the existing office use generates a negative fiscal impact of about $104,661
per year and the residential development would anticipate generating a positive fiscal
impact of approximately $41,732. This is based on the expected socio-economic profile
of the future tenants.
A positive fiscal impact for a for -rent property is not consistent with the original fiscal
analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General Plan, although in recent years some
very high value luxury residential projects have shown a positive fiscal benefit. If the
anticipated resident profile (i.e. demographic profile of residents) turns out to be more
like the average Newport Beach demographic (e.g. older population), or if it changes in
that direction over time, then the residential development would have a lower, or
possibly negative impact on the City budget. However, the 2006 General Plan
anticipated an increased development potential for commercial and lodging uses, in
addition to the new residential units it would permit. The net impact of the growth in land
uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the
plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7
million per year. Additionally, the Project will be required to pay public benefit fees as
part of the development agreement. The Project would also provide much -needed
housing opportunities in the City in furtherance of the certified Housing Element,
including 28 rental units affordable to very -low-income households.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 has been prepared for the Project in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the Project will not result in any
new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General
Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) or the Housing Element Initial
Study/Negative Declaration. All potential impacts associated with this Project would
either be the same or less than those described in either the PEIR or Negative
Declaration that have been appropriately mitigated. In addition, there are no substantial
changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would
result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either
the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe
significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section
15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the
appropriate environmental document for the Project.
The entire Addendum No. 9 and its technical appendixes are available online at the
City's website at: www.newportbeachca.gov/cega.
22-11
Ordinance No. 2024-18 and Resolution Nos. 2024-62 and 2024-63: Approving the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project, and Resolution No. 2024-64: Overriding
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency
(PA2022-0297)
August 27, 2024
Page 12
NOTICING:
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and
waterways), including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at
City Hall and on the City website.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
Attachment E
Attachment F
Attachment G
Attachment H
Attachment I
Attachment J
Attachment K
— Resolution No. 2024-62
— Resolution No. 2024-63
— Ordinance No. 2024-18
— Resolution No. 2024- 64
— Planning Commission Staff Report (No Attachments)
— Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
— Planning Commission Resolution No. 2024-008 (No Exhibits)
— ALUC and Caltrans Comment Letters
— Fiscal Impact Memorandum dated April 17, 2024
— Applicant's Project Description and Letters of Support
— Conceptual Plans
22-12
Attachment A
Resolution No. 2024- 62
22-13
RESOLUTION NO. 2024- 62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
ADDENDUM NO. 9 TO THE 2006 GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT AND THE 2008-2014 CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL
STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET PROJECT
LOCATED AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the
Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and
all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the
State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Piceme Group ("Applicant"), with
respect to the property located at 1600 Dove Street and legally described in Exhibit "A,"
which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to allow the future development of
a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units ("Project"), which require
the following approvals:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") -A request to add 49 dwelling units above the
current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
Number 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating 49
residential dwelling units to the Property;
• 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 50% increase in density including a request for three development
standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirements, and overall
residential density along with two development concessions related to the
payment of park in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32
(Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and
Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
22-14
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 2 of 9
• Development Agreement ("DA") -A development agreement, pursuant to Section
15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would
provide the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and provide
negotiated public benefits to the City;
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
• Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 9") - An
addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts
resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the
General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community
(PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7 with a residential overlay;
WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending
the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 23,
2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2024-008 by a majority vote (4 ayes, 1 nay) recommending the City Council approve
the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires
the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC")
to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan
("AELUP");
22-15
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 3 of 9
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024, the ALUC determined the Project is inconsistent
with the AELUP;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council
may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it
makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670
of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly
expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's
exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the
extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on July 9, 2024, in the
City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC
Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 2024-45 by unanimous vote (5 ayes, 2 recusals) to notify the ALUC and State
Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's
intent to override the ALUC's inconsistency finding;
WHEREAS, a notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency
determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-45 was sent via certified mail and emailed
to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024;
WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the
City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the
Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on August 27, 2024, in
the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with
the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public
Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
22-16
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 4 of 9
Section 1: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75 on July 25, 2006,
thereby certifying the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental impact Report
("EiR") for the General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119), which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. The EIR was prepared in compliance with
California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State
regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3
("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section
15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental
impact Report (PEIR) which analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan, and
the goals and policies of 10 General Plan elements.
Section 2: The City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003
on November 22, 2011, thereby approving the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing
Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration under CEQA, which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "C," and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3: The City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 2007-79 and 2012-62 on
December 11, 2007 and July 24, 2012, respectively, approving Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to
the 2006 General Plan Update EIR which are attached hereto as Exhibits "D" and "E" and
incorporated herein by reference, to analyze changes to the development intensities within
the North Newport Center Planned Community ("NNCPC") Development Plan. No analysis
specific to the Property was included in Addenda Nos. 1 and 2.
Section 4: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-78 on September 8,
2020, approving Addendum No. 3 (ER2020-002), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "F,"
and incorporated herein by reference, to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR to amend the
General Plan Land Use Designation of the Newport Airport Village project located 4341,
4361, and 4501 Birch Street; 4320, 4340, 4360, 4400, 4500, 4520, 4540, 4570, 4600, and
4630 Campus Drive; and 4525, 4533, and 4647 MacArthur Boulevard, from Airport Office
and Supporting Uses (AO) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and amend Table LU2
(Anomaly Locations) to add Anomaly No. 86 to allow for the development of 329 dwelling
units, exclusive of any permitted density bonus, and 297,572 square feet of commercial
uses. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 3.
22-17
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 5 of 9
Section 5: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-2 on January 26, 2021,
approving Addendum No. 4 (ER2020-003), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "G," and
incorporated herein by reference, to the PEIR to amend Planned Community Development
Plan No. 15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community) for the creation of a residential
overlay zone and a park overlay zone to allow for residential use and a public park within
the Koll Center Newport Professional and Business Office Site B, including a major site
development review, traffic study, lot line adjustment, affordable housing implementation
plan, and development agreement for the Residences at 4400 Von Karman Project. No
analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 4.
Section 6: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-19 on March 22, 2022,
approving Addendum No. 5 (ER2022-001), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "H," and
incorporated herein by reference, to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1300 Bristol
Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 5.
Section 7: The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. PC2022-011 on
May 12, 2022, approving Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002), which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "I," and incorporated herein by reference, to the PEIR to approve the Ritz Carlton
Residences Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 6.
Section 8: The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-22 on April 9, 2024,
approving Addendum No. 7 (PA2022-0296) which is attached hereto as Exhibit "J," and
incorporated herein by reference, to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1400 Bristol
Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 7.
Section 9: The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-25 on April 9, 2024,
approving Addendum No. 8 (PA2022-0040), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "K," and
incorporated herein by reference, to the PEIR for the consideration of the Residences at
1401 Quail Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum
No. 8.
22-18
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 6 of 9
Section 10: Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code
and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified for a project,
no subsequent EiR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major
revisions of the previous EiR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects;
b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due
to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe
than shown in the previous EIR;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to
adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline
to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Section 11: Addendum No. 9 to PEIR was prepared pursuant to Sections 15162
(Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EiR or
Negative Declaration) of the CEQA Guidelines.
22-19
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 7 of 9
Section 12: The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project:
Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and
Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and
Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and
Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities
and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum includes analysis of new topics that
were not included in the previous EiRs; specifically, it includes a new Energy, Wildfire,
and Tribal Cultural Resources section. These additional analyses are appropriate for
inclusion in Addendum No. 9, but none result in new or increased significant impacts that
would require preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Section 13: On the basis of the PEIR and entire environmental review record,
including Addenda Nos. 1-9, the Project (inclusive of recommended conditions of
approval) will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed
in the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR. Addendum No. 9, which
is attached hereto as Exhibit "L," and incorporated by reference including Addenda Nos.
1-8, confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with
this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR, and/or
Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial
changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would
result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the
PEiR, and/or Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 to the PEIR, nor has any new
information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental
impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR, including Addenda Nos. 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the Project.
In taking action to approve any of the requested applications for the Project, the data
presented in the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR as augmented
by Addendum No. 9 for this Project, are considered part of the record.
Section 14: Addendum No. 9 which is attached hereto as Exhibit "L" is hereby
adopted by the City Council. Addendum No. 9 and related and referenced documentation,
including, but not limited to Exhibits "B" through "K" constitute the administrative record upon
which this decision was based, are on file with the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic
Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
22-20
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 8 of 9
Section 15: The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA
determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time-consuming. In
addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As
project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that
such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial
challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that
may be awarded to a successful challenger.
Section 16: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 17: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
22-21
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 9 of 9
Section 18: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 27th day of August, 2024.
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani 1. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Attachments: Exhibit A - Legal Description
Exhibit B - 2006 General Plan Update EIR
Exhibit C - 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Update Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
Exhibit D - Addendum No. 1 (North Newport Center)
Exhibit E - Addendum No. 2 (North Newport Center Planned
Community Amendment)
Exhibit F - Addendum No. 3 (Newport Airport Village - ER2020-002)
Exhibit G - Addendum No. 4 (Residences at 4400 Von Karman -
ER2020-003)
Exhibit H - Addendum No. 5 (Residences at 1300 Bristol -
ER2022-001)
Exhibit 1 - Addendum No. 6 (Ritz Carlton Residences - PA2021-296)
Exhibit J - Addendum No. 7 (Residences at 1400 Bristol Street -
PA2022-0296)
Exhibit K - Addendum No. 8 (Residences at 1401 Quail Street -
PA2023-0040)
Exhibit L - Addendum No. 9 (Residences at 1600 Dove Street -
PA2022-0297)
22-22
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299, PAGES
15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER
UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND
OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED RECORDED IN
BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-23
Exhibit "B"
2006 General Plan Update EIR
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-24
Exhibit "C"
2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative
Declaration
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newi)ortbeachca._qov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/projects-environmental-document-download-
page/environmental-document-download-Pape-arch
22-25
Exhibit "D"
Addendum No. 1 (North Newport Center)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/communitV-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-26
Exhibit "E"
Addendum No. 2 (North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment)
Available separately due to bulk at:
httos://www.newportbeachca.goy/government/departments/communitY-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-27
Exhibit "F"
Addendum No. 3 (Newport Airport Village — ER2020-002)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/qovernment/departments/communitY-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-28
Exhibit "G"
Addendum No. 4 (Residences at 4400 Von Karman - ER2020-003)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-29
Exhibit "H"
Addendum No. 5 (Residences at 1300 Bristol - ER2022-001)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/qovernment/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-30
Exhibit "I"
Addendum No. 6 (Ritz Carlton Residences — PA2021-296)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www. newportbeachca.gov/qovernment/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
22-31
Exhibit "J"
Addendum No. 7 (Residences at 1400 Bristol Street — PA2022-0296)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/projects-environmental-document-download-
page/environmental-document-download-page
22-32
Exhibit "K"
Addendum No. 8 (Residences at 1401 Quail Street — PA2023-0040)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www. newportbeachca.gov/govern ment/d ei)artments/community-
development/planning-division/protects-environmental-document-download-
page/environmental-document-download-page
22-33
Exhibit "L"
Addendum No. 9 (Residences at 1600 Dove Street — PA2022-0297)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/projects-environmental-document-download-
page/environmental-document-download-page
22-34
Attachment B
Resolution No. 2024-63
22-14
RESOLUTION NO. 2024- 63
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND TRAFFIC
STUDY FOR THE RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET
PROJECT LOCATED AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-
0297)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the
Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and
all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the
State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Piceme Group ("Applicant"), with
respect to the property located at 1600 Dove Street and legally described in Exhibit "A,"
which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to allow the future development of
a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units ("Project"), which require
the following approvals:
® General Plan Amendment ("GPA") -A request to add 49 dwelling units above the
current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
Number 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating 49
residential dwelling units to the Property;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") - A plan specifying how the
Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a
50% increase in density including a request for three development standard
waivers related to height, park dedication requirements, and overall residential
density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park
in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and Government Code Section
65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
22-15
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 2 of 17
• Development Agreement ("DA") -- A development agreement, pursuant to
Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which
would provide the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and
provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
• Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 9") - An
addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts
resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the
General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community
(PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7 with a residential overlay;
WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending
the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 23,
2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2024-008 by a majority vote (4 ayes, 1 nay) recommending the City Council approve
the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires
the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC")
to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan
("AELUP");
22-16
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 3 of 17
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024, the ALUC determined the Project is inconsistent
with the AELUP;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council
may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it
makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670
of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly
expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's
exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the
extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on July 9, 2024, in the
City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC
Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 2024-45 by unanimous vote (5 ayes, 2 recusals) to notify the ALUC and State
Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's
intent to override the ALUC's inconsistency finding;
WHEREAS, a notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency
determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-45 was sent via certified mail and emailed
to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024;
WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the
City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the
Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on August 27, 2024, in
the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice
of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance the Ralph M.
Brown Act, Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of
the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented
to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting.
22-17
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 4 of 17
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and determined that modifications to the Project made by the City
Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning
Commission for consideration and recommendation.
Section 2: The City Council hereby approves a General Plan Amendment,
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, and Traffic Study subject to the conditions of
approval which are all attached hereto as Exhibits "B" through "E" respectively, and
incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3: An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use
Element is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC nor
California Government Code Section 65000 of seq., set forth any required findings for
approval of such amendments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Project is consistent
with the General Plan and the GPA is consistent with other General Plan policies as
follows:
1. The Property is designated Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan.
The Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation applies to properties located in
the Airport Area. It provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include
regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings,
industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses. No changes
are proposed to the underlying land use designation of the Property. However, the
requested GPA would increase the allowed base density at the property by 49
dwelling units.
2. The GPA and the resulting increase in dwelling units is compatible with the existing
surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, because
the Project would introduce additional residential units in the Airport Area, within
an area that already allows residential development. The Airport Area includes a
diverse mix of land uses including the gradual development of residential multi -unit
dwellings. The additional residential density requested for the property would
consolidate growth and support commercial properties within the Airport Area.
22-18
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 5 of 17
3. The GPA to add 49 dwelling units to the base unit count within the Mixed -Use
Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation does not eliminate existing or future land uses
to the overall detriment of the community given the Property's size, location, and
surrounding uses. The existing office building on -site was built in the 1970's and
there are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs
of the community. The proposed change to allow additional residential density
would increase the City's housing stock including the provision of 28 dwelling units
that will be affordable to lower incomes, as required by the Residential Overlay of
the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11).
4. The Property is located in an area of the city that has sufficient utility systems to
serve the Project. No off -site improvements other than typical utility connections
are currently proposed or required or proposed as part of the Project.
5. The Project is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach General Plan
policies that establish fundamental criteria for the formation and implementation of
new residential villages in the Airport Area with additional policy analysis included
in the EIR Addendum No. 9:
a. Land Use Element Policy LU 1.1 (Unique Environment): Maintain and
enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods,
business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and
design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural
diversity, and view sheds.
The Project enhances the distinct, urban character of the Airport Area by
providing a means for replacing parking lots and a 1970's era office building
with functional residential development, in line with the General Plan goal of
transitioning the Airport Area to a mixed -use community. The Property is not in
or near any of the City's areas that feature the harbor, unique topography, or
view sheds. The Project would introduce residential units to the Property
consistent with the uses and urbanized character of the Airport Area and the
existing Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation.
b. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of Residential Choices). Provide
opportunities for the development of residential units that respond to
community and regional needs in terms of density, size, location, and cost.
Implement goals, policies, programs, and objectives identified within the City's
Housing Element.
22-19
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 6 of 17
The Project includes up to 282 multi -family residential units, including 28 units
affordable for very low-income households. The 282 dwelling units are inclusive
of 139 base units from the conversion of 60,675-square-foot office building, 49
added units from the requested GPA, and 94 units from the requested 50%
density bonus. The Project responds to market needs and diversifies the City's
housing stock by adding additional dwelling units to the Airport Area.
c. Land Use Element Policy LU 3.8 (Project Entitlement Review with Airport
Land Use Commission) - Refer the adoption or amendment of the General
Plan, Zoning Code, specific plans, and Planned Community development plans
for land within the John Wayne Airport planning area, as established in the JWA
Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP'), to the Airport Land Use
Commission ("ALUC') for Orange County for review, as required by Section
21676 of the California Public Utilities Code. In addition, refer all development
projects that include buildings with a height greater than 200 feet above ground
level to the AL UC for review.
The Project is within the boundaries of the AELUP, therefore, the ALUC must
review the proposed GPA pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and
Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to
determine whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City
Council taking action on the Project. The Project is located within the City's
updated 60 decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") contour
as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan as well as the
60 dBA contour identified in the AELUP, where residential development is
allowed. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the
development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use
Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC. Further, the Property is
located within Safety Zone 6, which allows residential development.
d. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility). Require that all
development be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set
forth by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and that
residential development shall be allowed only on parcels with noise levels of
less than John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in
Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City
determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within the 65
22-20
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 7 of 17
dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed for the City to satisfy
its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged
on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area.
The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour as shown in
Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan as well as the 60 dBA
contour of the AELUP, where residential development is allowed, subject to the
development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use
Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC.
e. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.5 (Residential and Supporting Uses).
Accommodate the development of a maximum of 2,200 multi -family residential
units, including work force housing, and mixed -use buildings that integrate
residential with ground level office or retail uses, along with supporting retail,
grocery stores, and parklands. Residential units may be developed only as the
replacement of underlying permitted nonresidential uses. When a development
phase includes a mix of residential and nonresidential uses or replaces existing
industrial uses, the number of peak hour trips generated by cumulative
development of the site shall not exceed the number of trips that would result
from development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses. However, a
maximum of 550 units may be developed as infill on surface parking lots or
areas not used as occupiable buildings on properties within the Conceptual
Development Plan Area depicted on Figure LU22 provided that the parking is
replaced on site.
General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.5 establishes a development limit of
2,200 maximum dwelling units for the Airport Area. Of the 2,200 residential
units allowed, 1,650 units may be developed as replacement of existing office,
retail, and/or industrial uses. The remaining 550 units are classified as additive
units meaning they are not required to replace other units and they may be
constructed as "in -fill" units to existing commercial or office development within
the Conceptual Development Plan Area ("CDPA") of the Airport Area. Any
eligible density bonus allowed by Government Code Section 65915 (Density
Bonus Law) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC are not included
in the 2,200-unit allowance.
The 550 additive units have been previously allocated to the Uptown Newport
and Residences at 4400 Von Karman projects. Considering the dwelling unit
sum of the previously approved projects, the remaining and available
22-21
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 8 of 17
development allocation within the Airport Area would be 209 dwelling units.
With the development of this Project, there would be 70 dwelling units (209-
139=70) remaining, exclusive of density bonus units and units authorized
through a GPA.
The Property is developed with an existing 4-story commercial office building
totaling 60,675 square feet. Since the Project can be developed only as the
replacement of the underlying nonresidential office use (without a GPA), and
the number of peak hour trips generated by cumulative development of the
Property shall not exceed the number of trips that would result from
development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses, a conversion rate
of 2.29 dwelling units per 1,000 square feet of commercial floor area is required.
This results in a total of 139 dwelling units. The Project includes a request for
a GPA to increase the base units by 49 dwelling units, which results in a total
base unit count of 188 dwelling units. With the application of a 50% density
bonus (i.e. 94 units), a maximum of 282 units could be constructed.
f. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages). Allow
development of mixed -use residential villages, each containing a minimum of
10 acres and centered on a neighborhood park and other amenities (as
conceptually illustrated in Figure LU23). The first phase of residential
development in each village shall encompass at least 5 gross acres of land,
exclusive of existing rights -of -way. This acreage may include multiple parcels
provided that they are contiguous or face one another across an existing street.
At the discretion of the City, this acreage may also include part of a contiguous
property in a different land use category, if the City finds that a sufficient portion
of the contiguous property is used to provide functionally proximate parking,
open space, or other amenity. The "Conceptual Development Plan"area shown
on Figure LU22 shall be exempt from the 5-acre minimum, but a conceptual
development plan described in Policy LU 6.15.11 shall be required.
The Property is 2.49 acres in size. The Residential Overlay of the Newport
Place Planned Community (PC-11) allows residential development on sites
containing less than 10 acres if housing units affordable to lower income
households are provided. The Project will allocate a minimum of 15% of the
base dwelling units as affordable for very -low income households. Therefore,
the Project will be exempt from General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.6 (Size
of Residential Villages).
22-22
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 9 of 17
g. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 (Overall Density and Housing Types). Require that
residential units be developed at a minimum density of 30 units and maximum
of 50 units per net acre averaged over the total area of each residential village.
Net acreage shall be exclusive of existing and new rights -of -way, public
pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks. Within these densities, provide for
the development of a mix of building types ranging from townhomes to high-
rises to accommodate a variety of household types and incomes and to
promote a diversity of building masses and scales.
The Project proposes 188 base units subject to approval of the GPA to add 49
units to the base density for a density of 75.5 dwelling units per acre on the
2.49 net -acre site. A waiver from Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 regarding
maximum density is requested as part of the AHIP. The base density does not
include the 50% density bonus (94 units) that is allowed by the State Bonus
Density law and Section 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC. Altogether, the
Project would reach an overall maximum density of 113 dwelling units per acre,
which is exclusive of rights -of -ways, public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood
parks.
The Project is a for rent apartment building with up to 282 units. There will be
a mixture of unit types, ranging from studios to two -bedroom units, and possibly
3-bedroom units, accommodating a variety of household types and incomes.
Of the dwelling units, 28 units will be affordable to very -low income households
and the remaining units will be market -rate housing, which will increase the
City's overall housing stock for various household income levels.
h. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.8 (First Phase Development Density). Require a
residential density of 45 to 50 units per net acre, averaged over the first phase
for each residential village. This shall be applied to 100 percent of properties in
the first phase development area whether developed exclusively for residential
or integrating service commercial horizontally on the site or vertically within a
mixed -use building. On individual sites, housing development may exceed or
be below this density to encourage a mix of housing types, provided that the
average density for the area encompassed by the first phase is achieved.
The Project would be developed in one phase on an individual site with a
maximum density of 113 units per acre. The Project provides a mixture of
residential unit types that include 28 units of affordable housing to very -low-
income households. The proposed density is above the required minimum of
22-23
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 10 of 17
45 units per acre and the Applicant is requesting a development standard
waiver allowed by State Density Bonus Law to exceed the maximum density of
50 units per acre.
Land Use Policy LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and
Density). Subsequent phases of residential development shall abut the first
phase or shall face the first phase across a street. The minimum density of
residential development (including residential mixed -use development) shall be
30 units per net acre and shall not exceed the maximum of 50 units per net
acre averaged over the development phase.
See finding LU 6.15.8 (First Phase Development Density) above.
Tribal Consultation (SB18)Finding:
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 ("SB18"), a local government
is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage
Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General
Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of
preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources.
Fact in Support of Tribal Consultation Finding:
The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be
provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided
notice on February 23, 2023. California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires
notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request
to consult. The Project will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period,
which expired on May 24, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes:
the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission
Indians -- Acjachemen Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California.
Based on consultation with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of
approval have been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of
Tribal Cultural Resources.
Charter Section 423 Analysis Finding:
Section 423 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach ("Charter Section 423") requires
voter approval of any major General Plan amendment unless precluded by state or
22-24
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 11 of 17
federal law. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed
density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic
by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units
by more than 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from
the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments
affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General
Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding 10 years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that
proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the
Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all
General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine
if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds
indicated above.
Facts in Support of Charter Section 423 Findings:
1. The Project is the second General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L4 within
the last 10 years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The
proposed amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the square
footage of non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial development is
allowed by the current General Plan (2,200 in -fill units maximum in the Airport Area based
on conversion of existing commercial floor area). Reductions in commercial floor area are
not tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units are not
included in Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
2. The 49 additional dwelling units requested to be added to the base density result
in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and 19 p.m. peak hour trips based on the
"Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE 11th Edition trip rate for the
proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is given to the existing non-
residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was converted to residential
dwelling units so that the Project (less the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral.
Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the Greenlight thresholds.
3. There has been one other relevant GPA within Statistical Area L4 within the last
10 years, which resulted in an increase of 64 dwelling units at 1400 Bristol Street
(PA2022-0296). Considering 80% of the prior amendments (80% of 64 dwelling units)
results in 51 dwelling units. The Project includes a GPA for 49 dwelling units. Therefore,
cumulative development of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10 years coupled with the
22-25
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 12 of 17
Project results in an increase of 100 dwelling units. In terms of peak hour trips, the prior
GPA resulted in a net increase of 24 a.m. peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips.
Considering 80% of the prior amendments result in 19 a.m. and 20 p.m. peak hour trips,
respectively. Therefore, cumulative development of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10
years coupled with the Project results in a change of 37 a.m. and 39 p.m. peak hour trips,
respectively. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded,
no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested
GPA.
4. Additionally, the City Council recently adopted Resolution No. 2024-51, amending
the General Plan Land Use Element to Implement the General Plan Housing Element
Implementation Program, to accommodate housing opportunity sites. However, because
the Housing Element Implementation Program is not fully implemented, the City
conducted the above referenced analysis without regard to recent actions taken by the
City Council to implement the Housing Element.
Section 4: The AH1P, attached hereto as "Exhibit "C," is consistent with the
intent to implement affordable housing goals within the City pursuant to State Density
Bonus Law and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC for the following reasons:
1. Consistent with the requested 50% density bonus, 28 units (15% of the base units)
would be set aside as affordable units to lower income households. Lower income
households are defined as households with 80% or less of the area median income,
adjusted for family size for minimum term of 55 years for very low-income households.
The Project is consistent the provisions of the Residential Overlay of the Newport
Place Planned Community (PC-11), which requires a minimum of 15% of base units
to be set aside for lower income households.
2. The State Density Bonus Law and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC
provide for an increase in the number of units above the General Plan and zoning
limits for projects that include a minimum of 15% of the base units affordable to very -
low -income households earning 50% or less of area median income. The Project's
inclusion of 28 very -low-income units, which is 15% of the base unit count of 188 units
makes the Project eligible for 94 additional units. Inclusive of all base units, density
bonus units, and affordable units the total Project includes 282 units.
22-26
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 13 of 17
3. In addition to the 94 density bonus units, the Project is entitled under State Density
Bonus Law and Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the
NBMC, to receive up to three incentives or concessions that would result in
identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The Project includes a
development concession for the proposed affordable unit mix that does not meet
Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC.
Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC requires
affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the
residential development as a whole. In this case, the Project would provide a higher
percentage of affordable studio units and fewer affordable two -bedroom units and
three -bedroom compared to market rate units. Granting this incentive will result in
identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the
long-term rental subsidy costs associated with the two- and three -bedroom units and
affording additional rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
The Project includes a second development concession to waive a portion of the
required in -lieu park fee for a half -acre park. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would
allow the Applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while
providing identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable units
feasible.
4. In addition to the density bonus units and qualified concessions, the Project is entitled
under State Density Bonus Law and Section 20.32.080 (Waivers or Reduction of
Development Standards) of the NBMC, and recent caselaw to receive waivers or
reductions of development standards where application of the development standard
would physically preclude construction of a density bonus project. In this case, the
following development standards are entitled to a waiver:
a. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires
a public park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum
one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.49-acre
Property is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park.
b. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 and the Newport
Place Planned Community (PC-11) require residential density between 30-50
dwelling units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion units, the proposed density
of 55.8 dwelling units per acre would exceed the maximum density of 50 dwelling
units per acre. Including the GPA request that would increase the base density by
49 units, conversion units, and density bonus units, the Project would not comply
22-27
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 14 of 17
at a density of 113 dwelling units per acre and a waiver is necessary to implement
the project.
c. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building
height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is
necessary to accommodate 282 residential units within seven stories. The Project
is anticipated to have a height of 100 feet from established grade.
Section 5: In accordance with Section 15.40.030 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance -
Standards for Approval -Findings -Exemptions) of the NBMC, the following findings and
facts in support of such findings are set forth as follows:
Finding of Consistency with Section 15.040.030(A)(1).
That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and
Appendix A (NBMC Chapter 15.401.
Fact in Support of Finding with Section 15.040.030(A)(1):
A traffic study, entitled 1600 Dove Street Residences Revised Traffic Impact Analysis,
prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., dated August 14, 2023, attached hereto as Exhibit "D"
was prepared forthe Project in compliance with Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance
and Appendix A) of the NBMC.
Finding of Consistency with Section 15.040.030(A)(2):
That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic
study, one of the findings for approval in subsection 15.40.030(B) can be made:
i. Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project
approval in accordance with Section 15.40.030(B)(1) of the NBMC.
ii. Additionally, the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory
level of traffic service at any impacted intersection in accordance with Section
15.40.030(B)(1)(a) of the NBMC.
22-28
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 15 of 17
Facts in Support of Finding with Section 15.040.030(A)(2):
Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the Traffic
Study, and the conditions of approval, all of the findings for approval in Section
15.40.030(B)(1)(a) can be made in that:
1. The Project is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2029, within the 60-month
criteria. Therefore, the Traffic Study addresses the entire project development.
2. The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 14
existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine.
3. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 622 daily trips,
including 12 peak a.m. trips and 22 peak p.m. trips. When these trips distributed to
these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact
as the Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at
any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to
operate at acceptable Levels of Service.
Finding of Consistengy with Section 15.040.030 A 3 :
That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the
contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all
conditions of approval.
Fact in Support of Finding with Section 15.040.030 A 3 :
No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the Project will
neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted
primary Intersection within the City of Newport Beach. The Applicant will be required to
pay any applicable Traffic Fair Share fees for the net increase in vehicles trips, which will
be used to fund future planned improvements to the City's circulation system. The
Applicant will also be subject to the payment of San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
Fees.
22-29
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 16 of 17
Section 6: Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 was prepared for the
Project in compliance with CEQA set forth in California Public Resources Code Section
21000 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in California Code of
Regulations ("CCR') Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council
Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) to
ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased environmental impacts. On the
basis of the entire environmental record, the Project will not result in any new significant
impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General Plan 2006 Update
(SCH No. 2006011119) and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The potential impacts associated with this Project
would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR and the 2008-2014
City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration. In
addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project
would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than
previously addressed in either the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding potential
for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and
approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project
opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project
applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such
applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and
bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded
to a successful challenger.
Section 7: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 8: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
22-30
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 17 of 17
Section 9: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 27th day of August, 2024.
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani 1. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
lxz-
Aaron A. Harp
City tt rney
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — General Plan Amendment (PA2022-0297)
Exhibit C -- Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (PA2022-0297)
Exhibit D — Traffic Study (PA2022-0297)
Exhibit E — Conditions of Approval (PA2022-0297)
22-31
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299, PAGES
15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER
UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND
OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED RECORDED IN
BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-32
Exhibit "B"
General Plan Amendment (PA2022-0297)
22-33
Anomaly Statistical Land Use Development
Number Area Designation uma (so Development Limit Other Additional Information
139 dwelling units were converted
from one existing office building
12 L4 MU-1-12 457,880 49 Dwelling Units totaling 60.675 square feet consistent
with LU 6.15.5 and 49 units were
added through a GPA at 1600 Dove
5treet(PA2022-0297)
22-34
Exhibit "C"
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (PA2022-0297)
22-35
1600 DOVE STREET
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND DENSITY BONUS
APPLICATION
APRIL 22, 2024
Prepared by
Springbrook I, al
Realty Advisors, Inc.
22-36
1600 DOVE STREET
AFFORDABLE HO USING IMPLEMENTA TION PLAN AND DENSITY BONUS
APPLICATION
APRIL 22, 2024
Project Description & Affordability Level
The Picerne Group ("Picerne") is proposing the 1600 Dove Street development ("Project") on a
2.49 acre site located in the Newport Place Planned Community ("Property"). The site is generally
bounded by Dove Street on the South, low rise retail buildings and surface parking on the North,
an apartment community under construction on the West side and a parking structure on the East
Side. The Newport Beach General Plan designates the project site as Mixed Use Horizontal 2
("MU-112") and the zoning is Planned Community 11 ("PC-1 I"). The site is situated in the
Residential Overlay within PC-11. A General Plan Amendment to designate additional density
(i. e., 49 additional "base" units) allocated to the Airport Area (Statistical Area L4) is proposed as
part of the overall project application. The site is currently developed as a 1970's era four story
office building with surface parking.
The Project is planned to consist of 282 units including 188 base units and 94 density bonus units.
The Newport Place Development Standards, as revised by Council Resolution No. 2023-13 on
July 25, 2023 ("Development Standards"), provide that 15 percent of the base units within a
residential development shall be affordable to Lower Income households. Lower Income
Households, as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5, are households
earning 80 percent or less of area median income, adjusted for family size, including both Very
Low and Low Income categories. The affordable housing requirement for this project, as required
by the Development Standards, is 29 units (15% of 188 base units).
Eligibility for Density Bonus and Compliance with Newport Place Development Standards
Affordability Requirements
Picerne will be providing 29 units (15% of base units) affordable to Very Low Income
households. This will comply with the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 applicable
to a 50% density bonus. Rents for the Very Low Income Units will be computed in accordance
with Health and Safety Code Section 50053 ("HSC Section 50053"), as required by Government
Code Section 65915(c)(1).
1
22-37
1600 Dove Street Affordable Housing Plan
April 22, 2024
Density Bonus Computation and Term of Affordability
The density bonus computation for the Project per Government Code Section 65915 is shown
below:
Table 1
Density Bonus Computation
Unitg BA&A 033 Bxl tfrr Nonreaw.cmtial U
139
Additlunal Units PcT."a%W Gen.ml Plan
A mo ndrnt tl
49
Ira M= Unh
189
a islt r. tt�aa i1 .. _
94
TOM[ Units ft-r nitbratl
2,92
Picerne intends to operate the Project as a rental community. The 29 Very Low Income Units
will remain rent restricted for a minimum of 55 years, per Government Code Section
65915(c)(1), more than the 30-year affordability term set forth in the Development Standards
Reduction in Parking
As provided for in Government Code Sec. 65915(p) and Section 20.32.030 of the City's Zoning
Code the 1600 Dove Street project is eligible for a reduction in parking requirements.
Government Code Section 65915(p) provides the following:
(1) Upon the request of the developer, no city, county, or city and county shall
require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, of a
development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b), that exceeds the following
ratios:
a. Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space per unit
b. Two to three bedrooms: 1.5 onsite parking spaces per unit.
(2) If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a
whole number, the number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For
purposes of this subdivision, a development may provide "onsite parking" through
tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through street parking.
1 Per Section 423 of the City Charter, with approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, up to an additional
100 dwelling units are permitted in the Airport Area without a vote of the electorate.
2
22-38
1600 Dove Street Affordable Housing Plan
April 22, 2024
Picerne requests that parking requirements be calculated in accordance with Government Code
Sec. 65915(p). A table comparing parking requirements in accordance with Government Code
Sec. 65915(p) with parking to be provided by the project will be provided in conjunction with a
future Major Site Development Review application.
Development Incentives Request
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(d)(1) and Section 20.32 of the City's Zoning Code,
Picerne is entitled to three incentives or concessions due to providing at least fifteen percent (15%)
of the units as affordable for Very Low Income households. Picerne requests the following
development incentives:
1. Section V.F.1 of the Development Standards provides that "Affordable units shall
reflect the range of numbers of bedrooms provided in the residential development
project as a whole." Picerne requests that the 29 Very Low Income units be
provided utilizing unit mixes which differ from the overall unit mixes for the
project. A table summarizing the Very Low Income units by bedroom count will
be provided in conjunction with the future Major Site Development Review
application.
2. Picerne is requesting a partial reduction of the park in -lieu fee referenced in
General Plan Policy LU 6-15.13 and in Section 19.52 of the City's Subdivision
Code.
These incentives will result in actual and identifiable cost reductions which will provide for the
affordable rents to be set in accordance with Government Code Sec. 65915(c). Picerne reserves
the right to utilize its remaining concession or incentive should such become necessary at a future
date.
Development Standards Waiver Request
Government Code Sec. 65915(e)(1) provides that a city or county may not apply any
development standard (including height limits) that will have the effect of physically precluding
the construction of a density bonus proj ect at the density permitted under the density bonus statute.
The only exceptions to this prohibition are if the development standards waiver would have an
unmitigable impact on health and safety as delineated in Government Code Sec. 65589.5(d),
impact on property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or if the development
standards waiver would be contrary to state or federal law. The Project is eligible for an unlimited
amount of waivers to development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding
the construction of the Project at the desired density. For the proposed project, Picerne is
requesting the following development standard waivers;
22-39
1600 Dove Street Affordable Housing Plan
April 22, 2024
I . General Plan Park Dedication Requirement: Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 16-15.13,
a public park equal to 8 percent of the gross land area of the total development, or a
minimum one -half -acre, whichever is greater, shall be provided. This requirement would
mandate a one -half -acre park on the 2.49 acre site. The General Plan allows a waiver of its
park dedication requirement where it can be demonstrated that the development parcels are
too small to feasibly accommodate the park. Picerne therefore requests waiver of the
General Plan Policy LU 16-15.13 public park dedication requirement.
2. PC-11 Development Standards Deviation (Building Height): PC-11 development
standards limit building heights in the Residential Overlay Zone to 55 feet. Given the
constraints imposed by the street setbacks and the utilities required to serve the Property,
imposition of the 55-foot height limit would physically preclude the development of the
proposed 282 dwelling units. The proposed building height is 100 feet.
General Plan Land Use Policy 6.15.7 and Part III, Section Il of the PC-11 zoning
regulations prescribes a residential density range of 30-50 dwelling units per acre
("du/ac") for projects in the Residential Overlay. The Project proposes 188 base units on
a 2.49 net acre parcel, which equates to a base density of 76 du/ac. Applicant requests a
waiver from the maximum base density standards under LU Policy 6.15.7 and the PC- 11
zoning regulations in order to construct the Project at the base density sought.
Waiver of these requirements is necessary to accommodate the additional units permitted by the
density bonus. Government Code Section 65915(e)(1) requires that the waiver requests be
approved. Pieerne reserves the right to request additional development standards waivers in
conjunction with its future Major Site Development Review application.
Income Limits and Examples of Eligible Tenants for Affordable Homes
Lower Income Households are defined as households whose gross income does not exceed 80%
of area median income, adjusted for household size. Table 4 below shows the maximum income
limits as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the
California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") for Lower Income
Households with household sizes appropriate for the 1600 Dove Street project:
Table 4
Maximum Income Limits
.
i
1 Perm
$50,250
2 Persnn
57,400
3 Porson
64,600
4 Ptrsnn.
71,750
5 Person
77,500
4
22-40
1600 Dove StreetAffordable Housing Plan
April 22, 2024
Higher income limits apply to larger families; those families however are not considered to be a
target market for the Project, where the unit mix consists of studios, one -bedroom, two -bedroom,
and potentially three -bedroom apartment homes. These income limits are updated annually.
The 29 affordable homes that Picerne will provide will be rented to eligible Very -Low -Income
Households. As shown in Table 4, Very -Low -Income Households includes incomes ranging
from $50,250 per year for a one -person household to $77,500 per year for a five -person
household, consistent with the income limits set for Orange County, issued by the Department
of Housing and Community Development on June 6, 2023. These income limits are updated
annually.
Households qualifying to live in the project could include those containing City employees,
school district employees, health care workers, restaurant and other retail workers, and other
occupations which provide needed services to our community. While household size, overtime
pay, summer j obs, or second j obs may affect eligibility, the income limits in Table 4 are reflective
of pay to many public or health care sector workers, as shown in Table 5 below:
Table 5
Examples of Qualifying Salaries
Position
Equipment Mechanic I
Police Dispatcher
Utilities Specialist
Clinical Support Tech I - Irvine OR
Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) - HHH Home Health
Newport -Mesa Unified School District ("NMUSD')
Teacher
Campus Safety Facilitator 439-24
Information Technology Technician i#35-24
Pay Range
Source Comments
$53,932479,586
City May qualify for Very Low Income units
depending on household size
$63,379-$93,650
City May qualify for Very Low Income units
depending on household size
$56,994484,220
City May qualify for Very Low Income units
depencng on household size
$39,686-$60,985
Hoag May qualify for Very Low Income units
$53,144-$81,681
Hoag May qualify for Very Low income units
depending on household size
$67,116-$75,497
NMUSD Credentialed teacher with no advanced
education and up to 4 years expereience
may qualify for Very Low Income units.
$47,831-$58,139
NMUSD May qualify for Very Low Income units
$56,867-$69,120
NMUSD May qualify for Very Low Income units
The pay ranges shown above are as of 2023 and are subject to update. Retired persons or couples
or young business professionals starting their careers may also qualify to rent the affordable
homes at 1600 Dove Street. In order to provide opportunities for workers to live in one of the
affordable homes, the City could provide guidelines providing for acceptance of applications on
a priority basis from classes of individuals who qualify under the income limits in effect. The
guidelines could provide for priority treatment for City residents, City employees, employees of
the local school district, and employees of major health care institutions or other categories
identified by the City for priority treatment.
5
22-41
1600 Dove Street Affordable Housing Plan
April 22, 2024
Rental Rate Limits for Affordable Homes
The 29 Very -Low -Income Units shall be rented at an affordable rent calculated in accordance
with the provisions of HSC Section 50053, Government Code Section 65915(c)(1)(B)(i) requires
that rents for units qualifying a project for a density bonus be set in accordance with HSC Section
50053. Accordingly, the gross rental payment for a Very -Low -Income unit is calculated based on
50% of Median Income which results in lower rents than those set using the applicable income
limits in areas qualifying for the high -cost area adjustment. Additionally, HSC Section 50053
limits affordable rent to 30% of total income for a Very -Low -Income -household, as calculated in
Table 6 below. That section also requires that the rent for a studio unit assumes a one -person
household for rent calculation purposes, a one -bedroom unit assumes a two -person household, a
two -bedroom unit assumes a three -person household and a three -bedroom unit assumes a four -
person household.
The calculated rents are then adjusted by a utility allowance as determined annually by the County
of Orange Housing & Community Services Department. As of October 1, 2023, the reduction for
the utility allowance is $149.00 per month for a studio unit, $163, 00 per month for a one -bedroom
unit, $215.00 per month for a two -bedroom unit and $277.00 per month for a three -bedroom unit.
The utility allowance assumes gas cooking, gas space heating, gas water heating, as well as
electricity, air conditioning, water, sewer, and trash fees to be paid by the tenant.
The maximum monthly rent payments for 2023/24 are calculated in accordance with HSC Section
50053 and shown in Table 6 below:
Table 6
Maximum Rents by Bedroom Count
Studio
$50,250
$89,450
$44,725
$1,118
$149
$969
1 Bedroom
57,400
102,250
51,125
1,278
163
1,115
2 Bedroom
64,600
115,000
57.500
1,438
215
1,223
3 Bedroom
71,750
127,800
63,900
1,598
277
1,321
Picerne will enter into an affordable housing agreement, in recordable form, with the City prior
to obtaining the first building permit for any residential unit, That agreement will ensure that the
maximum rents for the affordable apartment homes will be calculated using the methodologies
utilized in Table 6. The rental rates shown will be updated prior to the commencement of rental
activities and on an ongoing basis to reflect then current income limits, utility configurations,
utility allowances, and any changes in applicable regulations and statutes.
1.1
22-42
1600 Dove Street A.ffotciable Musing flan
April 22, 2024
Unit Mix, Design, and Location of Affordable Homes
While the exact location of each of the affordable homes within the 1600 Dove Street project
has not yet been determined, the affordable homes will be spread throughout the development
to avoid concentration of affordable homes in any area. The affordable homes shall be
comparable in the quality of construction and exterior design to the market rate homes. As
provided for in the Development Standards, all affordable homes will have access to the
facilities and amenities offered by the development.
VA
22-43
Exhibit "D"
Traffic Sturdy (PA2022-0297)
Appendices available separately due to bulk at:
www.newportbeachca.gov/cega
22-44
Traffic Engineering • Transportation Planning • Parking • Noise & Vibration
Air Quality • Global Climate Change 9 Health Risk Assessment
1600 DOVE STREET RESIDENCES
REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
prepared by
Bryan Crawford
Giancarlo Ganddini, PE, PTP
GANDDINI GROUP, INC.
555 Parkcenter drive, Suite 225
Santa Ana, California 92705
(714) 795-3100 1 ganddini.com
City of Newport Beach
August 14, 2023
Project No. 19615
22-46
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
................................................ IV
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... I
ProjectDescription..........................................................................................................................................................1
StudyArea.........................................................................................................................................................................1
AnalysisScenarios.............................................................................................................................. ....................1
2. METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................................................................5
Traffic Phasing Ordinance Analytical Methodology (Nan-CEQA)......................................................................5
Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology...........................................................................................5
PerformanceStandards....................................................................................................................---...............5
Substantial Operational Deficiency Criteria..................................................................................................6
Cumulative and General Plan Analytical Methodology (CEQA)..........................................................................6
Thresholds of Significance for General Plan FIR Addendum .................... ........... ___ ............................. 6
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analytical Methodology (CEQA)......................................................................................6
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
7
ExistingRoadway System...........................................................................................7
PedestrianFacilities ....... ...................................................................................................... ....................... _.................. 7
BicycleRoutes..................................................................................................................................................................7
TransitFacilities.......................................•---.....-----...........---................................................---------....................................7
GeneralPlan Context......................................................................................................................................................7
ExistingTraffic Volumes................................................................................................................................................7
ExistingIntersection Level of Service.........................................................................................................................8
4. PROJECT FORECASTS.......................................................................................................................................17
ProjectTrip Generation ................... ......................................................................................................... ................. 17
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment....................................................................................................... ..17
5. FUTURE VOLUME FORECASTS......................................................................................................................25
City of Newport Beach Approved Projects...........................................................................................................25
AmbientGrowth................................................................................................................................. ............... 25
TPOYear 2029 Volume Forecasts.......................................................................................................................... 25
6. TPO ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................................................30
TPO Year 2029 One -Percent Threshold Analysis...............................................................................................30
TPOImpact Assessment............................................................................................................................................. 30
7. CEQA ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................................................33
CumulativeProjects................................................................................................................................. ................33
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project Volume Forecasts.......................................................................................33
CEQA Year 2029 Wth Project Volume Forecasts..............................................................................................33
CEQA Year 2029 Impact Assessment.......... ........................... ...... ........ __ ........ ___ ........ ........... ....................... 33
8. GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON ANALYSIS.................................................................................................44
General Plan Comparison Methodology................................................................................................................44
General Plan Comparison Trip Generation and Trip Distribution...................................................................44
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project Volume Forecasts.......................................................... 44
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project Volume Forecasts................................................................. 44
General Plan Comparison Impact Assessment.....................................................................................................44
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-47
9. CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.................................................................................................52
Background.. ..............................................................................•----•..----•.........................................................•---.......... 52
CMP-Monitored Intersections................................................................................................................................ 52
Requirements for Improvements............................................................................................................................. 52
Criteria for Preparation of CMP Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 52
10. SITE ACCESS...
........... 53
SiteAccess................................................................................................................ ............................... 53
11. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) .................................................................................................................54
Background....--••---•--••----•...................................................... ,........... .. 54
VMT Assessment and Screening--........................................................................................................................ 54
12.CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................................................................................55
ProjectTrip Generation...........................................................................•............... ___ .................................... ..... 55
TPOImpact Analysis.......................................................................................................••---------•---•--........................... 55
CEQAYear 2029 Impact Analysis..........................................................................................•---•--------.............•--•-... 55
CEQA General Plan Comparison Impact Analysis............................................................................._................ 55
VMT Screening (Informational Purposes Only).................................................................................................... 55
Congestion Management Program.......................................................................................................................... 55
SiteAccess and Circulation........................................................................................................................................ 55
APPENDICES
Appendix A Glossary
Appendix B Volume Count Worksheets
Appendix C Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix D Approved Projects List and Cumulative Projects
Appendix E TPO One -Percent Threshold Analysis
Appendix F Existing VMT per Population Map
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.
Exisfing (2022) Intersection Levels of Service.............................................................................................9
Table 2,
Project Trip Generation................•-................................. .............................................................................18
Table 3.
TPO One -Percent Threshold Analysis Summary........ ............................................................ .................
31
Table 4.
TPO Year 2029 Intersection Levels of Service and Impact Assessment...........................................32
Table 5.
Cumulative Projects Trip Generation.......................................................................................................... 34
Table 6.
CEQA Year 2029 Intersection Levels of Service and Impact Assessment ........................................ 36
Table 7.
General Plan Comparison Trip Generation................................................................................................
46
Table 8.
Genera4 Plan Comparison: Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Intersection Levels of
Service and Impact Assessment....................................................................................................................
47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure1. Project Location Map...............................................•----....---...-•------..................................................---...............3
Figure 2. Site Plan ............................ .......................4
Figure 3. Existing Lane Geometry and Intersection Traffic Controls....................................................................10
Figure 4. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ...................................................................... ............................................. ....11
Figure 5. Orange County Transportation Authority System Map.........................................................................12
Figure 6. City of Newport Beach General Plan Master Plan of Streets and Highways...................................13
Figure 7. City of Newport Beach General Plan Roadway Cross-Sections.......................................................... 14
1600 Dave Street Residences
Revised TrafFic Impact Analysis
ii 19615
22-48
Figure 8.
Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.. .............. .....................................15
Figure 9.
Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.-.,.. ... ......... .......... .........
16
Figure 10.
Project Outbound Trip Distribution - Existing General Office Building............................................19
Figure 11.
Project Inbound Trip Distribution - Existing General Office Building ................................................
20
Figure 12.
Project Outbound Trip Distribution - Proposed Residential................................................................21
Figure 13.
Project Inbound Trip Distribution - Proposed Residential....................................................................22
Figure 14.
Project (Net) AM Pear Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ........... .............. -- ...... -- .... 23
Figure 15.
Project (Net) PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes............................................24
Figure 16.
TPO Year 2029 Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement
Volumes............................................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 17.
TPO Year 2029 Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement
Volumes...............................................................................................................................................................
27
Figure 18.
TPO Year 2029 With Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.............28
Figure 19.
TPO Year 2029 With Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.............29
Figure 20.
Cumulative Projects Location Map..............................................................................................................37
Figure 21.
Cumulative Projects AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..............................
38
Figure 22.
Cumulative Projects PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..............................
39
Figure 23.
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement
Volumes.....................................................................................................................40
..........................................
Figure 24.
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement
Volumes...............................................................................................................................................................41
Figure 25,
CFQA Year 2029 With Project AM Peak Hour Wersection Turning Movement
Volumes...............................................................................................................................................................
42
Figure 26,
CEQA Year 2029 With Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..........
43
Figure 27.
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning
MovementVolumes.. .......................................................................................................................................
48
Figure 28.
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning
MovementVolumes.........................................................................................................................................
49
Figure 29.
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning
MovementVolumes.........................................................................................................................................50
Figure 30.
Post 2030 Genera# Plan Buildout With Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning
MovementVolumes.........................................................................................................................................51
gmddh
1600 Dave Street ResWences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-49
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the potential for transportation impacts resulting from development
of the proposed project both in the context of the City of Newport Beach's discretionary authority for
conformance with locally established operational standards and the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Although this is a technical report, effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. A
glossary is provided in Appendix A to assist the reader with terms related to transportation engineering.
This study was prepared in consultation with City of Newport Beach staff and in accordance with the
procedures and methodologies for assessing transportation impacts established by the City of Newport Beach.
To assess the project's conformance with local operational standards, this study evaluates the project's effect
an traffic operations in accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance FPO) and, if necessary, identifies
recommended improvements or corrective measures to alleviate operational deficiencies substantially caused
or worsened by the proposed project. In addition to existing (2022) conditions, this report analyzes forecast
traffic conditions for year 2029 (one year after project opening).
For CFQA purposes, this study also evaluates the significance of project -related transportation impacts using
cumulative methodology as well as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis relative to criteria established by the
City of Newport Beach as the lead agency and, if necessary, identifies any feasible mitigation measures to
mitigate any significant impacts. Additionally, analysis was also prepared for Year 2029 cumulative and Post
2030 General Plan Buildout conditions in support of the project's proposed addendum to the 2006 General
Plan Environmental Impact Report (ElR).
Project Description
The 2.49-acre project site is addressed at 1600 Dave Street, located at the northeast corner of Dove Street
and Dolphin Striker Way, in the City of Newport Beach, California. The project site is currently developed
with an existing 60,675 square foot four-story office building and surface level parking lot.
The proposed project involves demolition of the existing office building and construction of a new seven -
story apartment building comprised of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, a leasing office, roof-
top common space, and approximately 530 parking spaces within an on -grade parking garage with two and a
half subterranean levels. Vehicular access is proposed to be maintained via existing driveways at Dove Street
and Dolphin Striker Way. The proposed project is anticipated to be fully operational by year 2028.
Existing Conditions
The study intersections currently operate at Levels of Service D or better during the peak hours for Existing
(2022) conditions.
Project Trip Generation
The existing project site land use is estimated to generate approximately 658 daily trips, including 92 trips
during the AM peak hour and 88 trips during the PM peak hour. The proposed project site land use is forecast
to generate approximately 1,280 daily trips, including 104 trips during the AM peak hour and 110 trips during
the PM peak hour. Therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in a net increase of approximately 622
net new daily trips, including 12 net new trips during the AM peak hour and 22 net new trips during the PM
peak hour.
9:3-1dii 1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
iv 19615
22-50
TPO Impact Analysis
The addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service F or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no Level of Service impacts at the study intersections
for TPO Year 2029 With Project conditions and no improvements are required.
CEQA Impact Analysis
The addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no significant Level of Service impacts at the study
intersections for CFQA Year 2029 With Project conditions and no new mitigation measures are required.
CEQA General Plan Comparison Impact Analysis
The addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no significant Level of Service impacts at the study
intersections for Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project conditions and no new mitigation measures
are required.
VMT Screening (In[ormationol Purposes Only)
The proposed project is located in an area with VMT per capita lower than the Orange County regional
average for residential use. Per the City VMT Guidelines, the project is therefore presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT.
Congestion Management Program (CMP)
Since the proposed project has indirect access to a CMP facility (e.g., MacArthur Boulevard or Jamboree Road)
and is forecast to generate less than 2,400 daily trips, the proposed project does not satisfy the criteria for
preparation of a separate CMP impact analysis.
Site Access and Circulation
Vehicular access is proposed to be maintained via existing driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way.
The project driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way will continue to provide full access, Based on
review of the adjacent development and lane configurations along Dove Street and Doiphin Striker Way, the
existing lane configurations are anticipated to provide adequate circulation. The final parking and circulation
will be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach.
g3lddh 1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
v 19615
22-51
1. INTRODUCTION
This section describes the project location, project description, study area, and analysis scenarios.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 2.49-acre project site is addressed at 1600 Dove Street, located at the northeast corner of Dove Street
and Dolphin Striker Way, in the City of Newport Beach, California. The project site is curren0y developed
with an existing 60,675 square foot four-story office building and surface level parking lot. Figure 1 shows
the project location map.
The proposed project involves demolition of the existing office bui}ding and construction of a new seven -
story apartment building comprised of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, a (easing office, roof-
top common space, and approximately 530 parking spaces within an on -grade parking garage with two and a
half subterranean levels. Vehicular access is proposed to be maintained via existing driveways at Dove Street
and Dolphin Striker Way, The proposed project is anticipated to be fully operational by year 2028. Figure 2
illustrates the project site plan.
STUDY AREA
Based on scoping discussions with City of Newport Beach staff, the study area consists of the following study
intersections within the City of Newport Beach, three of which share jurisdiction with the City of Irvine:
Study Intersections'
Jurisdiction
1.
Campus Drive (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
Newport Beach
2.
Irvine Avenue/Campus Drive (NS) at Bristol Street South (EW)
Newport Beach
3.
Birch Street (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
Newport Beach
4.
Birch Street (NS) at Bristol Street South (EW)
Newport Beach
5.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
Newport Beach/Irvine
6.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Birch Street (EW)
Newport Beach
1.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Newport Place Dr/Van Karman Avenue (EW)
Newport Beach
8.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Jamboree Road (EW)
Newport Beach/Irvine
9.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Bison Avenue (EW)
Newport Beach
10.
Jamboree Road (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
Newport Beach/Irvine
11.
Jamboree Road (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
Newport Beach
12,
Jamboree Road (NS) at Bristol Street South (EW)
Newport Beach
13.
Jamboree Road (NS) at Eastbiuff Drive/University Drive (EW)
I Newport Beach
14.
Van Karman Avenue (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
I Newport Beach/Irvine
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
In accordance with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), this traffic report evaluates
the following analysis scenarios based on one year after the anticipated project opening year:
a) Existing (2022) Conditions;
b) TPO Year 2029 Without Project; and
c) TPO Year 2029 With Project
(NS) = North -South roadway; (EW) — East-West roadway
y�����i 1600 Dove Street Residences
9 i Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-52
Additionally, this study also evaluates the following analysis scenarios in support of the project's proposed
cumulative CEQA analysis:
d) CEQA Year 2029 Without Project;
e) CEQA Year 2029 With Project;
Lastly, this study evaluates the following analysis scenarios in support of the project's proposed addendum to
the 2006 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (FIR):
f) General Plan Comparison: Post 2030 General Plan Buiidout Without Project; and
g) General Plan Comparison: Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project.
9:nddh
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-53
Legend
QStudy Intersection
Figure 1
Project location Map
1600 Dove Street Residences
jr Traffic Impact Analysis
g t9615
22-54
VEHICULAR ENTRY
d
0
C
rn
W
n/V
g3ldil
RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS
VEHfCULAR ENTRY
0--
DOLPHIN' STR�K�ER WAYf
4
Figure 2
Site Plan
1600 pave Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-55
2. METHODOLOGY
This section discusses the analysis methodologies used to assess transportation facility performance as
adopted by the respective jurisdictional agencies.
TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY (NON-CEQA)
To establish consistency with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and other City requirements, all
proposed land use projects generating 300 or more daily trips are required to prepare a Level of Service
analysis for transportation impacts consistent with Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the City of
Newport Beach Municipal Code. The TPO requires assessment of development project impacts on the City's
arterial circulation system based on the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology, While operational
ICU analysis is required for conformance with the City's TPO requirements, it is noted that a project's effect
on automobile delay (as measured by Level of Service) shall not constitute a significant environmental impact
in accordance with current CEQA provisions.
Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology
In accordance with City of Newport Beach requirements, level of service analysis of signalized intersections
is based on the ICU methodology. The ICU methodology compares the volume of traffic using the intersection
to the capacity of the intersection. The resulting volume -to -capacity (V/C) ratio represents that portion of the
hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate
at capacity. The volume -to -capacity ratio is then correlated to a performance measure known as level of
service based on the following thresholds:
Level of Service
Volume/Capacity Ratio
A
<_ 0.60
B
> 0.60 to < 0.70
C
> 0.70 to < 0.80
D
>0.80to_<0.90
E
> 0.90 to <_ 1.00
F
> 1.00
Source: Transportation Research Board, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Transportation Research
Circular Na. 212, January 1980.
Level of service is used to qualitatively describe the performance of a roadway facility, ranging from Leve! of
service A (free -flow conditions) to Level of Service F (extreme congestion and system failure),
The ICU and Level of Service calculations for this study were performed using the Traffix software. In
accordance with City of Newport Beach TPO requirements, the ICU calculations assume a lane capacity of
1,600 vehicles per hour per lane and no factor for yellow time. The project -related increase in ICU is rounded
to three decimal places and then rounded to two decimal places.
Performance Standards
The City of Newport Beach has established Level of Service D as the minimum acceptable Level of Service
for its arterial roadway system, except at the following locations where Level of Service E or better is
acceptable:
1600 Dave Street Residences
Revised Traffic impact Analysis
S 19615
22-56
■ Any intersection in the Airport Area shared with City of Irvine; and
■ Any intersections in the City of Corona Del Mar.
Substantial Operational Deficiencv Criteria
In accordance with the City's TPO, the following criteria are used to determine if a proposed project wiJ result
in a substantial Level of Service impact and is required to provide improvements/corrective measures;
■ A substantial project impact is defined to occur if the addition of project -generated trips is forecast to
cause/worsen a deficient intersection operation (generally Level of Service E or F) and increase the
intersection capacity utilization by one percent or more of capacity (i.e., V/C increases by 0.010 or more).
If a project is forecast to cause or worsen a substantial Level of Service impact, the project must construct or
provide funding for improvements, to the extent feasible, such that the project -related increase in capacity
utilization does not exceed the City -established criteria.
CUMULATIVE AND GENERAL PLAN ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY (CEQA)
Although Level of Service impacts no longer constitute a significant environmental impact based on current
CEQA provisions, a Level of Service analysis and significant impact evaluation were also prepared for Year
2029 cumulative and Post 2030 General Plan Buildout conditions, which did include evaluation of Level of
Service impacts based on relevant thresholds of significance at the time of preparation. The purpose of the
General Plan Comparison analysis is to document whether any new traffic -related impacts would occur
compared to the 2006 General Plan FIR based on the proposed project.
Thresholds of Significance for General Plan EIR Addendum
Year 2029 cumulative and Post 2030 General Plan Buildout conditions are analyzed based on the same ICU
methodology used for the TPO analysis. Based on the 2006 General Plan DR, the following criteria are used
to determine if the proposed project would result in a significant Level of Service impact requiring new
mitigation measures.
■ A significant transportation impact is defined to occur if the addition of project -generated trips is forecast
to cause/worsen a deficient intersection operation (generally Level of Service E or F) and increase the
intersection capacity utilization by one percent or more of capacity (i.e., V/C increases by 0.010 or more).
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY (CEQA)
The metric used to evaluate the transportation impact of land use and transportation projects under CEQA is
known as vehicle miles traveled WIT). In general terms, VMT quantifies the amount and distance of
automobile travel attributable to a project or region. Additional information and a detailed project assessment
is provided in the Vehicle Miles Traveled section presented later in this report.
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-57
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing transportation setting in the project vicinity.
EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM
Figure 3 identifies the lane geometry and intersection traffic controls for existing conditions based on a field
survey of the study area. Regional access to the project area is provided by the San Joaquin Hills Corridor
(State Route 73) freeway south of the project site running between Bristol Street North and Bristol Street
South. The key north -south roadways providing local circulation are Irvine Avenue, Campus Drive, Birch
Street, MacArthur Boulevard, and Jamboree Road. The key east -west roadways providing local circulation are
Bristol Street North, Bristol Street South, Newport Place Drive, Von Karman Avenue, Bison Avenue, Eastbluff
Drive, and University Avenue.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Existing pedestrian facilities in the project vicinity are shown on Figure 4.
BICYCLE ROUTES
On -street bicycle facilities are not provided in the project area along Dove Street or Dolphin Striker Way.
Dove Street adjacent to the project site does not have bikeway classification. Roadways that provide on -street
bicycle facilities near the project site include Bristol Street North, Bristol Street South, Birch Street, and
intermittent areas of Jamboree Road and Campus Drive.
TRANSIT FACILITIES
Figure 5 shows the existing transit routes available in the project vicinity. As shown on Figure 5, no Orange
County Transportation Authority Routes service Dove Street adjacent to the project site.
GENERAL PLAN CONTEXT
Figure 6 shows the City of Newport Beach General Ran Master Plan of Streets and Highways roadway
classifications map. This figure shows the nature and extent of arteria4 and collector highways that are needed
to adequately serve the ultimate development depicted by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The
City of Newport Beach General Pian roadway cross -sections are depicted on Figure 7.
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Existing peak hour intersection volumes were developed from intersection turning movement counts collected
in March/April 2022 during typical weekday AM and PM peak periods of commuter traffic. The AM peak
period was counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the PM peak period was counted between 4:30 PM
and 6:30 PM. The actual peak hour within the peak period is the four consecutive 15-minute periods with the
highest total volume of all approaches. Thus, the PM peak hour at one intersection may occur at 4:45 PM to
5:45 PM if those four consecutive 15-minute periods have the highest combined volume. Count worksheets
are provided in Appendix B.
Based on the projects application date, existing volume and Level of Service conditions were established for
year 2022.
Figure 8 and Figure 9 show the Existing AM peak hour and PM peak hour intersection turning movement
volumes.
gTdii 16D0 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
7 19615
22-58
EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Existing intersection Levels of Service are summarized in Table 1. Detailed Level of Service worksheets are
provided in Appendix C.
As shown in Table 1, the study intersections currently operate at Levels of Service D or better during the peak
hours for Existing (2022) conditions.
g7lddll
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysls
W615
22-59
Table 1
Existing (2022) Intersection Levels of Service
ID Study Intersection
Traffic
Control'
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
V/Cz
LOS-'
V/Cl
ms,
1. Campus Dr INS) at Bristol St North (EW)
TS
0,36
A
0.61
B
2. irvine Ave/Campus Dr (NS) at Bristol 5t South (EW)
TS
0.49
A
0.44
A
3. Birch St(NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
TS
0.47
A
0,51
A
4. Birch 5t(NS) at Bristol St South (EW)
t',
0,34
A
0.35
A
S. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)4
TS
0.33
A
0.53
A
6. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Birch St (EW)
TS
0.28
A
0.37
A
7. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Newport PI Dr/Von Karman Ave (EW)
TS
0.31
A
0.35
A
8, MacArthur Blvd INS) at Jamboree Rd (EW)`'
TS
0.37
A
0.45
A
9. MacArthur Blvd INS) at 13ison Ave (EW)
TS
0.38
A
0.41
A
10. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)`'
TS
0.48
A
0.49
A
11, Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
TS
0.34
A
0.35
A
12. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol St5outh (EW)
TS
0.58
A
0.60
A
13. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Eastbluff Dr/University Dr (EW)
TS
0.54
A
0.57
A
14, Von Karman Ave (NS) at Campus Or (EW)4
TS
0.28
A
0.45
A
Notes:
(1) T5 = Traffic Signal
(2) V/C - Volume/Capacity
(3) LOS = Level of Service
(4) Level of Service E is acceptable; shared jurisdiction with City of Irvine.
g3ldliii
1600 E}ove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-60
IRVINE AVE
nC
DR
Campus Dr {NS)! Campus Dr (NS)!
Bristol51 N (EW) Bnslol5l 5 (EVV)
��ttt �. ttttt�
y
Birch 51 (NS)!
Bristol St N (EW)
Birch St (NS)I MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
Bristol St S (Ewj Campus or (EW}
�F
Pr
Litt r
n
u
Legend
Traffic Signal
#D #-Lane Divided Roadway
#U #-Lane Undivided Roadway
#A* -#-Lanes (One -Way)
Existing Lane
93-dii
D
4D
RTO Right Turn Overlap
F Free Right Turn Lane
SPLIT Split Signal Phasing
d De Facto Turn Lane
813
Q�
�P� 4D
6D 2
JO
8D 4D
4D\ 4D
Site 6D G
4D
4D
7D
1
4D
O ti
O
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
Von Karman Ave (EVtry
�
MacArhur Bl}! vd {NS�
Birch $I (EM
4D
�
!�
6D
7D
4u
MacMhur Blvd (NS)!
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
7D
Jamboree Rd (EW}
® '`
Bison Ave (EW)
'� Rra
r
r
6D
813
—'
F�
Jamhorea Rd (NSiI '
DR
Campus Dr {EW)
UNiVERStTY
60
40
F�
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bristol St N {EW)
Bristol St S (EW}
6°
��111
llll
�ttf�r
ittifw
FREE
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Van Kerman Ave(NS)!
`\
7D m
a'90 AVE
6D L
6D
University Dr (EW)
�F
Campus or (EW)
,it'r
d1
`5tttr
8D
Figure 3
Existing Lane Geometry and Intersection Traffic Controls
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
10 19615
22-61
1
at
Legend
— Sidewalk
93-dii
--. oui S RIR�Wp`Y
Figure 4
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-62
Local Routes 11 -991 ••^ IM••^ Matra ink StatloNnk Routes Brava Limped Stop Service � Rail Stations
(400-499) 1500-5991
Ylenblry Ri JIlwr any
—m— communl(y Routes 1100-199) ®— City Shunie
OC Bps Transit Centers
o SANTAANASTATION
..
z LL
BOLSA m 1ST
m
GOLOENWEST no
�
TRANSPORTATION
CENTER w z
E
MCFADDEN K1 MCFADDEN 4 m
fp
4
mEDINGER ® z
1 f VVV m ,
m m`�!'.,
WESTMINSTER a
WARNER
m 4�0 ` • f
SLATER U m p ® rypG. u
M
w u w -KF-
7ALREfii .� MRCRR7HUR 2
7 MACARIHUR
QSUNFLOWER y........
I FOUNTAIN Fm
® VALLEY COSTA
MESA
w ® ADAMS 1.11
m E
d N ■
2 = 'V =
m 4 X
O
� m >
WILSON LL
m
HAMILTON 44
t=
w
ic ,ci 19TH
INJ
Source: Orange County Transportation Authority
BgLBOq
BARER ® ,2`/
5
Cq�p�
m � FE J�Rr
L�2F'PS e sl
?y D�
i uNIVEASfTy
J w
�tPy m
m
NEWPORT
BEACH
T
TRANSPAANSPORiA710N
ZPINVU5
Figure 5
Orange County Transportation Authority System Map
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
-2 19615
22-63
Legend
ADOPTED INTERCHANGE
• PROPOSED INTERCHANGE
ROUTES REQUIRING
e=es FURTHER COORDINATION
0.75 Miles
COMMUTER ROADWAY
(TWO LANE UNDIVIDED)
3.24 M ilea
SECONDARY ROAD
(FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED)
16.88 Miles
SECONDARY
(NOT BUILT)
0.28 Mlles
PRIMARY ROAD
�• (FOUR LANE DIVIDED)
29.62 Mlles
PRIMARY ROAD
•••••• (NOT BUILT)
3.29 Miles
MAJOR ROAD
(SIX LANE DIVIDED)
30.64 Miles
EIGHT LANE ROAD
(DIVIDED)
2.81 Miles
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS
-• TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
5.31 Miles
ADOPTED FREEWAY
ROUTES
4.48 Miles
FUTURE FREEWAY
EXTENSION
0.75 Miles
Figure 6
Source: City of Newport Beach City of Newport Beach General Plan Master Plan of Streets and Highways
93-dini
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-64
PRINCIPAL -144'
(8 Lanes Divided)
q
MAJOR -128'
(6 Lanes Divided)
q
PRIMARY - 104'
(4 Lanes Divided)
rL
Lane Lane Lane J, 4ane ��py
SECONDARY - 84'
(4 Lanes Undivided)
aLane,
Lane Lane Lane
COMMUTER - 60'
(2 Lanes Divided)
Figure 7
Source: City of Newport Beach City of Newport beach General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections
93-���1 1600 Dove Street Residences
i Traffic Impact Analysis
14 19615
22-65
IRVINE AVZ
Campus Dr (NS)l
Campus Or (NS)i
Bristol St N (EW(
Bristol St S (£Nd)
N�
'-167
��
N N
—858
v co
.1
,r252
`5 T
682�
T 7'
1292-►
��
vrn
453�,
�r
Birch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (EVV
orn "-149
--1161
,1 -3+60
11
rov
I� N
Birch St (NS)f
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
6ristoi SI S (EWI
Campus
Dr (EW)
m�
o r-
'-6o
+-170
c°�vroT°
,r 21
496�
t f
254�
905�
��
406�
v�N
194,
N N
37�r
m
Legend
QStudy Intersection
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
MacArthur NO (NS)/
BNch St (EM
Von Karmen
Ave (EW)
wo
"-34
t30
rn
N[O 'ct'
�113
oLO
rvv
—59
1 4
rr 16
J
,r 147
59 �
`� I r
18 �'
`� 7'
179�
r�mv
38-'
eN,rnv
39
20-
Mm
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur
Blvd (NS)!
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
rn
152
^
'-40
C' (D
� M,n
—747
cm
—92
� 1.
,r-333
1 1,
,r165
2601
1 '1 T P
78
597
a�i v ono
69
o oi°o coo
tnN
r�
Jamboree Rd (NS)I
Campus Dr (EW)
Ln "- 87
r t2 cN Y-194
1 i �k r-184
58-A 1 `5 t t`
133-► �nIt
31co
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (NS)I
Bristol SL N (EW)
Bristol St S (EW)
a~i C-4
ni
J 1
l
875-'
t P
N rn co
47 NM
380 -►
rn co
ON
T -
1209 —�k
�2
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Von Karmen Ave (NS)l
University Dr (EW)
Campus Dr (EVIq
CDM
�142
cn
51
corn
—99
rr`n
—192
,r220
or-31
381 -4
i T 1'
114Jr
'1 r P
90—
ran rn c40,I
202
uO Co cN
32-).
M-
39-X
c,
Figure 8
Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
15 19615
22-66
Site
C
M
N
1RVINE q VZ
MacArthur Blvd {NS)!
MacArthurBlvd (NS)!
Birch Sr (EWj
Van Karmen
Ave (EW)
m Cn
149
co
'L 81
uu') rY,
—263
ram, uNi ch
—36
.l S.
01-62
Al 1 i*
rr409
252
64}
186�
manin~i
87�
25
127�r
vN
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (EN
MNN '�88
n n 2 —828
1. ,-357
179 - `1 t P
752 co
55 �r o co 0
N M M
MauMhur Blvd {NS)1
Bison Ave (EW)
`0 67
N N
COS —104
j r135
165�
102
1297 rrn
Campus Or (NS)! Campus Dr (NS)f Jamboree Rd (NS)/
Bnslol 51 N (EW) Edstal St S (E" campus Dr (EW)
M u') "-107 a Cl) litAVERSITY DR Lo r o '--251
as 1697 m cor �-274
r l r278 k. ,l 1 ` rl18
435158--`
N r^n 822—� rn� 255— U13EN
rein 485- mN 82� tl r
Birch 51 (NS)1� v Jamboree Rd (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Brstol S1 N (EW) Bristol SI N (EW) Bristol St 5 (EW)
�- '`110 N M
rLn c`".i —1537 OQ" rn n ti
J ,r 370
J
Ti? `mv I `l t r 513 -' t r
rt y Mr--0 686— ()N
N !�� �0w 1086-4 on
Birch 51(NS)! MacArthur Blvd (NS)f ~ Jamboree Rd (NS)! Von Kerman Ave 5)1
Bristol St S (EM Campus Dr (F" university Dr (FM Campus ❑r (EW)
"137 m o-'o ti122 c, L77
.1 MtoEO +-625 'ro —106 rvacNfl —332
t ~. + r $ k r35 e/soNavE \ 1 ,r228 .r 1 �. r16
202-' I r' 262271 -1 t P 128-- `1 T r
903: ► Nn 221 ,a�°7 100MDN 252— CNN
1111 NN 4612-X LoM 38-14 v
Le end
Study Intersection
g3o-diii
Figure 9
Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
16 19615
22-67
4. PROJECT FORECASTS
This section describes how project trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment forecasts were
developed. The forecast project volumes are illustrated on figures contained in this section,
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Table 2 shows the project trip generation based upon trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Based on review of the ITE land
use description, trip generation rates for general office building (Land Use Code 710) and multifamily housing
(mid -rise) not close to transit (Land Use Code 221) were determined to adequately represent the existing and
proposed land uses and were selected for use in this analysis. The project trip generation forecast is
determined by multiplying the trip generation rates by the land use quantities.
As shown in Table 2, the existing project site land use is estimated to generate approximately 658 daily trips,
including 92 trips during the AM peak hour and 88 trips during the PM peak hour. The proposed project site
land use is forecast to generate approximately 1,280 daily trips, including 104 trips during the AM peak hour
and 110 trips during the PM peak hour. Therefore, the proposed project is forecast to resuit in a net increase
of approximately 622 net new daily trips, including 12 net new trips during the AM peak hour and 22 net new
trips during the PM peak hour.
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Figure 10 thru Figure 13 show the forecast directional distribution patterns for the project generated trips.
The project trip distribution patterns were developed in consultation with City of Newport Beach staff based
on review of existing volume data, surrounding land uses, and the local and regional roadway facilities in the
project vicinity.
The project -generated AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure
14 and Figure 15.
93lddil 1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
17 19615
22-68
Table 2
Project Trip Generation
Trlp Generation Rates
Land Use
Sources
Unf
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
% In
% Out
Rate
% In
% Out
Rate
General Office Building
ITF 710
TSF
88%
12%
1.52
17%
83%
1.44
10.84
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
ITE 221
DU
23%
77%
0.37
61%
39%
0.39
4.54
Trips Generated
Land Use
Quantlty
Unit'-
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Fxisbng
General Office Building
60.675
TSF
81
11
92
15
73
8B
65B
Proposed
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
282
DU
1 25
79
104
68
1 42
110
1,280
NET PROJECT TRIPS GENERATED
56177
68
+12
1 +53
1 -31
+22
+622
Notes:
(1) ITE - Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Monuaf (11th Edition, 2021); ### - Land Use Code
(2) TSF = Thousand Square Feet (Gross Floor Area); DU = Dwelling Units
'sE
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-69
Legend
-d*-10% Percent From Project
5%
Figure 10
Project Outbound Trip Distribution - Existing General Office Building
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19 19615
22-70
Legend
,d*-10% Percent To Project
Figure 11
Project Inbound Trip Distribution - Existing General Office Building
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
20 19615
22-71
Legend
-011l-10% Percent From Project
Figure 12
Project Outbound Trip Distribution - Proposed Residential
ql1���_, 1b00 Dove Street Residences
�� Traffic Impact Analysis
21 19615
22-72
Legend
-0-10% Percent To Project
gMdJH
Figure 13
Project Inbound Trip Distribution - Proposed Residential
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Aikalysis
22 19615
22-73
AvE
Campus Ur (NS)l
Campus Dr {NS)1
Brstol St N (E"
Bristol St 5 (lzm
W-0
00 +-14
00
J� ro
AW
0:�
tr
0a
_11
00
i
Birch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (EW)
V 0 'I--2
'0
�t
O N
N
Birch St (NS)1
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Bristol 5t S (EM
Campus Or (EW)
'` 0
Nr
o?co, —0
lL
.1�L r0
-11'r
tP
Q�I
' tP
0�r
fly
dTd
0�
r
"
Legend
QStudy Intersection
g311-dfii
Site C
�
3
G
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacMhurBlvd {NS)1
rift
Birch St (EV4
Von Korman Ave (EW)
w-0
%t-0
04 NMo —0
Too --3
.1LL r0
W jL pro
P�Qr
1
7-$ '1 1'
3�
0-► 0rn0
3-. �oo
i 1
31
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)I
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Sison Ave (EVI)
-6
Mom`-0
ocooJ*-D
-0
r0
Jyr0
-7�r
0� O N O
0�
O v 0
o�,
0,,
UNIVERSITY
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Campus Dr (EVJ)
'1- 0
CD 0 —0
d�L r0
10
0� Dino
0-4
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bristol St N (Eq
965101 St S (Fq
�1r
Q�
1r
C? 0
4—
0 0
37
T
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Von Karmen Ave (NS)!
`\
University Cr (EVVI
Campus Dr (<=VVj
m
BIS0NAVE a
0rQ0 �o
J �' 0-0
0`?0 4-0
J L iro
�tr
0� �10
1r
0— a0o
0� 0v�0
0-4 r
0,,
Figure 14
Project (Net)
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Bove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
23 19615
22-74
Site
N
-i
IRVINEAVE
Campus Dr (NS)l
Campus Dr (NE)1
Bristol SI N (EW)
Bo5tol St 5 (EM
La
00 6
QO
j
t
0-�
r r
00
11
00
0-14
Birch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (EW)
L6
to co .-0 `
J r0 t�
J�
CS N Co
Birch St (NS)l MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Bristol St S (EM Campus Dr (EW)
1.-0
Ov10 �0
'd ,r04
a'i I P
ora
AVE
uN1VERs
60
MacMhur Blvd (NS)1
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Birch St (EW)
Van Karman Ave (EW)
L0
L 0
tpMO --0
J 1 �. rr0
m�� —g
.? r0
Aft-
1�r
�tr
�tr
0�
0�
ONO—►
-14�
NOO
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
MacArihurBlvd (NS)f
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
15
L?I O —0
0 LD
OAS? �a
J V fr0
,1 l 1. rr0
2} �1r
0-,
�1r
0- oils
0�
ovO
0-,
0 �,
Jamhoree Rd (NS)!
��
Campus Dr (EW)
'-o
o,2ro --o
'd j 1 r0
r
0— 0OO
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
07
6 ree Rd {NS)l
Bristol SI N (ER
Bristol S1 S (EW)
o 'n
rn
� �
1
�1r
ate' tr
C1 N 0
2— UI1 O
-2�
Jamboree Rd (NS)f
Von Karman Ave (NS)!
University or (EA
Campus Dr (EW)
L0
L0
Oro —0
r0
Or1O �4
ate' �?r
ate'
�1r
a� OrriO
a—
ONO
o-�,
0-�,
W 1 II NN\
La
end
Study Intersection
Figure 15
Project (Net)
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
93-diii
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
2q 19615
22-75
5. FUTURE VOLUME FORECASTS
This section describes how future volume forecasts for the TPO scenarios were developed. Forecast study
area volumes are illustrated on figures contained in this section.
CITY OF NEW PORT BEACH APPROVED PROJECTS
The City of Newport Beach staff provided a list of approved projects within the study area for use in the TPO
analysis. The approved project list consists of future developments that have been approved, but have not
been fully constructed and occupied. The approved project data is contained in Appendix D.
Trips associated with the following 17 projects are included in the TPO analysis:
■ Fashion Island Expansion
N Temple Bat Yahm Expansion
■ Hoag Hospital Phase III
■ St. Mark Presbyterian Church
■ 2300 Newport Blvd (Vue)
■ Hoag Health Center 500-540 Superior
■ North Newport Center
■ 328 Old Newport Medical Office GPA
■ Mariner's Pointe 23,105 SQ FT Commercial Center
■ Back Bay Landing 300 ECH
■ Balboa Marina West
■ Newport Crossings
■ Museum House - Vivante Senior Center
■ Uptown Newport: Phase 1 - Trans Devel Rights (TDR)
■ Uptown Newport: Phase 2 only
■ Residences at 4400 VK
■ Picerne Residential (1300 Bristol St N)
AMBIENT GROWTH
To account for ambient growth on roadways, existing volumes were increased by a growth rate of one percent
(1.0%) per year through year 2029 along applicab#e arterial highways (Irvine Avenue, Jamboree Road, and
MacArthur Boulevard) in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Regional Traffic Annual Growth Rate.
This equates to a growth factor of 1.07 along arterials with counts conducted in 2022.
TPO YEAR 2029 VOLUME FORECASTS
TPO Year 2029 Without Project volume forecasts were developed by adding ambient growth and approved
projects trips to existing volumes. TPO Year 2029 Without Project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning
movement volumes are shown on Figure 16 and Figure 17.
TPO Year 2029 With Project volume forecasts were developed by adding project -generated trips to TPO
Year 2029 Without Project volumes. TPO Year 2029 With Project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning
movement volumes are shown on Figure 18 and Figure 19.
gxddi1600_'Dave 5kreet Residences
'1Revisevi5ed Traffic Impact Analysis
25 19615
22-76
VRVINEAVe
campus Dr (NS)l
Campus Dr (NS)l
Bristol St N (EW)
Bristol $t S (EM
rn .- 167
rn
n i r`°w —949
d co
.! 1 ,r267
1.
'i 1
687
I + r
1290—
vrn
453-1,
I-N
3irch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (EW)
m co "-160
— 1244
.1 ,r381 k
Jk
ao u� y
Birch Sl (NS)f
MacArthur Blvd (NS)f
Bristol St S (EW)
Campus ➢r (EW)
N co
,r V N '-65
��
P731N —170
496�`
900-•
194�
t 1'
�'�
NN
254�`
406�
37�
t P
vm�
v
Legend
Study Intersection
CVccoq
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)f
NBirch
SI (Ew)
Von Karman Ave (EW)
G �84
c000 '�30
Ntotto —125
�,or —59
,1 ,r 16
W l �. ,r 162
91 �'
191 —�
39
I �'
N ! ) O
r110LO
18�
m r.C]
2a c'vr-
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree
Rd (EM
Bison Ave (EW)
Nov
�174
ti0
"40
N ch rp
+--915
rry
—93
,r397
J 1
,r181
2 8 7 -"
i t r
8 0:
674—
rn v 0
moo
84� cY2 N °o
rrnr
152
Lon
67-, r�2
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Campus Dr (EW)
UNIVERSITY DR
4Mr„
"-87
ICON
—194
r165
133—
omLO
33-,*%
rrn
Jamboree Rd (NS)I
Bristol St N (EWj
N N
M CO
�r rA
�l
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bristal Sl S (EW)
03
M
co
I
8 9 7- T r
1 r
co to
392 — v o
1239—x m
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Von Karmen Ave (NS)f
\1
University Dr (EW)
Campus or (EA
mas
co 142
00 t 58
\\,r220
'(0 C~o —99
r2 LT +-197
J L ,e-31
AVE
3611 '1Tr
114-" `�tP
ccO
204Sr+mN
32—
-A CO
Figure 16
TPO Year 2029 Without Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
26 19615
22-77
m MacArthur Blvd (NS)! MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
N Q4 Birch St (EW) Von Karman Ave (EW)
176 N L81
—275 vM TO'n —36
tRVINE avP�QiQ r62 J1L r421
� e�'�s � S264�` 't 64- �}
nn195— rnN
25- 127
0+
mN�'
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l MacArthurBlvd (NS)l
0� sj Jamboree Rd {EW) Bison Ave (EVJ)
(nr+un t101 vu�i �67
r.-N.r —9418 eOfm —108
J � L r400 'd or-141
206�` t P 170�r
933� N�ti 105-► °��
57� �+�� '131� �N
Campus Or (NS)l Campus Or (N5)! ' Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Brislal St N (EVV) Bristol St S (EM!) Campus Or (EW)
M� '�107 oN UNIVERSITY OR �.LoN '-251
aou� —1734 n- r5- �-274
jr281 jL JIL r123
# 4 r +
445�r I l� 159-x `S I
N rt 83C v rn 255 coo l` 00
�LO 485� tiN 94� rr
Birch St (NS)l Jamboree Rd (NS)l Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bristol St N {EW) Bristc 4 St N (EW) Bristol St S (EW)
cnc7 �115 rna
CO 0
n N —1570 cD 00 co
J 1 ,e-372
J
603 --r t
LO NwM cor- -r-�N �� rnTrn 1112-x N
Birch St (NS)l MacArthur Blvd (NS)1 Jamboree Rd (NS)1 Van Karman Ave (NS)l
Bristol St S (EW( Campus Or (EW) University Or (EVC Campus Dr (ENr)
VN -�140 ��� *-122 W0 '-81
aN n~7h20 —625 Mr2 —106 Nvccoo �335
L J L r35 $/soNAVE ,r235 10 +r16
202r t P 262-' `t t P 271 �' 1 t r 128"
927� M00 221� r'(D 100— co MN 258— ooarn
LO(O —ON -it 0rn VNN
111ti NN 46� eo 12--, eQM 38-% v
Legend
QStudy Intersection
g7diii
Figure 17
TPO Year 2029 Without Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
27 19615
22-78
IRVINI= AV, -
Campus Or (NS)1
f Campus 9r (NS)1
Bristol St N (EW)
Bristol Sr S (EYM)
mr
�167
rn
N CM
—963
v ar`o
.1 1
r267
l L
`, 1
687"
t P
a 00
1279-�
yr
v rn
453 :,
!- N
Birch St (NS)i
Bristol St N (EW)
M " 15 8
r — 1244
d c-381
�k
Birch St (NS)f
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
Bristol Sr S (EW)
Campus
6r (EW
Iq
rON
'-65
CO t°
C.,M N
�--170
1.
.1 1.
r 21
485-
fi l'
254:
'1 r r'
9007
0
406-►
00 cm v
v�N
194�,
NN
37�
Legend
0 Study Intersection
MacArthur Blvd (NS)f
MecArthurBlvd (NS)!
Birch St (Eq
Von Karma
n Ave (EW)
co�v
�84
ocoOnr
'-30
cV cP cA
—125
rvrn
+-56
,?
162
98
21�r
`���'
191 ►
NQ�
41�
°�vn
39ti
51�,
MacArthur
Blvd (NS)1
MacArthur
Nvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
'L168
c,
'-40
rC3iaNON
N c+)cc
+-915
r.-�
�93
.l 1.
r397
.1
r181
280
80�r
674�
malloo
84�
152
67�,
f{
UNIVERSE
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Campus Or (EW)
ornLO '--87
N m N —194
d } L r 185
saw' t`iTP
133— o[0-
33-, -Q,
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Bristol SL N (EW)
Bristol St 5 (EM
m n
br
v co
ea
� �
1
1 r•
s97�' ?
,,N�
1242-�,
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Van Kaiman Ave (NS)I
University Or (Effl
Campus
Cr (EW)
fl
Co�
"-142
L
58
\
coC4CND
—99
r220
mr°1'
JlS.
—197
r31
361-0
" 1 P
114"
90—
°QM�
204�
CN
32-
or
39-x
m
Figure 18
TPO Year 2029 With Project
AM Peak Hour intersection Turning Movement Volumes
2B
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-79
IRVINEAVE
Campus Dr (NS)!
Bristol St N (EVV)
rrn "107
arm —1728
J �r281
� t
N rz
�t
U-j
Birch St (%)1 -_ I
Bristol St N (EVV)
oLO 't121
.nr`nr —1570
r372
TcN
n wrr
Campus Or (NS)1
Bristol St 5 (EM
r-
445 'c t P
-T
v 12
485-" ti N
Birch St (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Bristol St 5 (Eq
Campus
Dr (EVV)
u,ro
'tN
M0
mr-SSO
t140
�625
,r35
2131
t r
262 -r
t l'
927
LID ED
221�
(0N
1i1-,k
NN
46
oo
Legend
0 Study Intersection
g3ldii
Site
G
a
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)/
Birch 5t (EVV)
Van Kerman
Ave (EVV)
N TH
'-176
1-81
*- m ro
—275
���
Cn UT) 3
� 39
,1 V
s -62
A! 1.
,r421
265''
`t t P
62�'
195�
�rnN
85—
Mr n�
25-14
Lo
113-,%
vN
MacArthurBlvd(NS)!
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EVV)
�-CDLO
'�116
Ito
67
i apr
—948
°2"28o
�-loa
r
rr400
.1 I S. Aft
,r141
208--4
'1 t �'
170-�
`5
933—
C; ry �
105-�
to w
57�,
NVm
1317
N
Jamboree Rd (NS)I
UNIVERSITY DRr�N
Campus Or (EVV)
"251
wf
—274
123
t
159-it
`5 t P
255--►
IrLOt0
94�
r
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Bristol St N (Eq
Bnslol St S (EVV)
Cr) LO
rfl
M rn
(D rI+
QID
� +
i
t rr
603--'
t r
co(0N
693-+
r`
coTrn
111
C
Jamboree Rd (NS)/
Von Kerman Ave (NS)I
UniversEly Dr (Eq
Campus Cr (EVV)
rnu°'ito
"-122
rnrs
11-81
rorGD
—106
Nvcn
+--335
1.
-235
271a
1tr
128-,
`1tr
102
to m cv
�
—
238
(0
o rn
v
�-�
00 CQ
-*
r
Figure 19
TPQ Year 2029 With Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
29 19615
22-80
6. TPO ANALYSIS
Detailed intersection Level of Service calculation worksheets for each of the following analysis scenarios are
provided in Appendix C.
TPO YEAR 2029 ONE -PERCENT THRESHOLD ANALYSIS
Table 3 summarizes the City of Newport Beach TPO one -percent threshold analysis. In accordance with the
City of Newport Beach TPO requirements, if project -generated peak hour approach volumes are greater than
or equal to one percent of the forecast peak hour volumes on any approach of an intersection, then a detailed
ICU analysis is required to assess the project -related change in ICU. The TPO one -percent analysis calculation
worksheets are contained in Appendix E.
The following eight study intersections are forecast to exceed the TPO one -percent threshold and require
ICU analysis:
1. Campus Drive (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
3. Birch Street (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
4. Birch Street (NS) at Bristol Street South (EW)
5. MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
6. MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Birch Street (EW)
Y. MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Newport Place Drive/Von Karman Avenue (EW)
8. MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Jamboree Road (EW)
10. Jamboree Road (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
TPO IMPACT ASSESSMENT
ICU and Levels of Service at the applicable study intersections for TPO Year 2029 Without and With Project
conditions are shown in Table 4. As shown in Table 4, the study intersections are forecast to operate at Levels
of Service D or better during the peak hours for TPO Year 2029 Without and With Project conditions.
Table 4 also calculates the net change in ICU at the applicable study intersections for TPO Year 2029 With
Project conditions. As shown in Table 4, the addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any
study intersection to operate deficiently (Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation
by more than one percent of capacity; therefore, the proposed project is forecast to resuit in no Level of
Service impacts at the study intersections for TPO Year 2029 With Project conditions and no improvements
are required.
' 1600 Dove Street Residences
g7ddloi
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
30 19615
22-81
Table 3
TPO One -Percent Threshold Analysis Summary
Peak
Project Trips Exceed One Percent?'
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbuurd
ID Study Intersection
Hour
1. Campus Dr (NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
AM
No
No
No
Yes
PM
No
No
No
No
2, Irvine Ave/Campus Dr (INS) at Bristol 5tSouth (EW)
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
3. Birch 5t (NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
AM
No
Yes
No
No
PM
Yes
No
No
No
4, Birch 5t (N5) at Bristol 5t South (EW)
AM
No
Yes
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
5. MacArthur Blvd (N5) at Campus Dr (EW)
AM
Yes
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
6. MacArthur Blvd (N5) at Bitch St (EW)
AM
No
No
Yes
Nc.
PM
No
Yes
No
No
7, MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Newport PI Dr/Von Korman Ave (EW)
AM
No
No
Yes
No
PM
Yes
No
No
No
8. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Jamboree Rd (EW)
AM
No
Yes
No
No
PM
No
No
No
Yes
9. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Bison Ave (EW)
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
Nn
10. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)
AM
Yes
No
No
:1Ju
PM
No
Yes
No
No
11. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
Nun
12. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol St South {EW}
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
13. Jamboree Rd {NS} at Eastbluff Dr/University Dr (EW)
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
14. Von Korman Ave (N5) at Campus Dr (EW}
AM
No
No
No
No
PM
No
No
No
No
Notes:
(1) If the project is forecast to contribute 1% or more of the projected TPO analysis year peak hour volume, then detailed
Intersection Capacity Utilization analysis is required in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance.
31
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-82
Table 4
TPO Year 2029 Intersection Levels of Service and Impact Assessment
I❑ Study Intersection
Traffic
Control,
TPO Williout Project
TPO With Project
VIC Increase
Significant
Impact?
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
WC'
LOS'
V/c
LO53
V/C'
LOS-,
VJCa
LOSS
AM I
PM
1, Campus Dr (N5) at Bristol St North (EW)
TS
0.37
A
0.62
B
0.38
A
0.62
B
+0.01
0.00
No
3. Birch 5t INS) at Bristol St North (EW)
T5
0.49
A
0.52
A
0.48
A
0.52
A
-0.01
0,00
No
4, Birch 5t INS) at Bristol 5t South (EW)
TS
0.35
A
0,36
A
0.35
A
0.36
A
0.00
0.00
No
5, MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)"
TS
0.34
A
0.55
A
0A4
A
0.55
A
0.00
0,00
No
6.MacArthur Blvd (NS)atBirch St(EW)
TS
0.32
A
0.42
A
0.32
A
0.42
A
0.00
0.00
No
7, MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Newport PI DOVon Karman Aye (EW)
TS
0.34
A
0.38
A
0.34
A
0.37
A
0.00
-0.01
No
B. MacArthur PIVd (NS) at Jamboree Rd (EW)"
TS
0.42
A
0.51
0.43
A
0.51
A
'101
0.00
No
10. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Campus Dr (E%W
TS
0.51
A
0.52
A
0.51
1 A
0.52
A
OAD
O.00
No
Notes-
(1) TS - Traffic Sighal
(2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
{3) LOS = Level of Service
(4) Level of Service E i5 acceptabte; shared jurisdktion with City of Irvine.
g:nJJK
32
1600 Dave Street Residence
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-83
7. CEQA ANALYSIS
This section presents analysis of Year 2029 cumulative conditions. Detailed intersection Level of Service
calculation worksheets for each of the following analysis scenarios are provided in Appendix C.
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
In addition to the approved projects in the City of Newport Beach (addressed in the TPO analysis), CEQA
requires analysis of cumulative conditions. This CEQA analysis also includes traffic from pending projects in
the Cities of Newport Beach and Irvine, in addition to the approved projects. Pending projects consist of
projects that are in various stages of the application and approval process but are not yet approved. These
projects are considered to be reasonably foreseeable projects in the vicinity of the project and must be
included in the Cumulative conditions analysis for CEQA purposes. The Cities of Newport Beach and Irvine
were consulted and provided the list of cumulative projects to be included in this analysis.
Table 5 includes the trip generation for cumulative projects as provided by the City of Newport Beach,
University of California, Irvine, and City of Irvine. Figure 20 shows the cumulative projects location map.
Cumulative Projects AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure 21
and Figure 22.
CEQA YEAR 2029 WITHOUT PROJECT VOLUME FORECASTS
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project volume forecasts were developed by adding cumulative projects trips to
TPO Year 2029 Without Project volumes. CEQA Year 2029 Without Project AM and PM peak hour
intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure 23 and Figure 24,
CEQA YEAR 2029 WITH PROJECT VOLUME FORECASTS
CEQA Year 2029 With Project volume forecasts were developed by adding project trips to CEQA Year 2029
Without Project volumes. CEQA Year 2029 With Project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning
movement volumes are shown on Figure 25 and Figure 26_
CEQA YEAR 2029 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
ICU and Levels of Service at the applicable study intersections for CEQA Year 2029 Without and With Project
conditions are shown in Table 6. As shown in Table 6, the study intersections are forecast to operate at Levels
of Service 0 or better during the peak hours for CEQA Year 2029 Without and With Project conditions.
Table 6 also calculates the net change in ICU at the applicable study intersections for CEQA Year 2029 With
Project conditions. As shown in Table 6, the addition of projectgeneratedtrips is not forecast to cause any
study intersection to operate deficiently (Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation
by more than one percent of capacity; therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no significant
Level of Service impacts at the study intersections for CEQA Year 2029 With Project conditions and no new
mitigation measures are required.
1600 dove Street Residences
,1 Reviser) Traffic Impart Analysis
33 19615
22-84
Table 5 (1 of 2)
Cumulative Projects Trip Generation
Net Trips Generated
AM Peak Hour
PM
Peak Hour
Project
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ID
Project Name
Lard Usc
Quantity'
Dail
City of Newport Beach
Existing Use
NB1
1400 Bristol Street North
Residences
General Office
38.764 TSF
-31
57
26
46
-13
33
620
Proposed Use
Multifamily Housing (W-Rise)
229 DU
NB2
Sage Hill School Expansion
Private School (K-8)
150 ST
86
66
152
18
21
39
617
Existing Use
Boat Sales
4.487 TSF
Proposed Uses
NB3
Mother's Market
11
17
28
29
24
53
690
Multifamily Housing
36 DU
Supermarket
5.096 TSF
NB4
Newport Beach Porsche
Auto Dealership
143.494 TSF
195
72
267
1391
208
347
3,995
NB5
The Garden Restaurant
Quality Restaurant
10.240 TSF
6
2
8
55
29
84
971
Commercial Retail
0.747 TSF
Existing Uses
John Sipt0ohnson Yacht Sales
0,500 TSF
Sun Country Marine
1.000 TSF
Powerhouse Vehicle Sales
17.000 TSF
WCH-Duffield Marine
2.000 TSF
General Office Building
7.185 TSF
WCH-A'Maree's
8.100 T5F
Marina
68 Berths
Proposed Uses
NB6
Newport Village
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
108 DU
108
55
163
77
105
182
2,23E
General Office
55.280 TSF
Car Show Room
7.900 TSF
Single -Family Detached Residential
14 DU
General Office
36.620 TSF
Duffield Marine Sales/Office
2.000 TSF
Boat Show Room
10 EMP
High Turnover Sit Down Restaurant
3.815 TSF
Quality Restaurant
9.100 TSF
Marina
63 Berths
NB7
Newport Coast
Multifamily Housing
564 DU
413
932
1,345
926
557
1,483
14,778
d
Single -Family Detached Residential
954 DU
g3-dJh
34
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-85
Table 5 (2 of 2)
Cumulative Projects Trip Generation
Net Trips Generated
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Project
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ID
Project Name
Land Use
Quantity'
Daii
University of California, Irvine
UCI North Campus
Hospital
144 Beds
Hospital Project
526
163
689
202
520
722
8,550
UCI
Ambulatory Care
225.000 TSF
UCI North Campus Child
Health/Medical Office
Medical Office Building
168.000 TSF
331
79
410
162
414
576
5,531
City of Irvine
iRl
Volar Apartments
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
930 DU
79
265
344
221
1-1
362
4,222
IR2
Futures Academy
Private School
5.621 TSF
8
1
9
1
7
81
61
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
593 DU
50
169
219
141
90
231
2,692
General Office Building
2.730 TSF
4
0
4
1
3
4
30
IR3
Eiement5 Phase 3
Strip Retail Plaza (<40k)
5.000 TSF
7
5
12
16
16
32
272
Coffee Donut Shop vvlo
Drive-Thru Window
2.730 TSF
130
125
255
44
44
68
1,393
Health Fitness Club
6.900 TSF
5
4
9
14
10
24
205
Hotel
386 RM
138
78
216
116
112
228
3,084
IR4
Landmark
General Office
448.000 TSF
599
82
681
110
535
645
4.856
IR5
Milani Apartments
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
287 DU
24
82
106
68
44
112
1,303
IR6
Elements
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
700 DU
60
199
259
167
106
273
3,178
IR7
Von Karman Quartz Office
General Office
16.538 TSF
221
31
251
4
201
241
179
Total
2,7711
2.4561
5,2271
2,557
2,9931
5,550
59.465
Sources:
Data provided by City of Newport Beach, City of Irvine, and UCI traffic studies.
ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generotion Monual (l lth Edition, 2021); ### — Land Use Code
Notes:
(1) TSF = Thousand Square Feet; DU = Dwelling Units; ST — Students; EMP = Employees; RM = Rooms
35
1600 Dave Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-86
Table 6
CEQA Year 2029 Intersection Levels of Service and Impact Assessment
ID Study ntersection
Traffic
Control"
CEQA Without Project
CEQA With Project
Vic Increase
significant
Impact?
AM Peal. Hour
PM Peak Huur
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Haw
V/C2
LOS'
V!C`
L053
V/C2
L053
V/C,
LOSS
AM
PM
1. Campus OF (NS) at Bristol St North (EW}
TS
0.45E
A
0.676
B
0.460
A
0.675
B
+0.002
-0.001
No
2- Irvine Ave/Campus Dr (NS) at Bristol St South (EW)
TS
0.545
A
0.476
A
0.544
A
0.498
A
-0.001
+0.002
No
3. Birch St (NS) at Bristol 5t North (EW)
TS
0.514
A
0.536
A
0.506
A
0.535
A
-0.008
-0.001
No
4. Birch St (NS) at Bristol St South (EM
TS
0-361
A
0.364
A
0.262
A
0.36E
A
+0.001
+0.0o1
No
5_ MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Campus Dr (E1N)"
T5
0.445
A
0.676
B
0.447
A
0,676
B
+0,002
D.000
No
6. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Birch St (EW)
T5
0.357
A
0.472
A
0.357
A
0.474
A
0,000
+0.002
No
7. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Newport PI Dr/Von Karman Ave (EW)
T5
0.401
A
0.436
A
0.408
A
0,429
A
+0.007
-0.007
No
8, MacArthur Blvd INS) at Jamboree Rd (EW}4
TS
0.561
A
0,636
B
0.565
A
01635
B
+0.004
-0A01
N0
9. MacArthur Blvd INS) at Bison Ave (EW)
TS
0.453
A
0.483
A
0.454
A.
0.484
A
+0.001
+0.001
No
to, Jamboree Rd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)"
TS
0.582
A
0.629
B
0.581
0.628
B
-0.001
0.000
N0
11. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol St North (EW)
TS
0.394
A
0A39
A
0.393
A
0.429
A
-0.001
0.000
No
12. Jamboree Rd INS) at Bristol St South (EW)
TS
0,656
B
0.669
B
0.656
B
0.598
A
0.000
-0.071
No
13. Jamboree Rd INS) at Eastbluff Dr/University Dr (EW)
TS
0.643
B
0,686
B
0.644
B
0.687
B
+0.001
+0.001
No
14. Von Karman Ave (N5) at Campus Dr (EW)"
TS
0,375
A
0.526
A
0.374
A
0.527
A
-0.001
+0,001
No
Notes:
(1) TS - Traffic 51gnal
(2) V/C - Volume/Capacity
(3) LOS = Lev6 of 5ervice
(4) Level of Service E is acceptable; shared jurisdiction with City of Irvine.
gndjh
36
1600 Dave Street Residences
Traffic impact Analysis
19615
22-87
egeod
Other Development (see Table 5):
• City of Irvine
• City of Newport Beach
Figure 20
Cumulative Projects Location Map
1600 Dove Street Residences
g:l,)djii
Traffic Impact Analysis
37 19615
22-88
of
m
IRVINE AVE
Campus Or(NS)f -
�( Campus Or{N5y!
Bfistal St N (Eq
I Bristol Sl S (EN!)
co
�fl
noiow
*-31
coo
Jl
AN
,rz
k
}L
1
zz�'
z
1 r
o� m
vn
cv
0�
MacArthur Blvd (NS(f
MacArthur Blvd (N5)!
Birch St (ENV)
Von Kerman Ave (EW)
ar
'-5
M
a0
o: f
+-15
ova
—0
rr0
J}L
rr49
0
`1 I r
55
cn
0�
oeno
co co
0ti
n
0�,
N
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EVV)
�o
'_0
cbo o
—145
ono4o
—54
J L
r167
J } L
r6♦
145�
11 t 1•
0
276
19C,0
17�
4-4
04—
0�
c�
UNIVERSITY
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Campus Or (EVJ)
"� '-24
00 r oo +--0
r
32 -0 `� t
�� rnmo
193� r
Birch St (N5)! Jamboree Rd (NS)I Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bnstoi St N (EMl} Bristol St N {EVIL Brislol S1 S {EVdy
o *-12 CDrn
f--24 QQ r? N coV
J} 0r31
42 a 1 r
o CO rnu74 6--+ vo
7 [n
(V� �.N 5 7 0'7
Birch 5[ (NS)l MacArthur Blvd (NS)l Jamboree Rd (NS)l Von Kerman Ava {NSy1
Bristol St S (EVO Campers Or {E147 University or (EA Campus Or (EW)
1CO fl o <Q t()
rnm n`ni0 —258 enN �0 oNo +-156
Id 11111, r43 `SONAVE \ J } L r30 J } L ,r0
35 I /' 115 (1 17 -0 '� t r 0}
22� ro 254M 0— oven 131—► �coC)
0-,%i m 51-,%
Legend
0 Study Intersection
Figure 21
Cumulative Projects
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
93-dii 1b00 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
38 19615
22-89
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l MacArthur Blvd (NS)I
N �° Birch St (EM Von Karmen Ave (EW(
a '�� 0 � 19 0 ►�0
p� ONr- —57 Ocri0 �0
�� .11L J1L
IRVIsz>< AVE r0 ,r87 eR.
s �P
T°< 0
ti 0-0
220o0OCfiD N
0�00 ISr� MacArthur Blvd (NS)7 MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamhoree Rd (EW) Bison Ave (EW)
o ca I 'k-0 a)'t-0
r N o +-294 o o`V-, o --33
.11L r189
66t r
181 53— oocn
_7� rr 0� (V
Campus Dr (NS)f Campus Dr (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Bristol St N (EW) Bristol St S (EW) Campus Ur (EW)
N r0i +LN L
O 11dNt ERSITY DR co 94
cvr w-73 ��:'con —0
Jl r-5 1L I pro
179-4
o 38— 0— CO
0
Birch St (NS)) Jamboree Rd (NS)f Jamboree Rd (NS)f
Brislal St N (EW( Bristol Sit N (EW) Bristol St S (EW)
0 M M
— 31
--6
J
T'it `mv '1t1' 21 t 7'
ON (� fO Ir 3— MO
�� N _4-14 N
Birch St (NS)l MacArthur BWd (NS)l T Jamboree Rd (NS)! Von Karman Ave (NS)!
Bristol Sr S (Elyd) Campus Dr (EW) University Dr (EW) Campus Dr (EN)
co ti0 m 0 '-0 %-0
pN0 r-252 O'nC, —d Ono —104
1 L A)1 L ,r51 eISpNAVE \ 1 1 L r63 d 1 L ,r0
15 � t P 35 �' `� t P 7 --' 1 t r 0--if '1 t t'
26 220� 0— ONE 121— "OO
0,Ln
4�, r 0� �+ 84�
Legend
Q Study Intersection
Figure 22
Cumulative Projects
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
g3-i1600 have Street Residences
i Traffic Impact Analysis
39 19615
22-90
Legend
0 Study Intersection
Figure 23
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
g3p-dii 1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
40 19615
22-91
Site
MacAdhurBlvd (NS)! MacMhurBlvd(NS)!
N � Birch St (EM Von Karmar Ave (EW)
T- 'b- 195 N t 81
�p mcom
cc —332 m000m —36
IRViNE41(e j r62 1 �. r508
'A��,rO< )P 264 -0 `t t r 64
`sT 217— timn°'i 87-• rn��
Ri 25� r• 1277N
M�S'Q Q STO( MacArthur SW (NS)l MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (ER Bison Ave (EW)
u' '�101 yr '�67
(n1242 °rr°m —141
1 1, r589 1 It, r146
272 '1 t r' 170 �7hID1114� mvr 15501�CN
Campus Or (NS)! Campus Or (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Bristol St N (EW) Bristol St S (Emj Campus Or (EW)
riCD '`107 0co UNIVER$IiYUR 160 '-345
t" -1797 0'0`T N f6 .--274
1 410,11111111, ,r-276 1r123
TN", t 624� t �' 168-0
N N $68--• N rn 255— N
M 00 4851 00 N 199 (v 00 co
00 co
Birch St (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Bristol St N (EVP) Bristol St N (EW) Bristol $L S (EW)
VN '`115 0� rn
�N —1601 1 ,r366 Q4'
� 1 l 1
1t 624--' tr'
rm 5 nr-r 694-► on
11081 N
Birch Si (NS)1 MacArthur Blvd (NS)! Jamboree Rd (NS)! Von Karmen Ave (NS)!
Bristol St S (EW) Campus or (EW) University Dr (EW} Campus Or (EW)
cn(o CDrn �140 ® '�122 rn 11-81
v Q3 v rn co — 877 tort —106 N v (a —439
j 1 �6 r86 B/SONAVE 1 j V r298 .� j 1. ,r16
217297278" 11 t P' 128-'
953� �� 441100- (D 373— CNN
111� NN 4B1 67 12--A Nr> 1221 V
Legend
0 Study Intersection
93-dii
Figure 24
CEQA Year 2029 Without Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
41 19615
22-92
IRVINE AVZ
Campus Dr (NS)l
Campus Dr (NS)/
Bristol St N (EM
Bristol SI S (EVt1
CD
'� 167
N v
vr7
—994
ro
u7w
l
r269
l L
'i T
909 �"
P
C°C
1342�
mo
I 2
453�,
coN
Birch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (Eq
~n_v "-180
—1268 O�
Air412
w u� y
r 4Q
Birch St (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)i
Bristol SI S (E"
Campus
Dr (EW)
M cta
M—
rn v N
'-65
—428
�.
V)ocav
W
r 64
520
t i'
369
922
00 v
660-;
194-"
NN
37
Le end
Study Intersection
site
� MacArthur Blvd (NS)I MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)I
Jamboree Rd lFM
Bison Ave (EVV)
'-168
No
'-40
N Ic6
—1060
rNa
f-147
,1 l L
r564
d L
80�'
r187
425-0
t r
950�
MNrr]
W 0co
101�
CNN
rNoO
156�
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Campus Pr (EM
I}NIVERSITYAR tir t111
�`pcn —194
J1L r185
r 4
133— Novi
226 -,, N
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Bristol $I N (EN')
Bristol SI S (EVV)
04
N� 2I
O
� t
939T
mw�
402— rnN
��2-
1247-x N
Jamboree
Rd (NS)/
Von Karman
Ave (NS)l
�\
Unlvemily Dr (EVV)
I
Campus
Dr (EVV)
®
CO v
�
.�lL
'� 142
'99
,r250
M
`ram°c,rv)
J�L
t 58
—353
r31
AVE
378 --r
P
114 -4
+
90—
32-x
COQ7N
u'vN
335—
90-X
`nd"'
co nN, N
Figure 25
CEQA Year 2029 With Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
42 19615
4
Birch St (EVV)
Von Karman Ave (EVV)
Nroo +-1840
Fmrn —56
J�L riff
J�L r211
Qeo
21�
}
107�`
246� N�ran
41�
°'Mrrnn
39� ca
51�
r—v
22-93
q
C'1
D
Site G
r7Jt 7a
IRVINE A V,-
MacAdhur BW (NS)f
MacAdhur Blvd (NS)!
Birch St (EY4
Von Karmen
Ave (EVV)
rrorn
—332
CD COODr C`-Ji
—39
1.
,r62
,1 1 1,4
r-508
265
62�
`5tr
217—►
nr�iN
85—
c7°'ao
25�
113-
�N
MacArthur
Blvd (NS)!
MamMhur
Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree
Rd (ER
Bison Ave (EVt)
rM�
11-116
vcr)
'-67
rn
11242
00 of SO
—141
Al 1.
r589
J
jo--146
274--r
t
I I
1701114—T'�cmIr
15850�,C+LnUJ
131�
rN
Campus Dr (NS)1 Campus Dr (NS)1 Jamboree Rd (NS)1
BriMof St N (Eq Bdsial St S (EW) Campus Fir (EW)
CO'� 107 WO CO UNNERSI DR ,r, °; a *—345
—1791 -M `T cV f `O —274
.t l Ar276 j S. ,1 1. ,r 123
t
F..I
624�'t r 168-' t879� N� 255—u 485-,, WN 199-* N��
r
Birch St (NS)!
Bristol St N (Eq
vti
'-121
u) N 1601
,1 ! ,r 366
J�
Birth St (NS)f
MacAdhur Blvd (NS)I
Bristol St S (Eq
Campus
Dr (EVJ)
140
yr
va)ccoo
—877
I.
.l
,r86
228,r
t P
297-$
1 t rw
953—►
441—
�LO0
111
48�
�rn
Le end
Study Intersection
AVE
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Bristol St N (FVO
co
C,co
� l
Jamhoraa Rd (NRd (NS)f K
Bosinl St S (EVV)
M
Im_
#
624-
t r•
696�
MP-
(0LO vrn
1106�,
LO
Jamboree
Rd (NS)1
Von Karmen
Ave (NS)!
University
Ur (EVV)
Campus
Dr (EW)
vC3CO
t122
rncO
'-81
mrr
�106
nr`ivm
—439
1
,r-298
`1 t 1r
d � �,
,r- 16
278--'
128-1
-, t - ,
102—
Cora'-,
a'aEN cO 0
N
122�
\`
Figure 26
CEQA Year 2029 With Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dave Street Resiciences
Traffic Impact Analysis
43 19615
22-94
8. GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON ANALYSIS
This section presents analysis of Post 2030 General Plan Buildout conditions in support of the project's
proposed addendum to the 2006 General Plan EIR. Detailed intersection Level of Service calculation
worksheets for each of the following analysis scenarios are provided in Appendix C.
GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON METHODOLOGY
This analysis compares the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) as analyzed in the Post 2030 General Man Buildout
traffic analysis with the proposed project. The Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM) TAZ 1383 was analyzed
with 202,585 square feet of general office in the 2006 General Plan EIR. Since the project is constructing 282
multifamiSy housing dwelling units, the project is proposing 282 additional dwelling units compared to the
2006 General Plan EIR analysis. Therefore, Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project conditions were
determined by adding the net increase in dwelling units proposed within TAZ 1383 to the Post 2030 General
Plan Buildout forecasts originally evaluated in the 2006 General Plan EIR. The general office square footage
stayed unchanged in this analysis,
GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON TRIP GENERATION AND TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Table 7 shows the project trip generation based upon trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Based on review of the ITE land
use description, trip generation rates for multifamily housing (mid -rise) not close to transit (Land Use Code
221) were determined to adequately represent the proposed land use and was selected far use in this analysis.
The project trip generation forecast is determined by multiplying the trip generation rates by the land use
quantity.
As shown in Table 7, the proposed increase in General Plan buildout units is estimated to generate
approximately 1,280 additional daily trips, including 104 additional trips during the AM peak hour and 110
additional trips during the PM peak hour.
Project residential trip distribution patterns (see Figure 12 and Figure 13) were used for this analysis
POST 2030 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITHOUT PROJECT VOLUME FORECASTS
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project volume forecasts were provided by the City of Newport
Beach based on the 2006 General Plan EIR. Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project AM and PM
peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure 27 and Figure 28.
POST 2030 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT VOLUME FORECASTS
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project volume forecasts were developed by adding the General Plan
Comparison project trips to Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic volumes_ Post 2030
General Plan Buildout With Project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown
on Figure 29 and Figure 30.
GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON IMPACT ASSESSMENT
ICU and Levels of Service at the applicab4e study intersections for General Plan Comparison: Post 2030
General Plan Buildout Without and With Project conditions are shown in Table 8. As shown in Table 8, the
study intersections are forecast to operate at Levels of Service D or better during the peak hours for Post
2030 General Plan Buildout Without and With Project conditions, except for the following intersections:
gndjh
1b00 Qove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
44 19615
22-95
1.
Campus Drive (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
(Both AM/PM Peak Hours)
3.
Birch Street (NS) at Bristol Street North (EW)
(AM Peak Hour)
5,
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
(PM Peak Hour)
6.
MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at Birch Street (EW)
(PM Peak Hour)
10.
Jamboree Road (NS) at Campus Drive (EW)
(PM Peak Hour)
12.
Jamboree Road (NS) at Bristol Street South (EW)
(AM Peak Hour)
Table 8 also calculates the net change in ICU at the study intersections for Post 2030 General Plan Buildout
With Project conditions. As shown in Table 8, the addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause
any study intersection to operate deficiently (Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection
operation by more than one percent of capacity; therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no
significant Level of Service impacts at the study intersections for Post General Plan Buildout With Project
conditions and no new mitigation measures are required.
grdJ101
45
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Anaiysis
19615
22-96
Table 7
General Plan Comparison Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
Source L
Unit
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
% In
% Out
Rate
% in
% Out
Rate
Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)
ITE 221
1 DU
2396
77%
0.37
61%
1 39%
1 0.39
4,54
Trips Generated
Land Use
Quantity
Unit'
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)3
282
DU
25
79
104
68
1 42
1 110
1,280
Notes:
(1) ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manua! (11th Edition, 2021); ### = Land Use Cade
(2) DU = Dwelling Units
(3) The General Plan comparison analysis evaluates an additional 282 DU to N3TM TA7 1383. Project (282 DU) - TAZ 1383 (0 DU) = 282 DU.
g3-1dJH
46
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Anatysis
19615
22-97
Table 8
General Plan Comparison: Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Intersection Levels of Service and Impact Assessment
ID Siud Intersection
Traffic
Control'
Generat Plan Buildout Without Project
General Plan Buildout With Project
VIC Increase
5ignidcan[
Impact'
AM Peak Hn4r
PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
V/C�
LDS
V/Cz
LOS'
V/C
LOS''
V/Cv
LOS'
AM
PM
1_ Campus Dr (NSI at Bristol St North (EW)
T5
1.024
F
0.948
E
1.026
F
0.950
E
+0.002
+0.002
No
2. Irvine Ave/Campus Or (NS) at Bristol St South (EW)
TS
0.893
D
0.774
C
0.893
R
0.776
C
0.000
+0.002
No
J. Birch 5t (NS) at Bristol St North (EM
TS
0.916
E
0.811
D
0.916
E
0.815
D
+0.002
+0.004
No
4. Birch 5t (NS) at Bristol5t South {EW)
TS
0.547
A
0.625
B
01550
A
0,626
B
+0.003
+0.DD1
P40
5. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)'
T5
0.809
D
1.241
F
D.B09
❑
1.241
F
0,000
0.000
No
6. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Birch St (FW)
T5
0.796
C
1.016
F
0.797
C
1.018
F
+0.001
+0.002
No
7, MacArthur Blvd (N51 at Newport PI DrlVon Korman Ave (EW)
TS
0.562
A
G
0_566
A
0.708
C
+0.004
+0.026
Na
8. MacArthur Blvd (NS) at Jamboree Rd (EWER
TS
0.677
D
D
0.884
D
01859
D
r0.007
+0.001
Nu
9. MacArthur Bivd (NS) at Bison Ave (EW)
TS
0.775
C
r6112
C
0.775
C
0.793
C
0.000
+0.001
No
10. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Campus Dr (FW)°
T5
0.930
E
F
0.933
E
1.184
F
+0.003
+0.004
No
11. Jamboree Rd INS) at Bristol St North (EW)
T5
0.681
B
B
0.681
E
0.607
B
0.000
+0,001
No
12. Jamboree Rd (NS) at Bristol 5t South (EW)
TS
0.942
E
0.867
❑
0.942
E
0.868
D
0.000
+0.001
No
13. Jamboree Rd (NIS) at Eastbluff Dr/University Dr (EW)
TS
0.681
B
0.667
B
0-682
6
0.668
B
+0.001
+0.001
No
14, Von Karman Ave (NS) at Campus Dr (EW)"
TS
0.721
C
0.972
E
0.733
C
0,973
E
+0_002
+0.001
No
Notes:
(1) TS -Traffic 5ignal
(2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
(3) LOS = Level of Service
(4) Level of Service E is acceptable; shared jurisdiction with City of Irvine.
g7lddh
47
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Im pact Analysis
19615
22-98
IRVINE AVZ
�sQ
Campus Dr (Ns)1
Campus Or (NS)!
Brstol 51 N (EM
Brislul St S (EM
0 0 '-250
0 0
e rn —2010
n r
d l ,r310
1.
1370�r
t r
N
1590
m o
M
670 �
N �+
Sfrah S1 (NS)!
Bristol 51 N (EM
Q a "-820
v N •-1730
,J ,r480
0o
y
Birch S1 (NS)!
MacArthur Blvd {NSp
Bristol Si S {EW)
Campus Br (EW)
Co
o0CD '-60
LO vcm*i
r�nrnN —630
l'.
.J 1 1. ,r 40
850�r
r r
770-A
`I r P
1200
990—
C) 0 N
210�
mm
200-,
r m�
Legend
QStudy Intersection
Site
AVE
MacArthur Blvd (NS)I
birch St {EM
m 0 0 *-20
NrAc2 —310
J j S. ,r50
710
670� �Mr
60�, r
MacArthur Blvd {NS)1
Von Karman Ave (EVV)
00 '-44
67cr'osmo —180
� 1. ,r 170
a0-'�� r r
174—► �CDoc
60�;im
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
MaeAdhdr Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
000 "-170
0 �? 11-10
ru~i� —1120
r°Tinr`ir0o +-250
.J 1. r420
J j rr160
670'r '1 r P
330
1760-+ 000,0
270�
160-4 cNmco
210�
MMN
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
UNIVERSITY
DR
Campus Or (EW)
t170
0nC:3
r- — 840
k. ,r800
r
260-' '� r -
280-► C o30
30 - r o co
N
Jamboree Rd (NS)! "
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Bdetol St N (EVO
Brstol St S {EVd)
c7
C
r• I+
tiI
jl
`1 r
2154
00
570— 043 043
M
10201r N
Jamboree Rd {NS}!
Von Karman Ave (NS)!
Univershy Ur (EW)
Campus Or (EN)
m
0cb0 "-170
0 10o
—110
S. ,r340
rn°rnv —480
,1 I. ,r60
510"
370-4 -i
1z0� EDNIt
750— NON
1�N
0�
547
Figure 27
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
46 19615
22-99
IRVINE A VEc
;91?
Campus Dr (NS)l
Bristol 51 N (EW)
NW) *-140
—2880
l ,r5+40
� I
00
T
Birch 5t (NS)!
Bristol Sl N (EW)
coM "-16a
�w —1730
1 r530
T
a0
e0 tJ
r�
Campus Dr (NS)l
Bristol St 5 (EVV
0
SD0 F
N M
550,r t
1420�
630� r
Birch St (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Bristol St S (Eq
Campus
Dr (EW)
00
rnv
00
'-190
—1470
rn��
,r 160
380-Y
T r' '
530-
1490
co 00
700 ►
000
130�,�
16D�
Mr
Legend
QStudy Intersection
Site
bl
a
m
C
MaWhur BW (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Birch St (EN
Von Kerman
Ave (EW)
occ0
" 36 0
0a0o0
'-110
Mir
�1020
210
1 L
Jr- 150
r 860
460�r
`� T r
140�
`i T rr
480�
mcC
270�
70�
t-12
1001�
rn�
MacArthur
Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
0
'1t80
`r920
Orn
'-500
r220
240�r
330�
I �'
rn�
E1480
70i
rr00 co
1007
Nrr
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Campus Dr(EM
UNIVERSITY DR o0o530
nQDc0
04O T —650
J j �L r360
6101 t `1 T r'
850 � Ln �
30-�4 r0r-
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
. ambcree Rd (NS)1
Bristol St N (E5V)
Bristol St S (Ew
0 0
Gov
0
V
� �
l
1180�r t P
`1 T
00
a N
150a� O0
C0
ON
1010-4 N�
Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Von Korman Ave (NS)t
`\
University Or (EW)
Campus Dr (EW)
m
or0vo '-210
ra'i T —110
1. ,r340
ova '-140
c~ir r � +-1040
r40
A4VEAVE
200}
'1 t P
240-14
110—
10-4
Lnvm
F,M
1020�
70--,
rotiM
to
Figure 28
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout Without Project
PM Peale Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dave Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
49 19615
22-100
IRVINE AVe
�sq
Campus Or (NS}l
Campus Dr (NS)l
Bristol 51 N (EW)
Bristol St S (EM
44
'--250
00
—2026
o f
.1
r 310
`1 f
1370
V N
1595
m Q
670�
Birch St (NS)!
Bristol St N (Eq
ED�
L823
vcv
—1730
1
r480
i
I
a_m
r
�AV
C
4Q
Birch St (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Bristol St S (EW)
Campus
Or (EM
LO 00
� N
'-60
—630
v C14i
lL
rn
.1 j1.
0-40
855-
t P
770-0
'1 t w
1200�
orn
990—
�hN
210-X
�m
200-r
r0f
Legend
QStudy Intersection
g7diii
Site
C
MacArlhur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
r
Birch 51 (Eq
Von Kerman Ave (EW)
rs�o '-20
0 '-40
04
co
04Q00-° _310
°-'mm •-181
�
d 1 1* r50
d j S. r170
P�
718,r
'1 t P
44�
670�
�vV
174—
EOon
60�
COY
96-%
r{in
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)!
Jamboree Rd {EW)
Bison Ave (EW)
v040
"-176
0
co rOOn r
—1120
a°ii C m
—250
r420
J 1.
r160
671-
"1 t '
330
`t t
1760
ova
270—
OMO
160�
Nmco
210-x
M(Dc4
cr)
Jamboree Rd (NS)!
Campus Or (F;M
UNIVERSITY DR L 170
r`ai r o +— 840
,C S. or -Soo
i
260-0 `1 t r
280—► CZ) CDCD
307 rocn
N
Jamboree Rd (NS)l Jamboree Rd (NS)1
Bristol S1 N (FW Bristol St S (E"
V M 0
r+I,-
�! 1
itP 2150-4 tr
0 574— Mo
rcoo 1024�, N0
Jamboree Rd (NS)1 Van Kerman Ave (NS)l
University Or (EVJ) Campus Or (EWj
m orno �170 ',-100
\ Nr �110 rnr°0nV 480
J 1. rr 340 ,1 1. 60
AVE
510 1tr 370-4 `,1tP
1�0� CDN cY 7�0~ N�Q
CD N i CM
Y
Figure 29
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
1600 Dove Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
50 19615
22-101
Campus or (NS)!
Campus or (NS)l
Bristol St N (EW)
Bnstol St S (EW)
oa
'-a140
Loa
r
—2888
N ri
d
r540
L
00
1434
0C
m T
6301r
r �
Birch St (NS)l
Bristol St N (EVV)
vm '�167
t- 02 —1730
,r 530
it�F
Birch St (NS)I
Bnslol St 5 (EW)
N
rnv
1L
3941 t /'
1490-• co CD
130� Mco
Legend
0 Study Intersection
g7dii
MacArlhur Blvd (NS)1
Campus Of(EW)
oC:'0 11-190
rnrr —1470
J�L o-160
530-'` t -
700Nam
160-X MT
AVE
MacArthur Blvd (NS)f
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
Birch 51 (Eq
Von Kerman Ave (EM
r-0000
'-360
mc000
�110
m��2
•-1020
213
L
�r 150
1 1 L
or 860
464:�
`5tr
142�'
480
�" 0
272�
70
119�
0�-
MacArthur Blvd (NS)l
MacArthur Blvd (NS)1
Jamboree Rd (EW)
Bison Ave (EVV)
Nat
R-197
0M
50
to
C° N
—1570
v oa
—`m� 4rt0
J L
,r920
r220
243
P
330
P
00N1480 m
�or
210
v0
cVcD70-x
100�,
Nn�
N
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
TY DR Campus Or (EW)
0 w C, '`530
LvNv —650
,/ i L r360
610-r
850— �cnN
30� rC.rn
Jamboree Rd (NS)f
Jamboree Rd (NS)f
Bristol St N (EWV)
Bristol St S (EW)
o_LID
CN
03
_
� 1
1
t
t C
mmo
1502—
m�
a) N
1012 -k
ni T
Jamboree Rd (NS)l
Von Kerman Ave (NS)l
University or (EW)
Campus Or (EW)
a N 0
t210
0v0
'`140
cIMM
o--
—110
nt`irL°
—1040
.1 ! L
or340
d L
pr40
200-0
240"
`t t P
110—
,US14$
1020--►
N�cas
10-,4
2 -
7"
to
Figure 30
Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
160E DOVe Street Residences
Traffic Impact Analysis
51 19615
22-102
9. CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
This section provides analysis of the project impacts at County facilities in accordance with typical Orange
County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements.
BACKGROUND
The Orange County CMP is a result of Proposition 111, which was a statewide initiative approved by the
voters in June 1990. To prevent gas tax revenues from being used to promote future development, the
legislation requires that a traffic impact analysis be prepared for new development. The traffic impact analysis
is prepared to monitor and mitigate traffic impacts caused by new development. In Orange County, the
Measure M Growth Management Program requires similar efforts; however, compliance with the CMP is
required far local jurisdictions to receive Measure M2 funds.
The Legislature requires that adjacent jurisdictions use a standard methodology for conducting a traffic impact
analysis. Although details vary from one county to another, the general approach selected by each county for
conducting traffic impact analyses has common elements. The Orange County CMP uses the Intersection
Capacity Utilization methodology for analysis of intersections within the designated CMP roadway system.
CMP-MONITORED INTERSECTIONS
The following intersections in the City of Newport Beach are part of the CMP Highway System that require
monitoring to ensure that Level of Service standards are maintained;
■ Newport Boulevard at Coast Highway
■ MacArthur Boulevard at Jamboree Road
■ MacArthur Boulevard at Coast Highway
REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS
To determine whether the addition of project -generated trips results in an operational impact at a CMP study
intersection, and thus requires improvements, the Orange County CMP utilizes the following requirements:
■ An operational project impact is defined to occur when a proposed project is forecast to increase traffic
demand at a CMP study facility by more than three percent of capacity (V/C > 0.03), causing or worsening
Level of Service F (V/C > 1.00).
CRITERIA FOR PREPARATION OF CMP IMPACT ANALYSIS
The Orange County CMP uses the following criteria to determine if a proposed development requires analysis;
■ Development projects forecast to generate 2,400 daily trips or more and have indirect access to a CMP
facility; or development projects forecast to generate 1,600 daily trips or more and have direct access to
a CMP facility; or
■ Projects with a potential to create an impact of more than three percent of Level of Service E capacity.
Since the proposed project has indirect access to a CMP facility (e.g., MacArthur Boulevard or Jamboree Road)
and is forecast to generate less than 2,400 daily trips, the proposed project does not satisfy the criteria for
preparation of a separate CMP impact analysis.
^' 1600 Dove Street Residences
gl)dii Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
52 19615
22-103
10. SITE ACCESS
This section includes a description of project improvements necessary to provide site access and an evaluation
of site access and circulation. The following section is based on the site plan used in this traffic impact analysis.
SITE ACCESS
Vehicular access is proposed to be maintained via existing driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way,
The project driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way will continue to provide full access. Based an
review of the adjacent development and lane configurations along Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way, the
existing lane configurations are anticipated to provide adequate circulation. The final parking and circulation
will be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach.
Based on the forecast project trip distribution patterns, the majority of the project trips, particularly resident
trips during the AM/PM peak hours, are expected to access the site via the project driveway at Dove Street.
Dove Street is a four -lane unclassified roadway at the project driveway that connects with other arterial and
regional roadway facilities. Northbound traffic along Dove Street at the project driveway will operate in free -
flow conditions. Right turns into the project site from Dove Street will have no conflicting vehicular
movements and are therefore expected to cause minimal to no delays along Dove Street. The southbound
left turn movement from Dove Street into the project driveway will need to yield to northbound traffic on
Dove Street and may experience small delays while waiting far an acceptable gap, similar to current conditions.
Left turn inbound access to the project site on Dove Street is currently permitted and consistent with adjacent
uses along Dove Street.
g:31dii 1660 Dave Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
53 19615
22-104
11. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
BACKGROUND
California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) directs the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for evaluating transportation impacts to provide
alternatives to Level of Service that "promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development
of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses." In December 2018, the California Natural
Resources Agency certified and adopted the updated CEQA Guidelines package. The amended CEQA
Guidelines, specifically Section 15064.3, recommend the use of Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) as the primary
metric for the evaluation of transportation impacts associated with land use and transportation projects. In
general terms, VMT quantifies the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project or region.
All agencies and projects State-wide are required to utilize the updated CEQA guidelines recommending use
of VMT for evaluating transportation impacts as of July 1, 2020.
The updated CEQA Guidelines allow for lead agency discretion in establishing methodo#ogies and thresholds
provided there is substantial evidence to demonstrate that the established procedures promote the intended
goals of the legislation. Where quantitative models or methods are unavailable, Section 15064.3 allows
agencies to assess VMT qualitatively using factors such as availability of transit and proximity to other
destinations. The Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation
Impacts in CEQA (State of California, December 2018) ["OPR Technical Advisory"] provides technical
considerations regarding methodologies and thresholds with a focus on office, residential, and retail
developments as these projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT.
VMT ASSESSMENT AND SCREENING
The project VMT screening is for informational purposes only
The project VMT impact has been assessed in accordance with guidance provided by the City of Newport
Beach SB743 Implementation (April 6, 2020) ["the City VMT Guidelines"] and City Council Policy K-3. The
transportation guidelines provide a framework for "screening thresholds" for certain projects that are expected
to cause a less than significant impact without conducting a detailed VMT study. The proposed project is
considered a residential land use.
The City VMT Guidelines contain a map of VMT per capita for all existing Newport Beach residential areas
(see Appendix F). VMT per capita in each area is compared to the regional average VMT per capita for Orange
County, This map shows areas where residential development have a VMT per capita lower than the Orange
County regional average and may therefore be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact based
on guidance provided in the OPR Technical Advisory.
The proposed project is in an area with low residential VMT per capita. Therefore, the proposed project is
presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT since it satisfies the City -established screening
criteria. No additional VMT modeling or mitigation measures are required.
g3-Iddi1600 Dove Street Residences'11 Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
54 19615
22-105
12. CONCLUSIONS
This section summarizes the findings and mitigation measures (if any) identified in previous sections of this
study.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
The existing project site land use is estimated per Table 2 to generate approximately 658 daily trips, including
92 trips during the AM peak hour and 88 trips during the PM peak hour. The proposed project site land use
is forecast to generate approximately 1,280 daily trips, including 104 trips during the AM peak hour and 110
trips during the PM peak hour. Therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in a net increase of
approximately 622 net new daily trips, including 12 net new trips during the AM peak hour and 22 net new
trips during the PM peak hour.
TPO IMPACT ANALYSIS
The addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no Level of Service impacts at the study intersections
for TPO Year 2029 With Project conditions and no improvements are required.
CEQA YEAR 2029 IMPACT ANALYSIS
The addition of project -generated trips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no significant Level of Service impacts at the study
intersections for CEQA Year 2029 With Project conditions and no new mitigation measures are required.
CEQA GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON IMPACT ANALYSIS
The addition of projectgeneratedtrips is not forecast to cause any study intersection to operate deficiently
(Level of Service E or F) or worsen a deficient intersection operation by more than one percent of capacity;
therefore, the proposed project is forecast to result in no significant Level of Service impacts at the study
intersections for General Plan Comparison: Post 2030 General Plan Buildout With Project conditions and no
new mitigation measures are required.
VMT SCREENING (INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY)
The proposed project is located in an area with VMT per capita lower than the Orange County regional
average for residential use. Per the City VMT Guidelines, the project is therefore presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT.
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Since the proposed project has indirect access to a CMP facility (e.g., MacArthur Boulevard or Jamboree Road)
and is forecast to generate less than 2,400 daily trips, the proposed project does not satisfy the criteria for
preparation of a separate CMP impact analysis.
SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
Vehicular access is proposed to be maintained via existing driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way.
The project driveways at Dove Street and Dolphin Striker Way will continue to provide full access. Based on
9:3"IdAii 160Q dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
55 19615
22-106
review of the adjacent development and lane configurations along Dave Street and Dolphin Striker Way, the
existing lane configurations are anticipated to provide adequate circulation.
g3p)ddii
56
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
22-107
APPENDICES
Appendix A Glossary
Appendix B Volume Count Worksheets
Appendix C Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix D Approved Projects List and Cumulative Projects
Appendix E TPO One -Percent Threshold Analysis
Appendix F Existing VMT per Population Map
g3,)JJH
1600 Dove Street Residences
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis
19615
Apx-1
22-108
Exhibit "E"
Conditions of Approval (PA2022-0297)
(Project -specific conditions are in italics)
Planning Division
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Residences
at 1600 Dove Street Affordable Housing Implementation Plan and Density Bonus
Application dated April 22, 2024 (except as modified by applicable conditions of
approval).
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain all applicable
discretionary permits (e.g. Site Development Review). The Applicant shall comply
with all conditions of approval for said discretionary permits.
3. The Project is subject to compliance with all applicable submittals approved by the
City of Newport Beach ("City") and all applicable City ordinances, policies, and
standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
4. The Approval of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan granted under
PA2022-0297 shall expire unless exercised within twenty-four (24) months from
the date of approval as specified in Section 20.54.060 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code ("NBMC"), unless an extension is otherwise granted by the City
for a period of time provided for in the Development Agreement pursuant to
California Government Code Section 66452.06(a).
5. The proposed residential development shall consist of 282 apartment units,
inclusive of 188 base units (conversion and GPA units) and 94 density bonus units.
6. A minimum of 28 apartment units shall be made affordable to very -low-income
households consistent with the approved Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan and Density Bonus Application dated
April22, 2024.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building ermit for the new structures an affordable
housing agreement shall be executed in a recordable form as required by the City
Attorney's Office.
8. The Applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Development Agreement
including payment and timing of the public benefit fees.
9. A qualified monitor from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation,
shall be retained and compensated as a Native American Monitor for the project
site prior to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activity to the completion
of ground disturbing activities to monitor grading and excavation activities.
22-109
10. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any "ground -
disturbing activity" for the subject project. "Ground -disturbing activity" shall include
any demolition that includes subterranean impacts, mass grading, and
excavation. The monitor is expected to accommodate the construction schedule
provided by the Applicant. The Applicant shall make a good faith effort to notify
the monitor of any changes to the construction schedule at least 24 hours in
advance,
11. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the City prior
to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activity, or the issuance of any
permit necessary to commence a ground -disturbing activity.
12. The monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of
the relevant ground -disturbing activities, the type of construction activities
performed, locations of ground -disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related
materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance
to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs,
including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts,
remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or
"TCR'), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains
and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs shall be provided to the project
applicant/lead agency upon written request to the monitors.
13. On -site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the earlier of the following: (1) written
confirmation to the consulting tribe from a designated point of contact for the
project applicant/lead agency that all ground -disturbing activities and phases that
may involve ground -disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with
the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the
consulting tribe to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned
construction activity and/or development/consfruction phase at the project site
possesses the potential to impact TCRs of the consulting tribe.
14. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity
of the discovery shall cease (i.e., within the surrounding 25 feet) and shall not
resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the monitor and/or
archaeologist. The monitor will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form
and/or manner the tribe deems appropriate, in the tribe's sole discretion in
coordination with the applicant, and for any purpose the tribe deems appropriate,
including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.
15. Native American . human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an
inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal
completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
22-110
Attachment C
Ordinance No. 2024-18
22-111
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-18
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE RESIDENCES
AT 1600 DOVE STREET PROJECT LOCATED AT 1600
DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in
the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to
any and all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any
law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Picerne Group ("Applicant"), with
respect to the property located at 1600 Dove Street and legally described in Exhibit "A,"
which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to allow the future development
of a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units ("Project"), which
require the following approvals:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") - A request to add 49 dwelling units above
the current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
Number 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating 49
residential dwelling units to the Property;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") - A plan specifying how the
Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for
a 50% increase in density including a request for three development standard
waivers related to height, park dedication requirements, and overall residential
density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park
in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus)
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and Government Code Section
65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
• Development Agreement (DA) - A development agreement, pursuant to Section
15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would
provide the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and
provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
22-112
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 2 of 7
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
• Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 9") - An
addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts
resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the
General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned
Community (PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7 with a
residential overlay;
WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore
amending the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not
required;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 23,
2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2024-008 by a majority vote (4 ayes, 1 nay) recommending the City Council approve
the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires
the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission
("ALUC") to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land
Use Plan ("AELUP");
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024, the ALUC determined the Project is inconsistent
with the AELUP;
22-113
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 3 of 7
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council
may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it
makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670
of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly
expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's
exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to
the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on July 9, 2024, in the
City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC
Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2024-45 by unanimous vote (5 ayes, 2 recusals) to notify the ALUC and
State Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of
the City's intent to override the ALUC's inconsistency finding;
WHEREAS, a notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency
determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-45 was sent via certified mail and
emailed to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024;
WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the
City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the
Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on August 27, 2024,
in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and
20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting;
WHEREAS, a development agreement is required by Chapter 15.45
(Development Agreements) of the NBMC in that the Project would add more than 50
dwelling units within Statistical Area L4 (Airport Area);
22-114
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 4 of 7
WHEREAS, Section 15.45.040 (Contents) of the NBMC requires inclusion of the
permitted use of the property, density or intensity of use, maximum height, and size of
proposed building into a development agreement;
WHEREAS, the DA satisfies the mandatory elements of Section 15.45.040
(Contents) of the NBMC in providing for the future development of 282 dwelling units,
inclusive of requested density bonus;
WHEREAS, the DA further satisfies other mandatory elements of Section
15.45.040 (Contents) of the NBMC as the DA specifies the permitted uses of the
property, the maximum height and size of the Project, and includes requirements for
subsequent discretionary actions, but the requirements do not prevent the development
of the land for the uses and to the density of development set forth in the agreement;
WHEREAS, the DA also provides other non -mandatory elements, including a
term of 10 years for completion of the Project along with providing public benefits that
are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the
City of Newport Beach General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et
seq.; and
WHEREAS, the public benefits include the payment of a $285,760 public safety
fee, a $714,212 park in -lieu fee, and $3,555,268 public benefit fee, for a total of
$4,555,240 to be used by the City as specified in the DA.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and determined that modifications to the Project made by the City
Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning
Commission for consideration and recommendation.
22-115
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 5 of 7
Section 2: The City Council finds the Development Agreement is consistent
with provisions of California Government Code Sections 65864 to 65869.5 and Chapter
15.45 (Development Agreements) of the NBMC that authorize binding agreements that:
(i) encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and public
facilities financing; (ii) strengthen the public planning process and encourage private
implementation of the local general plan; (iii) provide certainty in the approval of projects
in order to avoid waste of time and resources; and (iv) reduce the economic costs of
development by providing assurance to the property owners that they may proceed with
projects consistent with existing policies, rules, and regulations.
Additionally, the City Council finds that the Development Agreement is entered
into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, the City's police power and is in
the best interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, residents, and the
public.
Section 3: The Development Agreement which is attached hereto as Exhibit
"B," and incorporated herein by reference to accommodate the development of Project
and to enter the agreement for a term of ten years, is hereby approved.
Section 4: Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 was prepared for
the Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) set forth
in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; CEQA's implementing
regulations set forth in CCR Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and
City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental
Quality Act) to ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased environmental
impacts. On the basis of the entire environmental record, the Project will not result in
any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the
General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) and the 2008-2014 City of Newport
Beach Housing Element initial Study/Negative Declaration. The potential impacts
associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in
the PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under
which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe
environmental impacts than previously addressed in either the PEIR, nor has any new
information regarding potential for new or more severe significant environmental
impacts been identified.
22-116
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 6 of 7
The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations
and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. in addition, project
opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project
applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such
applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge,
and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be
awarded to a successful challenger.
Section 5: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are
incorporated into the substantive portion of this ordinance.
Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
22-117
Ordinance No. 2024-
Page 7 of 7
Section 7: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be
published pursuant to City Charter Section 414. This ordinance shall be effective thirty
(30) calendar days after its adoption.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Newport Beach held on the 27th day of August, 2024, and adopted on the 1 Oth day of
September, 2024, by the following vote, to -wit,
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
WILL ❑'NEILL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
+AAC.. HAR , CITY ATTORNEY
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Development Agreement
22-118
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND
IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299,
PAGES 15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE;
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE
RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE
PURPOSE OF EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-119
Exhibit "B"
Development Agreement
22-120
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This Agreement is recorded at the request and for the
benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is exempt
from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to
Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
1600 DOVE, LP and GS 1600 DOVE, LLC
and
THE PICERNE GROUP, INC.
CONCERNING
"THE RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET"
22-121
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is dated for reference purposes as of
the _ day of , 2024 (the "Agreement Date"), and is being entered into by and between
the City of Newport Beach ("City"), a California municipal corporation and charter city, organized
and existing under and by virtue of its Charter and the Constitution, and the laws of the State of
California, 1600 Dove, LP, a California limited partnership and GS 1600 Dove, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, (collectively referred to as "Property Owner"), and The Picerne Group,
Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Developer"). City, Property Owner, and Developer are sometimes
collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of
Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California commonly referred to as 1600 Dove Street
and more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and depicted on
the site map attached hereto as Exhibit `B" ("Pro e "). Developer has an equitable interest in
the Property by way of the Contribution Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions ("Contribution
Agreement") between Property Owner and Developer which provides that Property Owner will
contribute the Property to a joint venture that includes Property Owner and Developer upon the
Closing Date as that term is defined in the Contribution Agreement. Developer has submitted an
application to the City for the Development Plan, defined in Section 1 (Definitions) below to
develop the Property. The Property consists of approximately 2.49 acres and is a part of the
Newport Place Planned Community shown on the City's Zoning Map.
B. To encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and
public facilities financing, strengthen the public planning process and encourage private
implementation of the local general plan, provide certainty in the approval of projects in order to
avoid waste of time and resources, and reduce the economic costs of development by providing
assurance to property owners that they may proceed with projects consistent with existing land
use policies, rules, and regulations, the California Legislature adopted California Government
Code Sections 65864-65869.5 (the "Development Agreement Statute") authorizing cities and
counties to enter into development agreements with persons or entities having a legal or equitable
interest in real property located within their jurisdiction.
C. On March 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2007-6, entitled
"Ordinance Amending Chapter 15.45 of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Regarding
Development Agreements" (the "Development Agreement Ordinance"). This Agreement is
consistent with the Development Agreement Ordinance.
D. The Parties wish to enter into this Agreement for the construction of a seven -story,
apartment complex consisting of up to 282 apartment units (including affordable units).
E. As detailed in Section 3 of this Agreement, Property Owner and Developer agree
to provide the following significant public benefits as consideration for this Agreement: a public
benefit fee in the amount of Three Million Five Hundred Fifty -Five Thousand Two Hundred
-1-
22-122
Sixty -Eight Dollars and 00/100 ($3,555,268.00), a park in -lieu fee of Seven Hundred Fourteen
Thousand Two Hundred Twelve Dollars and 00/100 ($714,212.00), and a public safety fee in the
amount of Two Hundred Eighty -Five Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Dollars and 00/100
($285,760.00).
F. This Agreement is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan
("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the Property as
Mixed Use Horizontal 2 ("MU-112") which provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may
include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings,
industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses and the Newport Place
Planned Community that was adopted in 1970 by Ordinance No. 1369, and amended from time to
time, in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate land use and development of property
within the general boundaries of the Newport Place Planned Community.
G. In recognition of the significant public benefits that this Agreement provides, the
City Council finds that this Agreement: (i) is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General
Plan as of the date of this Agreement; (ii) is in the best interests of the health, safety, and general
welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a
present exercise of, City's police power; (iv) is consistent with the Project's Addendum No. 9 to
the Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2006011119) ("PEIR") that was certified by the City
Council on July 25, 2006 for the 2006 General Plan Update and the Initial Study/Negative
Declaration prepared in accordance with CEQA for the Newport Beach Housing Element Update
(General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003) adopted by the City Council on November 22, 2011
(the PEIR and Initial Study/Negative Declaration are collectively referred to herein as the "PEIR"),
all of which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Project on the
Property, and all of the findings, conditions of approval and mitigation measures related thereto;
and (v) is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California Government
Code Section 65867 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 15.45.
H. On May 9, 2024, City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
Agreement, and made findings and determinations with respect to this Agreement, and
recommended to the City Council that the City Council approve this Agreement.
I. On August 27, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing on this Agreement and
considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and the testimony and information
submitted by City staff, Developer, Property Owner, and members of the public. On September
10, 2024, consistent with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and
Development Agreement Ordinance, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. 2024- (the
"Adopting Ordinance"), finding this Agreement to be consistent with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan and approving this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City, Property Owner, and Developer agree as follows:
1. Definitions.
In addition to any terms defined elsewhere in this Agreement, the following terms when
used in this Agreement shall have the meanings set forth below:
2
22-123
"Action" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.10 of this Agreement.
"Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. 2024- approving and
adopting this Agreement.
"Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended from
time to time.
"Agreement Date" shall mean September 10, 2024, which date is the date the City Council
adopted the Adopting Ordinance.
"CEQA" shall mean the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public
Resources Code Sections 21000-21177) and the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder
by the Secretary for Resources (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.)
("CEQA Guidelines"), as the same may be amended from time to time.
"City" shall mean the City of Newport Beach, a California charter city.
"City Council" shall mean the governing body of City.
"City's Affiliated Parties" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this
Agreement.
"Claim" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this Agreement.
"CPI Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index published from time to time by the
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for all urban consumers (all items)
for the Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, California Area, All Urban Consumers, All Items,
Base Period (1982-84=100), or, if such index is discontinued, such other similar index as may be
publicly available that is selected by City in its reasonable discretion.
"Cure Period" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"Default" shall have the meaning ascribed to that term in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"Develop" or "Development" shall mean to improve or the improvement of the Property
for the purpose of completing the structures, improvements, and facilities comprising the Project,
including but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related
to the Project, whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of all of the private
improvements and facilities comprising the Project; the preservation or restoration, as required of
natural and man-made or altered open space areas; and the installation of landscaping. The terms
"Develop" and "Development," as used herein, do not include the maintenance, repair,
reconstruction, replacement, or redevelopment of any structure, improvement, or facility after the
initial construction and completion thereof.
"Developer" shall mean the Picerne Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and any
successor or assignee to all or any portion of its right, title, and/or interest in and to ownership of
all or a portion of the Property and/or the Project.
3
22-124
"Development Agreement Ordinance" shall mean Chapter 15.45 of the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
"Development Agreement Statute" shall mean California Government Code Sections
65864-65869.5, inclusive.
"Development Exactions" shall mean any requirement of City in connection with or
pursuant to any ordinance, resolution, rule, or official policy for the dedication of land, the
construction or installation of any public improvement or facility, or the payment of any fee or
charge in order to lessen, offset, mitigate, or compensate for the impacts of Development of the
Project on the environment or other public interests.
"Development Plan" shall mean all of the land use entitlements, approvals and permits
approved by the City for the Project on or before the Agreement Date, as the same may be amended
from time to time consistent with this Agreement. Such land use entitlements, approvals and
permits include, without limitation, the following: (1) the Development rights as provided under
this Agreement; (2) General Plan Amendment adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2024-; (3)
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2024-; and (4)
Traffic Study adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2024-_
"Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as
of the Agreement Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Property,
but excluding any amendment or modification to the Development Regulations adopted, approved,
or imposed after the Agreement Date that impairs or restricts the Property Owner and Developer's
rights set forth in this Agreement, unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized
by this Agreement or is agreed to by the Property Owner and Developer in writing: the General
Plan, the Development Plan, and, to the extent not expressly superseded by the Development Plan
or this Agreement, all other land use and subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses,
density and intensity of use, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications,
procedures for obtaining required City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters
that may apply to development of the Project on the Property during the Term of this Agreement
that are set forth in Title 15 of the Municipal Code (buildings and construction), Title 19 of the
Municipal Code (subdivisions) and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning and zoning), but
specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code, including without limitation Title
5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and regulations). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
term "Development Regulations," as used herein, does not include any City ordinance, resolution,
code, rule, regulation or official policy governing any of the following: (i) the conduct of
businesses, professions, and occupations; (ii) taxes and assessments; (iii) the control and abatement
of nuisances; (iv) the granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests
which provide for the use of or entry upon public property; or (v) the exercise of the power of
eminent domain.
"Effective Date" shall mean the latest of the following dates, as applicable: (i) the date that
is thirty (30) days after the Agreement Date; (ii) if a referendum concerning the Adopting
Ordinance, the Development Plan, or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before
the Agreement Date is timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning
the Adopting Ordinance or any of such Development Regulations, the date on which the
referendum is certified resulting in upholding and approving the Adopting Ordinance and the
0
22-125
Development Regulations; or (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the validity of the
Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations approved on or
before the Agreement Date, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of the
validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, the Development Plan and/or the
applicable Development Regulations, which such finality is achieved by a final non -appealable
judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to appeal an
involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement. Promptly after the Effective Date
occurs, the Parties agree to cooperate in causing an appropriate instrument to be executed and
recorded against the Property memorializing the Effective Date.
"Environmental Laws" means all federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local laws,
statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations which are in effect as of the Agreement Date, and all
federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local laws, statutes, rules, ordinances, rules, and
regulations which may hereafter be enacted and which apply to the Property or any part thereof,
pertaining to the use, generation, storage, disposal, release, treatment, or removal of any Hazardous
Substances, including without limitation the following: the Comprehensive Environmental
Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Sections 9601, et sue., as amended
("CERCLA"); the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Sections 6901, et sue., as amended ("RCRA"); the Emergency
Planning and Community Right to Know Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. Sections 11001 et seq., as
amended; the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. Section 1801, et sue., as
amended; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401 et seq., as amended; the Clean Water Act,
33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et sM., as amended; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C.
Sections 2601 et seq., as amended; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 7
U.S.C. Sections 136 et seq., as amended; the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections
300f et seq., as amended; the Federal Radon and Indoor Air Quality Research Act, 42 U.S.C.
Sections 7401 et seq., as amended; the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. Sections
651.g t seq., as amended; and California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et sN.
"General Plan" shall mean City's 2006 General Plan adopted by the City Council on July
25, 2006, by Resolution No. 2006-76, as amended by Resolution No. 2024-51 and any other
amendments through the Agreement Date but excluding any amendment after the Agreement Date
that impairs or restricts the Property Owner and Developer's rights set forth in this Agreement,
unless such amendment is expressly authorized by this Agreement or is specifically agreed to by
the Property Owner and/or Developer.
"Hazardous Substances" means any toxic substance or waste, pollutant, hazardous
substance or waste, contaminant, special waste, industrial substance or waste, petroleum or
petroleum -derived substance or waste, or any toxic or hazardous constituent or additive to or
breakdown component from any such substance or waste, including without limitation any
substance, waste, or material regulated under or defined as "hazardous" or "toxic" under any
Environmental Law.
"Mortgage" shall mean a mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, or any
other form of conveyance in which the Property, or a part or interest in the Property, is pledged as
security and contracted for in good faith and for fair value.
5
22-126
"Mortgagee" shall mean the holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage or any
successor or assignee of the Mortgagee.
"Notice of Default" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"Part-" or "Parties" shall mean City, Property Owner, and/or Developer as determined by
the context.
"Project" shall mean the development of a seven -story, apartment complex consisting of
up to 282 apartment units including all on -site and off -site improvements that Property Owner
and/or Developer is/are authorized and/or may be required to construct on the Property, as
provided in this Agreement and the Development Regulations, as the same may be modified or
amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement and applicable law.
"Property" is described in Exhibit "A" and generally depicted on Exhibit `B".
"Property Owner" shall mean 1600 Dove, LLP and GS 1600, LLC and any successor or
assignee to all or any portion of the right, title, and interest in and to ownership of all or a portion
of the Property.
"Public Benefit Fee" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 3.1 of this Agreement.
"Subsequent Development Approvals" shall mean all discretionary development and
building approvals that Property Owner and/or Developer is/are permitted to obtain to Develop the
Project on and with respect to the Property after the Agreement Date consistent with the
Development Regulations.
"Term" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 2.4 of this Agreement.
"Termination Date" and "Lot Termination Date" shall have the meaning ascribed in
Section 2.4 of this Agreement.
"Transfer" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 11 of this Agreement.
2. General Provisions.
2.1 Plan Consistencv. Zoning Implementation.
This Agreement and the Development Regulations applicable to the Property are consistent
with the General Plan and the Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) as
amended by the approvals in the Development Plan adopted concurrently herewith (including but
not limited to the amendment to the General Plan and Newport Place Planned Community
Development Plan (PC-11).
2.2 Binding Effect of Agreement.
The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is
hereby authorized and shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
G
22-127
2.3 Property Owner and Developer's Representations and Warranties Regarding Ownership of
the Property and Related Matters Pertaining to this Agreement.
Property Owner, Developer and each person executing this Agreement on behalf of
Property Owner and/or Developer hereby represent and warrant to City as follows: (i) that Property
Owner is the owner of the fee simple title of the Property; (ii) that Property Owner and Developer
entered into the Contribution Agreement and that the Property shall be transferred to a joint venture
that includes Property Owner and Developer; (iii) if Property Owner and/or Developer or any co-
owner comprising Property Owner and/or Developer is/are a legal entity and that such entity is
duly formed and existing and is authorized to do business in the State of California; (iii) if Property
Owner and/or Developer or any co-owner comprising Property Owner and/or Developer is/are a
natural person that such natural person has the legal right and capacity to execute this Agreement;
(iv) that all actions required to be taken by all persons and entities comprising Property Owner
and/or Developer to enter into this Agreement have been taken and that Property Owner and
Developer have the legal authority to enter into this Agreement; (v) Property Owner and
Developer's entering into and performing its obligations set forth in this Agreement will not result
in a violation of any obligation, contractual or otherwise, that Property Owner and/or Developer
or any person or entity comprising Property Owner and/or Developer has/have to any third party;
(vi) that neither Property Owner and/or Developer nor any co-owner comprising Property Owner
and/or Developer is/are the subject of any voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy; and (vi)
Property Owner and/or Developer has/have the authority and ability to enter into or perform any
of its obligations set forth in this Agreement.
2.4 Term.
The term of this Agreement (the "Term" shall commence on the Effective Date and
continue until 20_, unless otherwise terminated or modified pursuant to its terms.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if any
Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date will not occur because (i) the Adopting
Ordinance or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date for
the Project has/have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election or (ii) a final non -
appealable judgment is entered in a judicial action challenging the validity or legality of the
Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations for the Project
approved on or before the Agreement Date such that this Agreement and/or any of such
Development Regulations is/are invalid and unenforceable in whole or in such a substantial part
that the judgment substantially impairs such Party's rights or substantially increases its obligations
or risks hereunder or thereunder, then such Party, in its sole and absolute discretion, shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement upon delivery of a written notice of termination to the other
Parties, in which event the Parties shall have no further rights or obligations hereunder except that
Property Owner and Developer's indemnity obligations set forth in Article 10 shall remain in full
force and effect and shall be enforceable, and the Development Regulations applicable to the
Project and the Property only (but not those general Development Regulations applicable to other
properties in the City) shall be repealed by the City after delivery of said notice of termination
except for the Development Regulations that have been disapproved by City's voters at a
referendum election and, therefore, never took effect.
7
22-128
The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) the tenth (loch)
anniversary of the Effective Date; (ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in
accordance with Article 5 and/or Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or
65868 of the Development Agreement Statute; or (iii) completion of the Project in accordance
with the terms of this Agreement, including Property Owner and Developer's complete
satisfaction, performance, and payment, as applicable, of all Development Exactions, the issuance
of all required final occupancy permits, and acceptance by City or applicable public agency(ies)
or private entity(ies) of all required offers of dedication.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the
provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 14.11 (as well as any other Property Owner and/or
Developer obligations set forth in this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the
Termination Date) shall survive the Termination Date of this Agreement.
3. Public Benefits.
3.1 Public Benefit Fee.
As consideration for City's approval and performance of its obligations set forth in this
Agreement, Property Owner and Developer shall pay to City a fee that shall be in addition to any
other fee or charge to which the Property and the Project would otherwise be subject to (herein,
the "Public Benefit Fee") in the total sum of Three Million Five Hundred Fifty -Five Thousand
Two Hundred Sixty -Eight Dollars and 00/100 ($3,555,268.00) which shall be due and payable
prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any portion of the Project.
The City has not designated a specific project or purpose for the Public Benefit Fee.
Property Owner and Developer acknowledge by its approval and execution of this Agreement that
it is voluntarily agreeing to pay the Public Benefit Fee and that its obligation to pay the Public
Benefit Fee is an essential term of this Agreement and is not severable from City's obligations and
Property Owner and Developer's vested rights to be acquired hereunder, and that Property Owner
and Developer expressly waive any constitutional, statutory, or common law right it might have
in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the payment of the Public Benefits
identified in this Section 3.1 on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to
the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution
Article I Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq.),
or otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth in this Agreement for Property Owner
and/or Developer's default, if Property Owner and/or Developer shall fail to timely pay any portion
of the Public Benefits identified in this Section 3.1 when due, City shall have the right to withhold
issuance of any further building permits, occupancy permits, or other development or building
permits for the Project.
3.2 Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increases. Any fee provided in this Article 3 (Public
Benefits) shall be increased based upon percentage increases in the CPI Index as provided herein.
The first CPI adjustment shall occur on the second anniversary of the City Council's adoption of
the Adopting Ordinance (the first "Adjustment Date") and subsequent CPI adjustments shall occur
on each anniversary of the first Adjustment Date thereafter until expiration of the Term of this
Agreement (each, an "Adjustment Date"). The amount of the CPI adjustment on the applicable
Adjustment Date shall in each instance be calculated based on the then most recently available CPI
22-129
Index figures such that, for example, if the Effective Date of this Agreement falls on July 1 and
the most recently available CPI Index figure on the first Adjustment Date (January 1 of the
following year) is the CPI Index for November of the preceding year, the percentage increase in
the CPI Index for that partial year (a 6-month period) shall be calculated by comparing the CPI
Index for November of the preceding year with the CPI Index for May of the preceding year (a 6-
month period). In no event, however, shall application of the CPI Index reduce the amount of the
Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable
Adjustment Date.
3.2 Other Public Benefits.
3.2.1 In addition to the Public Benefit Fee, the direct and indirect benefits City shall receive
pursuant to this Development Agreement are as follows:
3.2.2 Park In -Lieu Fee. The Property Owner and Developer shall pay a park land dedication in -
lieu fee pursuant to the City General Plan Land Use Policy 6.15.13 in the amount of Seven Hundred
Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred Twelve Dollars and 00/100 ($714,212.00), for the purpose of
acquisition and improvement of other properties as parklands to serve the Airport Area (the "Park
In -Lieu Fee"). The Park In -Lieu Fee shall be due and payable prior to the issuance of the first
building permit for any portion of the Project.
3.2.3 Public Safety Fee. The Property Owner and Developer shall pay a public safety fee in the
amount of Two Hundred Eighty -Five Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Dollars and 00/100
($285,760.00) to be used, at the City's discretion, to fund the cost of staffing, services, and
equipment necessary for fire related public safety purposes (the "Public Safety Fee"). The Public
Safety Fee shall be due and payable prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any portion
of the Project.
3.2.4 Apportionment of Fees. Property Owner, Developer and City hereby acknowledge and
agree that the amounts of the Public Benefit Fee (Section 3.1), Park In -Lieu Fee (Section 3.2.2),
and Public Safety Fee (Section 3.2.3) assessed herein are predicated on the Project being developed
as a 282-unit, seven- story residential development project. In the event Property Owner and/or
Developer receive(s) land use approval from the City amending the development plan for the
Project that includes fewer residential units, the amounts owed by Property Owner and Developer
to City for the Public Benefit Fee, Park In -Lieu Fee, and Public Safety Fee shall each be reduced
on a proportional basis.
4. Development of Proiect.
4.1 Applicable Regulations; Property Owner and Developer's Vested Rights and Cit) L
Reservation of Discretion With Respect to Subsequent Development Approvals.
Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, during the Term of this Agreement, (i)
Property Owner and Developer shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with
respect to the Property in accordance with the terms of the Development Regulations and this
Agreement and (ii) City shall not prohibit or prevent development of the Property on grounds
inconsistent with the Development Regulations or this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
nothing herein is intended to limit or restrict City's discretion with respect to (i) review and
approval requirements contained in the Development Regulations, (ii) exercise of any
E
22-130
discretionary authority City retains under the Development Regulations, (iii) the approval,
conditional approval, or denial of any Subsequent Development Approvals applied for by Property
Owner and/or Developer, if any, or that are required, for Development of the Project as of the
Agreement Date provided that all such actions are consistent with the Development Regulations,
or (iv) any environmental approvals that may be required under CEQA or any other federal or state
law or regulation in conjunction with any Subsequent Development Approvals that may be
required for the Project, and in this regard, as to future actions referred to in clauses (i)-(iv) of this
sentence, City reserves its full discretion to the same extent City would have such discretion in the
absence of this Agreement. In addition, it is understood and agreed that nothing in this Agreement
is intended to vest Property Owner and/or Developer's rights with respect to any laws, regulations,
rules, or official policies of any other governmental agency or public utility company with
jurisdiction over the Property or the Project; or any applicable federal or state laws, regulations,
rules, or official policies that may be inconsistent with this Agreement and that override or
supersede the provisions set forth in this Agreement, and regardless of whether such overriding or
superseding laws, regulations, rules, or official policies are adopted or applied to the Property or
the Project prior or subsequent to the Agreement Date.
Property Owner and/or Developer has/have expended and will continue to expend
substantial amounts of time and money in the planning and entitlement process to permit
Development of the Project in the future. Property Owner and Developer represent and City
acknowledges that Property Owner and Developer would not make these expenditures without this
Agreement, and that Property Owner and/or Developer is/are and will be making these
expenditures in reasonable reliance upon obtaining vested rights to Develop the Project as set forth
in this Agreement.
Property Owner and/or Developer may apply to City for permits or approvals necessary to
modify or amend the Development specified in the Development Regulations, provided that unless
this Agreement also is amended, the request does not propose an increase in the maximum density,
intensity, height, or size of proposed structures, or a change in use that generates more peak hour
traffic or more daily traffic. In addition, Property Owner and/or Developer may apply to City for
approval of minor amendments to existing tentative tract maps, tentative parcel maps, or associated
conditions of approval, consistent with City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 19.12.090.
This Agreement does not constitute a promise or commitment by City to approve any such permit
or approval, or to approve the same with or without any particular requirements or conditions, and
City's discretion with respect to such matters shall be the same as it would be in the absence of
this Agreement.
4.2 No Conflicting Enactments.
Except to the extent City reserves its discretion as expressly set forth in this Agreement,
during the Term of this Agreement City shall not apply to the Project or the Property any ordinance,
policy, rule, regulation, or other measure relating to Development of the Project that is enacted or
becomes effective after the Agreement Date to the extent it conflicts with this Agreement. This
Section 4.2 shall not restrict City's ability to enact an ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other
measure applicable to the Project pursuant to California Government Code Section 65866
consistent with the procedures specified in Section 4.3 of this Agreement. In Pardee Construction
Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, the California Supreme Court held that a
construction company was not exempt from a city's growth control ordinance even though the city
10
22-131
and construction company had entered into a consent judgment (tantamount to a contract under
California law) establishing the company's vested rights to develop its property consistent with
the zoning. The California Supreme Court reached this result because the consent judgment failed
to address the timing of development. The Parties intend to avoid the result of the Pardee case by
acknowledging and providing in this Agreement that Property Owner and Developer shall have
the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property at the rate, timing, and
sequencing that Property Owner and Developer deem appropriate within the exercise of Property
Owner and Developer's sole subjective business judgment, provided that such Development
occurs in accordance with this Agreement and the Development Regulations, notwithstanding
adoption by City's electorate of an initiative to the contrary after the Agreement Date. No City
moratorium or other similar limitation relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the
Development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or another method,
affecting subdivision maps, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlement to use,
shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other similar limitation restricts Property
Owner and Developer's vested rights in this Agreement or otherwise conflicts with the express
provisions of this Agreement.
4.3 Reservations of Authority.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the laws,
rules, regulations, and official policies set forth in this Section 4.3 shall apply to and govern the
Development of the Project on and with respect to the Property.
4.3.1 Procedural Regulations. Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies,
petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals, and
any other matter of procedure shall apply to the Property, provided that such procedural regulations
are adopted and applied City-wide or to all other properties similarly situated in City.
4.3.2 Processing and Permit Fees. City shall have the right to charge and Property
Owner and Developer shall be required to pay all applicable processing and permit fees to cover
the reasonable cost to City of processing and reviewing applications and plans for any required
Subsequent Development Approvals, building permits, excavation and grading permits,
encroachment permits, and the like, for performing necessary studies and reports in connection
therewith, inspecting the work constructed or installed by or on behalf of Property Owner and
Developer, and monitoring compliance with any requirements applicable to Development of the
Project, all at the rates in effect at the time fees are due.
4.3.3 Consistent Future City Regulations. City ordinances, resolutions,
regulations, and official policies governing Development which do not conflict with the
Development Regulations, or with respect to such regulations that do conflict, where Property
Owner and Developer have consented in writing to the regulations, shall apply to the Property.
4.3.4 Development Exactions Applicable to Property. During the Term of this
Agreement, Property Owner and Developer shall be required to satisfy and pay all Development
Exactions at the time performance or payment is due to the same extent and in the same amount(s)
that would apply to Property Owner, Developer and the Project in the absence of this Agreement;
provided, however, that to the extent the scope and extent of a particular Development Exaction
(excluding any development impact fee) for the Project has been established and fixed by City in
11
22-132
the conditions of approval for any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the
Agreement Date, City shall not alter, increase, or modify said Development Exaction in a manner
that is inconsistent with such Development Regulations without Property Owner and Developer's
prior written consent or as may be otherwise required pursuant to overriding federal or state laws
or regulations (Section 4.3.5 hereinbelow). In addition, nothing in this Agreement is intended or
shall be deemed to vest Property Owner and/or Developer against the obligation to pay any of the
following (which are not included within the definition of "Development Exactions") in the full
amount that would apply in the absence of this Agreement: (i) City's normal fees for processing,
environmental assessment and review, tentative tract and parcel map review, plan checking, site
review and approval, administrative review, building permit, grading permit, inspection, and
similar fees imposed to recover City's costs associated with processing, reviewing, and inspecting
project applications, plans, and specifications; (ii) fees and charges levied by any other public
agency, utility, district, or joint powers authority, regardless of whether City collects those fees
and charges; or (iii) community facility district special taxes or special district assessments or
similar assessments, business license fees, bonds or other security required for public
improvements, transient occupancy taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, sewer lateral connection
fees, water service connection fees, new water meter fees, and the Property Development Tax
payable under Chapter 3.12 of City's Municipal Code.
4.3.5 Overriding Federal and State Laws and Regulations. Federal and state laws
and regulations that override Property Owner and/or Developer's vested rights set forth in this
Agreement shall apply to the Property, together with any City ordinances, resolutions, regulations,
and official policies that are necessary to enable City to comply with the provisions of any such
overriding federal or state laws and regulations, provided that (i) Property Owner and Developer
do not waive its right to challenge or contest the validity of any such purportedly overriding
federal, state, or City law or regulation; and (ii) upon the discovery of any such overriding federal,
state, or City law or regulation that prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of this
Agreement, City, Property Owner or Developer shall provide to all Parties a written notice
identifying the federal, state, or City law or regulation, together with a copy of the law or regulation
and a brief written statement of the conflict(s) between that law or regulation and the provisions
of this Agreement. Promptly thereafter City, Property Owner, and Developer shall meet and confer
in good faith in a reasonable attempt to determine whether a modification or suspension of this
Agreement, in whole or in part, is necessary to comply with such overriding federal, state, or City
law or regulation. In such negotiations, City, Property Owner, and Developer agree to preserve
the terms of this Agreement and the rights of Property Owner and Developer as derived from this
Agreement to the maximum feasible extent while resolving the conflict. City agrees to cooperate
with Property Owner and Developer at no cost to City in resolving the conflict in a manner which
minimizes any financial impact of the conflict upon Property Owner and/or Developer. City also
agrees to process in a prompt manner Property Owner and/or Developer's proposed changes to the
Project and any of the Development Regulations as may be necessary to comply with such
overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation; provided, however, that the approval of such
changes by City shall be subject to the discretion of City, consistent with this Agreement.
4.3.6 Public Health and Safety. Any City ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation,
program, or official policy that is necessary to protect persons on the Property or in the immediate
vicinity from conditions dangerous to their health or safety, as reasonably determined by City,
shall apply to the Property, even though the application of the ordinance, resolution, rule
12
22-133
regulation, program, or official policy would result in the impairment of Property Owner and
Developer's vested rights under this Agreement.
4.3.7 Uniform Building Standards. Existing and future building and building -
related standards set forth in the uniform codes adopted and amended by City from time to time,
including building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, housing, swimming pool, and fire codes, and
any modifications and amendments thereof shall all apply to the Project and the Property to the
same extent that the same would apply in the absence of this Agreement.
4.3.8 Public Works Improvements. To the extent Property Owner and/or
Developer construct(s) or install(s) any public improvements, works, or facilities, the City
standards in effect for such public improvements, works, or facilities at the time of City's issuance
of a permit, license, or other authorization for construction or installation of same shall apply.
4.3.9 No Guarantee or Reservation of Utility Cqpacity. Notwithstanding any
other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement is intended
or shall be interpreted to require City to guarantee or reserve to or for the benefit of Property
Owner, Developer or the Property any utility capacity, service, or facilities that may be needed to
serve the Project, whether domestic or reclaimed water service, sanitary sewer transmission or
wastewater treatment capacity, downstream drainage capacity, or otherwise, and City shall have
the right to limit or restrict Development of the Project if and to the extent that City reasonably
determines that inadequate utility capacity exists to adequately serve the Project at the time
Development is scheduled to commence.
5. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled
in whole or in part only by mutual written and executed consent of the Parties in compliance with
California Government Code Section 65868 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Section
15.45.070 or by unilateral termination by City in the event of an uncured default of Property Owner
and/or Developer.
6. Enforcement. Unless this Agreement is amended, canceled, modified, or suspended as
authorized herein or pursuant to California Government Code Section 65869.5, this Agreement
shall be enforceable by any of the Parties despite any change in any applicable general or specific
plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulation or other applicable ordinance or regulation
adopted by City (including by City's electorate) that purports to apply to any or all of the Property.
7. Annual Review of Pronertv Owner and Developer's Compliance With Agreement.
7.1 General.
City shall review this Agreement once during every twelve (12) month period following
the Effective Date for compliance with the terms of this Agreement as provided in Government
Code Section 65865.1. Property Owner and Developer (including any successor to the Property
Owner and Developer executing this Agreement on or before the Agreement Date) shall pay City
a reasonable fee in an amount City may reasonably establish from time to time to cover the actual
and necessary costs for the annual review. City's failure to timely provide or conduct an annual
review shall not constitute a Default hereunder by City.
13
22-134
7.2 Property Owner and Developer's Obligation to Demonstrate Good Faith Compliance.
During each annual review by City, Property Owner and Developer are required to
demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Property Owner and
Developer agree to furnish such evidence of good faith compliance as City, in the reasonable
exercise of its discretion, may require, thirty (30) days prior to each anniversary of the Effective
Date during the Term.
7.3 Procedure. The Zoning Administrator shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall
determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Property Owner or Developer has,
for the period under review, complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the Zoning
Administrator finds that Property Owner and Developer have so complied, the annual review shall
be concluded. If the Zoning Administrator finds, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Property
Owner and Developer have not so complied, written notice shall be sent to Property Owner and
Developer by first class mail of the Zoning Administrator's finding of non-compliance, and
Property Owner and Developer shall be given at least ten (10) calendar days to cure any
noncompliance that relates to the payment of money and thirty (30) calendar days to cure any other
type of noncompliance. If a cure not relating to the payment of money cannot be completed within
thirty (30) calendar days for reasons which are beyond the control of Property Owner and
Developer, Property Owner and Developer must commence the cure within such thirty (30)
calendar days and diligently pursue such cure to completion. If Property Owner and Developer
fails to cure such noncompliance within the time(s) set forth above, such failure shall be considered
to be a Default and City shall be entitled to exercise the remedies set forth in Article 8 below.
7.4 Annual Review a Non -Exclusive Means for Determining and Requiring Cure of Property
Owner and/or Developer's Default.
The annual review procedures set forth in this Article 7 shall not be the exclusive means
for City to identify a Default by Property Owner and/or Developer or limit City's rights or remedies
for any such Default.
8. Events of Default.
8.1 General Provisions. In the event of any material default, breach, or violation of the terms
of this Agreement ("Default"), the Party alleging a Default shall deliver a written notice (each, a
"Notice of Default") to the defaulting Party. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the
alleged Default and a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (ten (10) calendar days if
the Default relates to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less
than thirty (30) calendar days in the event of non -monetary Defaults) in which the Default must
be cured ("Cure Period"). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in
Default for the purposes of termination of this Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. If
the alleged Default is cured within the Cure Period, then the Default thereafter shall be deemed
not to exist. If a non -monetary Default cannot be cured during the Cure Period with the exercise
of commercially reasonable diligence, the defaulting Party must promptly commence to cure as
quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) calendar days after it receives the Notice
of Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the City is not required to give Property Owner or Developer notice of default and may
14
22-135
immediately pursue remedies for a Property Owner or Developer Default that result in an
immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare.
8.2 Default by Property Owner or Developer.
If Property Owner or Developer is alleged to have committed a non -monetary Default and it
disputes the claimed Default, it may make a written request for an appeal hearing before the City
Council within ten (10) days of receiving the Notice of Default, and a public hearing shall be
scheduled at the next available City Council meeting to consider Property Owner or Developer's
appeal of the Notice of Default. Failure to appeal a Notice of Default to the City Council within
the ten (10) day period shall waive any right to a hearing on the claimed Default. If Property
Owner or Developer's appeal of the Notice of Default is timely and in good faith but after a public
hearing of Property Owner or Developer's appeal the City Council concludes that Property Owner
or Developer is in Default as alleged in the Notice of Default, the accrual date for commencement
of the thirty (30) day Cure Period provided in Section 8.1 shall be extended until the City Council's
denial of Property Owner or Developer's appeal is communicated to Property Owner or Developer
in writing.
8.3 City's Option to Terminate Agreement.
In the event of an alleged Property Owner or Developer Default, City may not terminate
this Agreement without first delivering a written Notice of Default and providing Property Owner
and Developer with the opportunity to cure the Default within the Cure Period, as provided in
Section 8.1, and complying with Section 8.2 if Property Owner or Developer timely appeals any
Notice of Default. A termination of this Agreement by City shall be valid only if good cause exists
and is supported by evidence presented to the City Council at or in connection with a duly noticed
public hearing to establish the existence of a Default. The validity of any termination may be
judicially challenged by Property Owner or Developer. Any such judicial challenge must be
brought within thirty (30) days of service on Property Owner, or Developer by first class mail,
postage prepaid, of written notice of termination by City or a written notice of City's determination
of an appeal of the Notice of Default as provided in Section 8.2.
8.4 Default by Citya
If Property Owner or Developer alleges a City Default and alleges that the City has not
cured the Default within the Cure Period, Property Owner or Developer may pursue any equitable
remedy available to it under this Agreement, including, without limitation, an action for a writ of
mandamus, injunctive relief, or specific performance of City's obligations set forth in this
Agreement. Upon a City Default, any resulting delays in Property Owner or Developer's
performance hereunder shall neither be a Property Owner or Developer Default nor constitute
grounds for termination or cancellation of this Agreement by City and shall, at Property Owner or
Developer's option (and provided Property Owner or Developer delivers written notice to City
within thirty (30) days of the commencement of the alleged City Default), extend the Term for a
period equal to the length of the delay.
8.5 Waiver.
Failure or delay by any Party in delivering a Notice of Default shall not waive that Party's
right to deliver a future Notice of Default of the same or any other Default.
15
22-136
8.6 Specific Performance Remedv.
Due to the size, nature, and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore
the Property to its pre-existing condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After
such implementation, Property Owner, Developer and City may be foreclosed from other choices
they may have had to plan for the development of the Property, to utilize the Property or provide
for other benefits and alternatives. Property Owner, Developer, and City have invested significant
time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to
the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in
implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement. It is not possible to
determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate Property Owner, Developer or
City for such efforts. For the above reasons, City, Property Owner and Developer agree that
damages would not be an adequate remedy if City, Property Owner or Developer fails to carry out
its obligations under this Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Agreement is
necessary to compensate Property Owner and Developer if City fails to carry out its obligations
under this Agreement or to compensate City if Property Owner or Developer fails to carry out its
obligations under this Agreement.
8.7 Monetary Damages.
The Parties agree that monetary damages shall not be an available remedy for a Party for a
Default hereunder by the other Party; provided, however, that (i) nothing in this Section 8.7 is
intended or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict City's right to recover the Public Benefit Fees
due from Property Owner as set forth herein; and (ii) nothing in this Section 8.7 is intended or
shall be interpreted to limit or restrict Property Owner's indemnity obligations set forth in Article
10 or the right of the prevailing Party in any Action to recover its litigation expenses, as set forth
in Section 8.10. In no event shall damages be awarded against the City upon an event of default
or upon termination of this Agreement. Property Owner expressly agrees that the City, any City
agencies and their respective elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers,
agents, employees, volunteers and representatives (collectively, for purposes of this Section 8.7,
"City") shall not be liable for any monetary damage for a Default by the City or any claims against
City arising out of this Agreement. Property Owner hereby expressly waives any such monetary
damages against the City. The sole and exclusive judicial remedy for Property Owner in the event
of a Default by the City shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance, or other injunctive
or declaratory relief.
8.8 Additional City Remedy for Property Owner or Developer's Default.
In the event of any Default by Property Owner or Developer, in addition to any other
remedies which may be available to City, whether legal or equitable, City shall be entitled to
receive and retain any Development Exactions applicable to the Project or the Property, including
any fees, grants, dedications, or improvements to public property which it may have received prior
to Property Owner or Developer's Default without recourse from Property Owner, Developer, or
eithers successors or assigns.
16
22-137
8.9 No Personal Liabilitv of Citv Officials, Emplovees, or Aizents.
No City official, employee, or agent shall have any personal liability hereunder for a
Default by City of any of its obligations set forth in this Agreement.
8.10 Recovery of Legal Expenses by Prevailing Party in Any Action.
In any judicial proceeding, arbitration, or mediation (collectively, an "Action") between
the Parties that seeks to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or arises out of this Agreement,
the prevailing Party shall not recover any of its costs and expenses, regardless of whether they
would be recoverable under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1033.5 or California Civil
Code Section 1717 in the absence of this Agreement. These costs and expenses include, but are
not limited to, court costs, expert witness fees, attorneys' fees, City staff costs (including
overhead), and costs of investigation and preparation before initiation of the Action.
9. Force Maieure.
No Party shall be deemed to be in Default where failure or delay in performance of any of
its obligations under this Agreement is caused, through no fault of the Party whose performance
is prevented or delayed, by floods, earthquakes, other acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar
hostilities, strikes or other labor difficulties, state or federal regulations, or court actions. Except
as specified above, nonperformance shall not be excused because of the act or omission of a third
person. In no event shall the occurrence of an event of force majeure operate to extend the Term
of this Agreement. In addition, in no event shall the time for performance of a monetary obligation,
including without limitation Property Owner and/or Developer's obligation to pay Public Benefit
Fees, be extended pursuant to this Section.
10. Indemnity Obliizations of Property Owner.
10.1 Indemnity Arising From Acts or Omissions of Pronertv Owner or Developer.
Property Owner and Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's
officials, employees, agents, attorneys, and contractors (collectively, the "City's Affiliated
Parties") from and against all suits, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, penalties, obligations, and
expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs) (collectively, a "Claim") that may
arise, directly or indirectly, from the acts, omissions, or operations of Property Owner or Developer
or Property Owner or Developer's agents, contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in the
course of Development of the Project or any other activities of Property Owner or Developer
relating to the Property or pursuant to this Agreement. City shall have the right, in its sole
discretion, to select and retain counsel to defend any Claim filed against City and/or any of City's
Affiliated Parties, and Property Owner and Developer shall pay the reasonable cost for defense of
any Claim. In the event City, Property Owner or Developer recovers any attorneys' fees, expert
witness fees, costs, interest, or other amounts from the party or parties asserting the Claim,
Property Owner and Developer shall be entitled to retain the same (provided it has fully performed
its indemnity obligations hereunder). The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.1 shall
commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall
survive the Termination Date.
17
22-138
10.2 Third PartLitigation.
In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, Property Owner and
Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and
against any Claim against City or City's Affiliated Parties seeking to attack, set aside, void, or
annul the approval of this Agreement, the Adopting Ordinance, any of the Development
Regulations for the Project (including without limitation any actions taken pursuant to CEQA with
respect thereto), any Subsequent Development Approval, or the approval of any permit granted
pursuant to this Agreement. Said indemnity obligation shall include payment of attorney's fees,
expert witness fees, City staff costs, and court costs. City shall promptly notify Property Owner
and Developer of any such Claim and City shall cooperate with Property Owner and Developer in
the defense of such Claim. If City fails to promptly notify Property Owner and Developer of such
Claim, Property Owner and Developer shall not be responsible to indemnify, defend, and hold
City harmless from such Claim until Property Owner and Developer are so notified and if City
fails to cooperate in the defense of a Claim Property Owner and Developer shall not be responsible
to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City during the period that City so fails to cooperate or
for any losses attributable thereto. City shall be entitled to retain separate counsel to represent City
against the Claim and the City's defense costs for its separate counsel shall be included in Property
Owner and Developer's indemnity obligation, provided that such counsel shall reasonably
cooperate with Property Owner and Developer in an effort to minimize the total litigation expenses
incurred by Property Owner and Developer. In the event City Property Owner, or Developer
recovers any attorney's fees, expert witness fees, costs, interest, or other amounts from the party
or parties asserting the Claim, Property Owner and Developer shall be entitled to retain the same
(provided it has fully performed its indemnity obligations hereunder). The indemnity provisions
in this Section 10.2 shall commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective
Date occurs, and shall survive the Termination Date.
10.3 Environmental Indenni ty.
In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, from and after the
Agreement Date, Property Owner and Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City
and City's Affiliated Parties from and against any and all Claims for personal injury or death,
property damage, economic loss, statutory penalties or fines, and damages of any kind or nature
whatsoever, including without limitation attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs, based upon
or arising from any of the following: (i) the actual or alleged presence of any Hazardous Substance
on or under any of the Property in violation of any applicable Environmental Law; (ii) the actual
or alleged migration of any Hazardous Substance from the Property through the soils or
groundwater to a location or locations off of the Property; and (iii) the storage, handling, transport,
or disposal of any Hazardous Substance on, to, or from the Property and any other area disturbed,
graded, or developed by Property Owner or Developer in connection with Property Owner and/or
Developer's Development of the Project. The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.3 shall
commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall
survive the Termination Date.
11. Assignment.
Property Owner or Developer shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign (hereinafter,
collectively, a "Transfer") its interest in or fee title to the Property, in whole or in part, to any
WV
22-139
person, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation (which successor, as of the effective date
of the Transfer, shall become the "Property Owner" under this Agreement) at any time from the
Agreement Date until the Termination Date; provided, however, that no such Transfer shall violate
the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or City's
local subdivision ordinance and any such Transfer shall include the assignment and assumption of
Property Owner or Developer's rights, duties, and obligations set forth in or arising under this
Agreement as to the Property or the portion thereof so Transferred and shall be made in strict
compliance with the following conditions precedent: (i) no transfer or assignment of any of
Property Owner or Developer's rights or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made
together with the Transfer of all or a part of the Property; and (ii) prior to the effective date of any
proposed Transfer, Property Owner or Developer (as transferor) shall notify City, in writing, of
such proposed Transfer and deliver to City a written assignment and assumption, executed in
recordable form by the transferring and successor Property Owner or Developer and in a form
subject to the reasonable approval of the City Attorney of City (or designee), pursuant to which
the transferring Property Owner or Developer assigns to the successor Property Owner and the
successor Property Owner assumes from the transferring Property Owner all of the rights and
obligations of the transferring Property Owner with respect to the Property or portion thereof to be
so Transferred, including in the case of a partial Transfer the obligation to perform such obligations
that must be performed off of the portion of the Property so Transferred that are a condition
precedent to the successor Property Owner's right to develop the portion of the Property so
Transferred. Any Permitted Transferee shall have all of the same rights, benefits, duties,
obligations, and liabilities of Property Owner or Developer under this Agreement with respect to
the portion of, or interest in, the Property sold, transferred, and assigned to such Permitted
Transferee; provided, however, that in the event of a Transfer of less than all of the Property, or
interest in the Property, no such Permitted Transferee shall have the right to enter into an
amendment of this Agreement that jeopardizes or impairs the rights or increases the obligations of
the Property Owner with respect to the balance of the Property, without Property Owner or
Developer's written consent.
Notwithstanding any Transfer, the transferring Property Owner or Developer shall
continue to be jointly and severally liable to City, together with the successor Property Owner, to
perform all of the transferred obligations set forth in or arising under this Agreement unless the
transferring Property Owner or Developer is given a release in writing by City, which release shall
be only with respect to the portion of the Property so Transferred in the event of a partial Transfer.
City shall provide such a release upon the transferring Property Owner or Developer's full
satisfaction of all of the following conditions: (i) the transferring Property Owner or Developer no
longer has a legal or equitable interest in the portion of the Property so Transferred other than as a
beneficiary under a deed of trust; (ii) the transferring Property Owner or Developer is not then in
Default under this Agreement and no condition exists that with the passage of time or the giving
of notice, or both, would constitute a Default hereunder; (iii) the transferring Property Owner or
Developer has provided City with the notice and the fully executed written and recordable
assignment and assumption agreement required as set forth in the first paragraph of this Section
11; and (iv) the successor Property Owner either (A) provides City with substitute security
equivalent to any security previously provided by the transferring Property Owner or Developer
to City to secure performance of the successor Property Owner's obligations hereunder with
respect to the Property or the portion of the Property so Transferred or (B) if the transferred
obligation in question is not a secured obligation, the successor Property Owner either provides
security reasonably satisfactory to City or otherwise demonstrates to City's reasonable satisfaction
19
22-140
that the successor Property Owner has the financial resources or commitments available to perform
the transferred obligation at the time and in the manner required under this Agreement and the
Development Regulations for the Project. Any determination by the City in regards to the second
paragraph of Section 11 subpart (iv) (A) and/or (B) shall be documented in writing.
12. Mortgagee Rights.
12.1 Encumbrances on Property.
The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Property Owner or
Developer in any manner from encumbering the Property, any part of the Property, or any
improvements on the Property with any Mortgage securing financing with respect to the
construction, development, use, or operation of the Project.
12.2 Mortgagee Protection.
This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Nevertheless, no
breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage
made in good faith and for value. Any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in
the Property or part of the Property by a Mortgagee (whether due to foreclosure, trustee's sale,
deed in lieu of foreclosure, lease termination, or otherwise) shall be subject to all of the terms and
conditions of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee who takes title to the Property or any part of the
Property shall be entitled to the benefits arising under this Agreement.
12.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12.3, a Mortgagee will not have any
obligation or duty under the terms of this Agreement to perform the obligations of Property Owner
or Developer or other affirmative covenants of Property Owner or Developer, or to guarantee this
performance except that: (i) the Mortgagee shall have no right to develop the Project under the
Development Regulations without fully complying with the terms of this Agreement; and (ii) to
the extent that any covenant to be performed by Property Owner or Developer is a condition to the
performance of a covenant by City, that performance shall continue to be a condition precedent to
City's performance.
12.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee-, Right of Mortgagee to Cure.
Each Mortgagee shall, upon written request to City, be entitled to receive written notice
from City of: (i) the results of the periodic review of compliance specified in Article 7 of this
Agreement, and (ii) any default by Property Owner or Developer of its obligations set forth in this
Agreement.
Each Mortgagee shall have a further right, but not an obligation, to cure the Default within
ten (10) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a monetary Default and within
thirty (30) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a non -monetary Default. If the
Mortgagee can only remedy or cure a non -monetary Default by obtaining possession of the
Property, then the Mortgagee shall have the right to seek to obtain possession with diligence and
continuity through a receiver or otherwise, and to remedy or cure the non -monetary Default within
thirty (30) days after obtaining possession and, except in case of emergency or to protect the public
FE
22-141
health or safety, City may not exercise any of its judicial remedies set forth in this Agreement to
terminate or substantially alter the rights of the Mortgagee until expiration of the thirty (30) day
period. In the case of a non -monetary Default that cannot with diligence be remedied or cured
within thirty (30) days, the Mortgagee shall have additional time as is reasonably necessary to
remedy or cure the Default, provided the Mortgagee promptly commences to cure the non -
monetary Default within thirty (30) days and diligently prosecutes the cure to completion.
13. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy.
14. Miscellaneous Terms.
14.1 Reserved.
14.2 Notices.
Any notice or demand that shall be required or permitted by law or any provision of this
Agreement shall be in writing. If the notice or demand will be served upon a Party, it either shall
be personally delivered to the Party; deposited by a reliable courier service that provides a receipt
showing date and time of delivery with courier charges prepaid. The notice or demand shall be
addressed as follows:
TO CITY: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attn: City Manager
With a copy to: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attn: City Attorney
TO PROPERTY OWNER John Saunders
1600 Dove, LP and GS 1600 Dove, LLC
4040 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 300
Newport Beach, CA 92660
With a copy to:
TO DEVELOPER: Greg Nakahira
The Picerne Group
5000 Birch Street, Ste. 600
Newport Beach, CA 92660
With a copy to: Kevin Ashe
Holland & Knight LLP
4675 MacArthur Court, Ste. 900
Newport Beach, CA 92660
21
22-142
Any Party may change the address stated in this Section 14.2 by delivering notice to the other
Parties in the manner provided in this Section 14.2, and thereafter notices to such Party shall be
addressed and submitted to the new address. Notices delivered in accordance with this Agreement
shall be deemed to be delivered upon the earlier of: (i) the date received or (iii) three business days
after deposit in the mail as provided above.
14.3 Project as a Private Undertaking.
Any future Development of the Project is a private undertaking. No Party will be acting
as the agent of the other in any respect, and each Party will be an independent contracting entity
with respect to the terms, covenants, and conditions set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement
forms no partnership, joint venture, or other association of any kind. The only relationship between
the Parties is that of a government entity regulating the Development of private property by the
owner or user of the Property.
14.4 Cooperation.
Each Party shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other Party to the
extent consistent with and necessary to implement this Agreement. Upon the request of a Party at
any time, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgement or affidavit if reasonably
required, and file or record the required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be
reasonably necessary to implement this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions
contemplated by this Agreement.
14.5 Estonnel Certificates.
At any time, a Party may deliver written notice to the other Party requesting that that Party
certify in writing that, to the best of its knowledge: (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect
and is binding on the Party; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or
in writing or, if this Agreement has been amended, the Party providing the certification shall
identify the amendments or modifications; and (iii) the requesting Party is not in Default in the
performance of its obligations under this Agreement and no event or situation has occurred that
with the passage of time or the giving of Notice or both would constitute a Default or, if such is
not the case, then the other Party shall describe the nature and amount of the actual or prospective
Default.
The Party requested to furnish an estoppel certificate shall execute and return the certificate
within thirty (30) days following receipt. Requests for the City to furnish an estoppel certificate
shall include reimbursement for all administrative costs incurred by the City including reasonable
attorney's fees incurred by the City in furnishing an estoppels certificate.
14.6 Rules of Construction.
The singular includes the plural; the masculine and neuter include the feminine; "shall" is
mandatory; and "may" is permissive.
22
22-143
14.7 Time Is of the Essence.
Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement as to which time is an
element.
14.8 Waiver.
The failure by a Party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this
Agreement by the other Party, and failure by a Party to exercise its rights upon a Default by the
other Party, shall not constitute a waiver of that Party's right to demand strict compliance by the
other Party in the future.
14.9 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be
identical and may be introduced in evidence or used for any other purpose without any other
counterpart, but all of which shall together constitute one (1) and the same agreement.
14.10 Entire Agreement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all
prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, between the Parties with respect to the
subject matter addressed in this Agreement.
14.11 Severability.
The Parties intend that each and every obligation of the Parties is interdependent and
interrelated with the other, and if any provision of this Agreement or the application of the
provision to any Party or circumstances shall be held invalid or unenforceable to any extent, it is
the intention of the Parties that the remainder of this Agreement or the application of the provision
to persons or circumstances shall be rendered invalid or unenforceable. The Parties intend that no
Party shall receive any of the benefits of the Agreement without the full performance by such Party
of all of its obligations provided for under this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, the Parties intend that Property Owner and Developer shall not receive any of the
benefits of this Agreement if any of Property Owner or Developer's obligations are rendered void
or unenforceable as the result of any third party litigation, and City shall be free to exercise its
legislative discretion to amend or repeal the Development Regulations applicable to the Property
and Property Owner and Developer shall cooperate as required, despite this Agreement, should
third party litigation result in the nonperformance of Property Owner or Developer's obligations
under this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 14.11 shall apply regardless of whether the
Effective Date occurs and after the Termination Date.
14.12 Construction.
This Agreement has been drafted after negotiation and revision. City, Property Owner,
and Developer are sophisticated parties who were represented by independent counsel throughout
the negotiations and Property Owner and Developer had the opportunity to be so represented and
voluntarily chose to not be so represented. City, Property Owner, and Developer agree and
acknowledge that the terms of this Agreement are fair and reasonable, taking into account their
23
22-144
respective purposes, terms, and conditions. This Agreement shall therefore be construed as a
whole consistent with its fair meaning and applicable principle or presumptions of contract
construction or interpretation, if any, shall be used to construe the whole or any part of this
Agreement in favor of or against any Party.
14.13 Successors and Assigns; Constructive Notice and Acceptance.
The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement
shall inure to, all successors in interest to the Parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this
Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the
land. Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act hereunder with regard to Development
of the Property: (i) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property; (ii) runs
with the Property and each portion thereof; and (iii) is binding upon each Party and each successor
in interest during its ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. Every person or entity who
now or later owns or acquires any right, title, or interest in any part of the Project or the Property
is and shall be conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to every provision of this
Agreement. This Section 14.13 applies regardless of whether the instrument by which such person
or entity acquires the interest refers to or acknowledges this Agreement and regardless of whether
such person or entity has expressly entered into an assignment and assumption agreement as
provided for in Article 11.
14.14 No Third Party Beneficiaries.
The only Parties to this Agreement are City, Property Owner, and Developer. This
Agreement does not involve any third -party beneficiaries, and it is not intended and shall not be
construed to benefit or be enforceable by any other person or entity.
14.15 Applicable Law and Venue.
This Agreement shall be construed and enforced consistent with the internal laws of the
State of California, without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action at law or in equity
arising under this Agreement or brought by any Party for the purpose of enforcing, construing, or
determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior
Court of the County of Orange, State of California, or the United States District Court for the
Central District of California. The Parties waive all provisions of law providing for the removal
or change of venue to any other court.
14.16 Section Headings.
All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect
construction or interpretation of this Agreement.
14.17 Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits.
All of the Recitals are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Exhibits A and
B are attached to this Agreement and incorporated by this reference as follows:
N
22-145
EXHIBIT
DESCRIPTION
DESIGNATION
A
Legal Description of Property
B
Depiction of the Property
14.18 Recordation.
The City Clerk of City shall record this Agreement and any amendment, modification, or
cancellation of this Agreement in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange
within the period required by California Government Code section 65868.5 and City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.090. The date of recordation of this Agreement shall not
modify or amend the Effective Date or the Termination Date.
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
25
22-146
SIGNATURE PAGE TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
1600 DOVE LP, a Nevada limited partnership
By: _
Naive:
Title:
By: _
Name:
Title:
GS 1600 DOVE LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company
By: _
Name:
Title:
By: _
Name:
Title:
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Aaron . Harp, CiU Attorney
Jennifer Hernandez, Attorney for Property Owner
"DEVELOPER"
THE PICERNE GROUP, INC., a Delaware
corporation
By: _
Name:
Title:
By: _
Name:
Title:
"CITY"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal
corporation and charter city
Will O'Neill, Mayor
26
22-147
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of
On , 20 before me, , Notary
Public, personally appeared , who proved to me
on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon
behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (seal)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of
On , 20 before me, , Notary
Public, personally appeared , proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon
behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(seal)
22-148
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299, PAGES
15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE;
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE
RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE
PURPOSE OF EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-149
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
42�.!fl Folk
DOLPHIN -STRIKER WAY
A.
LEGEND
G STORIES Of RESIDENTILk-
OVER PARXING
7�
COURTYARD
-4
—t -
RE RI ME TER LANDSCAPE
22-150
Attachment D
Resolution No. 2024-64
22-151
RESOLUTION NO. 2024- 64
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THE
RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET PROJECT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE
AERONAUTICS ACT AND OVERRIDING THE ORANGE
COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION'S
DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE
AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN (PA2022-0297)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the
Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and
all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the
State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Piceme Group ("Applicant'), with
respect to the property located at 1600 Dove Street and legally described in Exhibit "A,"
which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to allow the development of a
multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units ("Project"), which require
the following approvals:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") -A request to add 49 dwelling units above the
current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
Number 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating 49
residential dwelling units to the Property;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") - A plan specifying how the
Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a
50% increase in density including a request for three development standard
waivers related to height, park dedication requirements, and overall residential
density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park
in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and Government Code Section
65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
22-152
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 2 of 8
• Development Agreement ("DA") -A development agreement, pursuant to Section
15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would
provide the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and provide
negotiated public benefits to the City;
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
• Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 9") - An
addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts
resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the
General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community
(PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7 with a residential overlay;
WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending
the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required;
WHEREAS, the Property is located in the Airport Area Environs ("Airport Area")
and is one of the 62 new housing opportunity sites allocated in the certified 6th Cycle
Housing Element;
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the City Council approved Resolutions Nos.
2023-72 and 2023-73 and Ordinances Nos. 2023-20 and 2023-21, authorizing
amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20
(Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community Development
Plan (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-
60) (6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments) to update
the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement
Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 ("EIR No. 617"), allowing residential
units identified by the certified 6th Cycle Newport Beach Housing Element to be located
within the 65 decibel ("65 dBA") Community Noise Equivalent Level ("CNEL") noise
contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617, and incorporating additional noise attenuation
measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport ("JWA");
22-153
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 3 of 8
WHEREAS, the Property is located within the 60 dBA noise contour CNEL as a
shown in the updated noise contour maps adopted as part of the 6th Cycle Housing
Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 23,
2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2024-008 by a majority vote (4 ayes, 1 nay) recommending the City Council approve
the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires
the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC")
to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan
("AELUP");
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024, the ALUC determined (6 ayes, 0 nays) the Project
is inconsistent with the following provisions of the AELUP:
A. Section 2.1.1 (Aircraft Noise), which provides that the "aircraft noise emanating
from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants
within the vicinity of an airport";
B. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones), which provides "the purpose of
these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by
establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational
safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or
recreating near JWA"; and
C. Section 3.2.1 (General Policy), which provides that "[w]ithin the boundaries of
the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP [if
it] ... (1) [p]laces people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise [or]
(2) concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... ";
22-154
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 4 of 8
WHEREAS, the ALUC's determination is attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and
incorporated herein by reference;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council
may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it
makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670
of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly
expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's
exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the
extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on July 9, 2024, in the
City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC
Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 2024-45 by unanimous vote (5 ayes, 2 recusals) to notify the ALUC and State
Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's
intent to override the ALUC's inconsistency finding;
WHEREAS, a notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency
determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-45 was sent via certified mail and emailed
to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024;
WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the
City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the
Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676 which are attached hereto
as Exhibits "C" and "D" respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on August 27, 2024, in
the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice
of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings)
of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting.
22-155
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 5 of 8
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds the Project consistent with the purposes of
Section 21670 of the CPUC and the AELUP to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use
measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards
within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted
to incompatible uses and hereby overrides ALUC's determination that the Project is
inconsistent with the AELUP.
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings
A. The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP.
The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of JWA
and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning
Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards are
intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people
and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and ensure
that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.
Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards, and Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4
of the AELUP define the noise exposure in the 60 dBA to 65 CNEL noise contour (Noise
Impact Zone 2) as "Moderate Noise Impact". Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use
Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential uses as "normally consistent" for the 60
dBA CNEL noise contour. The Project is located within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour
as shown on the updated noise contour maps as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element
Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour as
shown on the AELUP. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the
development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use Proximate to
John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC.
Additionally, as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be conditioned
to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure
that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level
of 45 dBA, and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote clearer air without the
opening of windows. These conditions of approval mitigate noise issues for the Project
and are consistent with the 45 dBA interior noise standards, pursuant to Section 3.2.3 of
the AELUP.
22-156
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 6 of 8
B. The proposed Amendments are consistent with the safety standards of the
AELUP.
Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth zones depicting which
land uses are acceptable in various portions of JWA environs. Allowed uses in Safety
Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and
similar uses with very high intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's
schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated
with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence.
The Project is located within Safety Zone 6 and residential uses are allowed in that zone.
The City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City
acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones in providing, "S 8.6 John Wayne
Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA)
Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land
use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular,
future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone
(Figure S5) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with
aircraft operations."
The Project complies with the policies and regulations within the JWA Airport Planning
Area and follows the safety standards of the AELUP as it is located within Safety Zone 6
and is not within the JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone.
C. The Project is consistent with the height standards of the AELUP.
Section 2.1.3 (Building Height Restrictions) of the AELUP sets forth building height
restrictions. Section 2.1.3 provides that ALUC consider only one standard as provided in
14 Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") Part 77 (also referred to as the Federal
Aviation Regulations). Section 2.1.3 provides that the Federal Aviation Regulations are
the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used. Section 2.1.3
identifies the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") as the single authority for analyzing
project impact on airport or aeronautical operations, or navigational -aid siting, including
interference with navigational -aids or published flight paths and procedures along with
reporting results of such studies and project analyses.
The FAA conducted an aeronautical study for the Project consistent with the Federal
Aviation Regulations. The FAA issued a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation on
October 24, 2023, thereby finding the development does not exceed obstruction
standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. The FAA reviewed the proposed
22-157
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 7 of 8
height of the project assuming an existing site elevation ("SE") of 54 feet, with a proposed
building that is 100 feet above ground level ("AGL"), and 154 feet above mean sea level
("AMSL"). The FAA further found that marking and lighting of the Project are not
necessary for aviation safety. Any increase in height of the structure above the proposed
100-foot building height would require a revised Determination of No Hazard to Air
Navigation from the FAA. Additionally, there are other buildings in the vicinity of the project
that are tallerthan the Project including the adjacent building at 4100 Newport Place Drive
that is approximately 234 feet AMSL and the nearby building at 4545 MacArthur (Hyatt
Regency) that is approximately 225 feet AMSL.
Section 2: Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 was prepared for the
Project in compliance with CEQA set forth in California Public Resources Code Section
21000 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in California Code of
Regulations ("CCR") Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council
Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) to
ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased environmental impacts. On the
basis of the entire environmental record, the Project will not result in any new significant
impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEiR for the General Plan 2006 Update
(SCH No. 2006011119) and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element
Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The potential impacts associated with this Project
would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR and the 2008-2014
City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration. In
addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project
would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than
previously addressed in either the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding potential
for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and
approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project
opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project
applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such
applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and
bear the responsibility for any costs, attomeys' fees, and damages which may be awarded
to a successful challenger.
Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
22-158
Resolution No. 2024-
Page 8 of 8
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 27th day of August, 2024.
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
-wit--ku-
Aaro C. Harp
City Torney
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Orange County Airport Land Use Commission
Inconsistency Determination dated June 25, 2024
Exhibit C — Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use
Commission dated August 8, 2024
Exhibit D — Comment Letter from California Department of
Transportation, Aeronautics Program dated August 7, 2024
22-159
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299, PAGES
15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM,
GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET
FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER
UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND
OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED RECORDED IN
BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-160
Exhibit "B"
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated
June 25, 2024
22-161
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
ORA�COUIITI
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
.1 U� 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626. 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012
June 25, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach Community Development
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: ALUC Determination for the Residences at 1600 Dove Street - City of Newport
Beach General Plan (Land Use) Amendment
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
During the public meeting held on June 20, 2024, the Airport Land Use Commission {ALUC} for
Orange County considered the subject item. The matter was duty discussed, and with a 6-0 vote
(Bresnahan, Monin, Murphy, Beverburg, Sustarsic, Klerna), the Connnission found the
Residences at 1600 Dove Street - City of Newport Beach General Plan (Land Use) Amendment
to be Inconsistent with the Airport Environs Laud Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (AELUp for
JWA) per:
1. Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be
incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport."
2. Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to
support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and
safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards
for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
3. 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land
use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people so that
they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in areas
susceptible to aircraft accidents..."
You may contact us at (949) 252-5170 or at jfitch Roc_ainc_om if you have any questions
regarding this proceeding.
Sincerely,
Julie Fitch
Executive Officer
cc: ALUC
22-162
Exhibit "C"
Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use Commission dated
August 8, 2024
22-163
/ OI.MTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
ORANGE C
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.2S2.SI70 fax: 949.252.6012
August 8, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission
Determination Regarding Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Dear Ms. Westmoreland,
We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated July 10, 2024, and City Council
Resolution No. 2024-45 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County
of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed 1600
Dove Street Residences. In ace'rdance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC
submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule ` findings ',for the above -
referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to
overrule the ALUC.
Please be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states:: "With respect
to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to
Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the
operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury
caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to ovemile the
commission's action or recommendation."
Background
On June 20, 2024, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Residences at 1600 Dove
Street to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne
Airport (JPVA) on a 6-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2,
and 3.2.1. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to
safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the
continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the
adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas
susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect
navigable airspace.
22-164
1600 DDve Steeat Residences
August 8, 2024
Page 2
Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the
Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. The City's
proposed project would increase the maximum height and density of residential uses within the 60
dBA Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), and within Safety Zone 6, This would result
in exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are
inconsistent with the AELUP.
ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included
in Resolution No. 2024-45.
Response to Finding and Fact in Sut)Dort A - Re2ardinv Noise Standards:
Finding of Fact A correctly states that the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP and that the
AELUP identifies residential uses as " normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour.
The ALUC appreciates that, "as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be
conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure
that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45
dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of
windows." However, Section 2,1.1 of the AELUP states "... aircraft noise emanating from airports
may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport,"
and the ALUC believes that increasing the intensity and height of residential uses in the proposed
location would subject future residents to excessive noise.
Response to Fact in Support B - ReRardina Safety:
Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are
acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of
these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility
and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for
persons living, working or recreating near TWA."
The proposed project is located in Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone. According to the
California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in
Safety Zone 6. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report which show
a high number of flights adjacent to the proposed project site, Considering the proposed density,
increased height, and proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, this project
is an inappropriate use for the site.
Response to Fact in Supp A C - Regardine "Intent of the AELUP":
By virtue of being clearly stated in AELUP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0
"Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports
from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the
health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and
as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise
in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC
22-1
1600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
Page 3
members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed 1600 Dove Street
Residences to be inconsistent with the AELUP for ,IWA.
We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to
deciding whether to overrule ALUC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these conuuents.
Sincerely,
Gerald Bresnahan
Gerald Bresnahan
Chairman
cc; Airport Land. Use Commission for Orange County
Jonathan Huff, CattranslDivision of Aeronautics
Signature. —6eYaig &1EMLY,
Geraldllfewahn0 Mug 9,2N4092aPp71
22-1
Exhibit "D"
Comment Letter from California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics
Program dated August 7, 2024
22-167
CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR
California Department of Transportation ,
la
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS 4r*
P.O. BOX 942873, MS-40 aeww,
SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001
(916) 654-4959
W W W .¢ot.c a. 4oy
August 7, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner Electronically Sent
City of Newport Beach <lwestmoreland a@newportbeachca.gov>
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics (Division) thanks the
City of Newport Beach (City) for providing the Notice of Intent, dated July 10, 2024, to overrule
a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has
reported that the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project (Project) is inconsistent with the
Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent
concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2024--45 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support"
related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling
the ALUC's determination, the Division is providing the following comments pursuant to
California Public Utilifies Code (PUC) Section 21676. The Division supports the position of the
ALUC in noting that the City has provided insufficient support for an overrule.
The ALUC has noted the following reasons this Project update is incompatible with the AELUP:
Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be
incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an
airport."
Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to
support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility
and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential
safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
Section 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any
land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people
so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in
areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... "
The Division notes that the intent of the California Airport Lane Use Planning Handbook
(Handbook) guidance aims to ensure the safety of both the aviation community and the
community members surrounding an airport. Within this framework, the ALUC has determined
that the City has inadequately addressed the safety concerns related to the proposed
significant increase of housing density within airport safety zones.
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network tIna f serves a]I people and respects the environment"
22-168
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
August 7, 2024
Page 2
The Division notes of the 282 proposed units on the 2.49 acre parcel, all are within the 60 CNEL
noise contour. While this is nominally allowed by the AELUP, the Division strongly recommends
that the Lead Agency or authority having jurisdiction require developers to adequately design
structures to ensure interior noise levels below 45 dB and to hold final permitting until the
developer can demonstrate adequate interior noise attenuation. Separate from interior noise
reduction is exterior noise, which cannot be mitigated, and must be addressed through
avigation easements to ensure that airport operations are not adversely impacted by noise
complaints from new residents.
The Division concurs with the ALUC's determination that the Housing Element Implementation
Program Amendments Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John
Wayne Airport. This conclusion is based on insufficient findings by the City and the safety
concerns for public health and welfare posed by allowing housing in incompatible safety
zones and noise contours.
The Division also notes that this is the seventh proposed overrule since 2020 for a component of
a larger redevelopment development program in Newport Beach. This ongoing pattern of
overrules raises concerns about the cumulative impact on safety. Each overrule potentially
compromises the safety of both aviation users at Jahn Wayne Airport (JWA) and the new
residents of Newport Beach, by allowing developments that may not fully account for the
necessary safety and noise considerations.
In addition, PUC Section 21675.1(f) provides: If a city or county overrules the commission
pursuant to subdivision(d) with respect to a publicly owned airport that the city or county does
not operate, the operator of the airport is not liable for damages to property or personal injury
resulting from the city's or county's decision to proceed with the action, regulation, or permit.
Please note: These comments are to be included in the public record of any decision to
overrule the ALUC. If you have questions or if we may be of further assistance, please contact
me by email at jonothan.huff@dot.ca.gov or call (916) 879-6528.
Sincerely,
Originally signed by
Jonathan Huff
Associate Transportation Planner
Caltra ns Aeronautics
c: Julie Fitch, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission
<JFitch @ocair.com>;
Matthew Friedman, Chief of Aviation Planning, Caltrans Aeronautics
m o tth ew. fried ma n@d ot. ca.pov>
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment"
22-169
Attachment E
Planning Commission Staff Report (No Attachments)
22-170
PO CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
n PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
�GoftH'P�,
SUBJECT: Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
■ General Plan Amendment
■ Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
■ Traffic Study
■ Development Agreement
■ Environmental Impact Report Addendum
SITE LOCATION: 1600 Dove Street
APPLICANT: The Picerne Group
OWNERS: 1600 Dove LP and GS 1600 Dove LLC
May 23, 2024
Agenda Item No. 4
PLANNER: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
949-644-3234, Westmoreland(a)_newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Affordable
Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), Traffic Study, and Development Agreement (DA) for
the future development of a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling
units at 1600 Dove Street, in the Airport Area (Project). No specific design for the Project is
included in this application. The Project would require a future Site Development Review
by the Planning Commission prior to building permit issuance.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing;
2) Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through
the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program
Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No.
2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial
Study/Negative Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with
Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an
addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental
documentation for the Project; and
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-008 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City
Council adoption of Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9, and approval of
General Plan Amendment, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study,
1 22-171
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 2
and Development Agreement, for the Project located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-
0297).
2 22-172
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
m
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
3 i y° qO 11 - i
12
mu 12 —�—CC 11
ANOMAL Qp
mu R
MllM s 3 R
4
PG 11 3
3 C Q�av
ea WPv:,z. 1 n u �n6
t?J
14
MUM2 yj e Y
LOCATION
ON -SITE
GENERAL PLAN
Mixed Use Horizontal
MU-H2
ZONING
Newport Place Planned
CommunityPC-11
CURRENT USE
Office
NORTH
MU-H2
PC-11
350-unit Newport Crossings
(graded site
SOUTH
MU-H2
PC-11 =F
-Parking structure and office
EAST
MU-H2
PC-11
Medical office
WEST
General Commercial
Office (CO-G)/MU-H2
PC-11
Office
S 22-173
4
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 4
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting
The 2.49-acre project site is located within the Residential Overlay zone of Newport
Place Planned Community (PC-11) and currently improved with one 4-story, 60,675-
square-foot office building and a surface parking lot. The property is somewhat
rectangular in shape, with a primary frontage on Dove Street to the west, bordered by
the approved Newport Crossings Residential Project (PA2017-107) and Martingale Way
to the north, Dolphin -Striker Way to the south, and an existing commercial development
to the east.
Project Description
The Applicant, the Picerne Group, seeks the following approvals that would allow future
development of a seven -story, multiple -unit residential development consisting of up to
282 apartment units:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA)- A request to add 49 dwelling units above
the current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly
12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating the 49
residential dwelling units to the Property;
• 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 50% increase in density including a request for three development
standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall
residential density along with two development concessions related to the
payment of park in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32
(Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Government Code
Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
• Development Agreement (DA) — A Development Agreement between the
Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement
Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right
to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public
benefits to the City;
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental
Impact Report (Addendum No. 9) - Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing
Ordinance) of the NBMC.
5 22-175
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 5
The applicant has provided conceptual exhibits showing the anticipated design types
and possible site plan that may be presented as part of the future Project (Attachment
4). Figures 1 and 2 show the conceptual plans. Should the applications be approved by
the City Council, future development of the Project would be required to comply with the
Residential Overlay development standards set forth in the PC-11 and subject to Site
Development review by the Planning Commission. The applicant's full project description
and letters of support are provided as Attachment No. PC 2.
CJSv`\' 4�. Rr SIAi YTI�LL �PA111YFNi5 / y
�� V 4i ririiii arNirr ��Y'il� c
r
• � � iJ o
� m
1� DOLPHIN -STRIKER WAY LEGEND
F
6 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL
_. ._ .. - as-.f .ra•.r .y OVER PARKIN
J COURTYARD
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
0 22-176
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
XWOM
M o n r tR
��r ryry q • bi s
4.
j1 � lll�r L A3 Y* 1
fill
RAI
.06
�.
Figure 2: Conceptual Elevations
DISCUSSION
General Plan Consistency
The subject property is located in the Airport Area and is currently designated as Mixed
Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land Use Element. The Mixed -Use
Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may
include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings,
industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses to a majority of
properties in the Airport Area. The MU-H2 designation also allows a maximum of 2,200
residential units as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or industrial uses at a
maximum density of 50 units per net acre. Any eligible density bonus allowed by
Government Code Section 65915 (State density bonus law) and NBMC Chapter 20.32
(Density Bonus) are not included in the 2,200-unit policy allowance.
While the proposed Project is allowed by the General Plan, the applicant is requesting
an amendment to Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to
increase the number of dwelling units allocated to the project site by 49 dwelling units,
for a total of 188 dwelling units. The base density currently allotted to the property is 139
dwelling units. This density is based on the conversion of the existing 60,675-square-
foot office building, consistent with the City's adopted land use conversion factors. The
applicant also proposes a 50% density bonus to increase the total unit count to 282
7 22-177
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 7
pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20. 32 (Density Bonus)
and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The dwelling unit
calculations are summarized below in Table 1.
Table 1 — Dwelling Unit Summary
Units Based on Existing Nonresidential Uses
139
Additional Units Requested via GPA
49
Total Base Units
188
Density Bonus(50%
94
Total Units Allowed
282
Total Units Proposed
282
Presently, there are a total of 209 units remaining and available to be entitled in the
Airport Area 2,200-unit policy allowance. The requested 49 GPA units would be in
addition to the 2,200-unit policy allowance. With the approval of this project, there would
be 70 (209-139=70) dwelling units remaining (exclusive of density bonus units and units
authorized through General Plan Amendments). Residential units approved, proposed,
and remaining within the MU-H2 designation of the Airport Area are listed in the Table 2
below.
Airport
Base Units
Project
Density
Totals with
Residential Development Allocation
Replacement
Additive
Transferred
Bonus
Density
Units
Units
Units
Total Units
Units
Bonus*
General Plan Unit Limit (MU-H2)
1,650
550
0
2,200
Approved Projects
Uptown Newport
632
290
-77
845
322
1,167
Newport Crossings
259
0
0
259
91
350
Residences at Airport Village
329
0
0
329
115
444
Residences at 4400 Von Karman
260
0
260
52
312
Residences at 1300 Bristol
77
0
+77
154
39
193
Residences at 1400 Bristol
89
0
0
89
77
229**
Residences at 1401 Quail
52
0
0
52
15
67
Projects Under Review
Residences at 1600 Dove
139
0
0
139
94
282***
Remaining Development Allocation
70
0
70
*Project totals reflect actual proposed project inclusive of density bonus units and any GPA units. However, the
density bonus units and GPA units are not restricted by the 2,200 residential unit limit identified in the 2006
General Plan.
**Total includes GPA for 64 dwelling units.
***Total includes GPA for 49 dwelling units.
2 22-178
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 8
The future residential development as envisioned is consistent with existing surrounding
uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, as it would introduce
additional residential land uses in the Airport Area which includes a diverse mix of land
uses including the gradual multiple residential opportunities.
The GPA to increase dwelling units does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the
overall detriment of the community given the subject property's size, location, and
surrounding uses. The existing office building on -site was built in the 1970's and there
are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs of the
community. The Project would increase the City's housing stock including the provision
of 28 units that will be affordable to lower incomes.
The General Plan contains a number of policies that provide for the orderly evolution of
the Airport Area, from a business park to a mixed -use district with cohesive residential
villages integrated within the existing fabric of office, industrial, retail, and airport -related
businesses. This project site was identified as a site for mixed -use development within
the General Plan.
Housing Element
The Housing Element identifies adequate sites to accommodate its fair share allocation
for the 6th Cycle Housing Element to accommodate housing growth needs by income
categories. The project site is identified as a Housing Inventory Site 80. Figure B-3 of
the Housing Element (below) displays the capacity and opportunity within the Airport
Area which can help accommodate a portion of the City's Regional Housing needs
Allocation (RHNA). Ultimately, the anticipated residential development implements the
certified Housing Element and aids the City in its goal to provide new housing
opportunities.
9 22-179
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 9
Figure B-3: Airport Area Environs —Sites Inventory
Site Inventory:
Airport Area Environs
LEGEND
[ity Boundary
O sth Cycle Sites
Pipeline Praiects
u Opportunity sites
Key Map
Feet
NO H 0 500 1,000
Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination
The project site is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan
(AELUP), therefore, the overseeing agency, Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC),
must review the proposed GPA pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and
Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine
whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council acting on the
Project. Staff anticipates review of the project by the ALUC on June 20, 2024.
Staff believes the Project is consistent with the requirements and standards in the
AELUP. The project site is located within the 60 decibel (dBA) community noise
equivalent level (CNEL) contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the
General Plan and in the AELUP, where residential development is allowed.
Additionally, the subject site is located within John Wayne Airport Safety Zone 6 which
allows residential uses. Lastly, the future residential development at the subject site will
be required to comply with the noise -related development standards set forth in Section
20.30.080(F) of the NBMC applicable to residential uses proximate to John Wayne
Airport.
The draft Planning Commission resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) includes facts in
support of a finding of consistency of relevant Airport Area policies. Furthermore, the
EIR Addendum includes a comprehensive analysis of all relevant General Plan policies.
The Project, as proposed, is consistent with all relevant General Plan policies except as
10 22-180
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 10
waived through the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) pursuant to State
Density Bonus Law and NBMC Section 20.42 (Density Bonus) (see AHIP discussion
below).
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to
the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases
allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area,
increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases
residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases
resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other
amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown
in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that
proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the
Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all
General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine
if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds
indicated above.
The Project is the second General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L1 within the last
10 years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The
proposed amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the
square footage of non-residential floor area. Density bonus units are not included in
Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
The 49 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and
19 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail"
ITE 11th Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No
credit is given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office
floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less
the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually
does not exceed the Charter Section 423 thresholds. A summary of the analysis is
provided below in Table 3.
11 22-181
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 11
Table 3 — Charter 423 Analvsis
Projects
Description
Thresholds
Nonresidential
Dwelling
AM Peak
PM Peak
SF Change
Unit
Hour
Hour
Change
Change
Change
Prior Amendments
Residences at 1400
General Commercial (CO-G)
0
64
24
25
Bristol Street
to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -
(PA 2022-0296)
H2) and GPA for 64 additional
Approved April 9, 2024
units
100% Totals
0
64
24
25
80% Totals
0
51
19
2
Remaining Capacity
40,000
49
66
65
Without a Vote
Residences at 1600
GPA for 49 additional units
0
49
18
19
Dove Street
Subject Project
Thresholds
-
No
No
No
Exceeded?
As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of
the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA.
Tribal Consultation (SB-18)
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government is
required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General
Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of
preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from
the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the
proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 23, 2023.
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to
Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project
will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period, which expired on April
26, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes: the Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen
Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Based on
consultation with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of approval have
been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural
Resources.
Newport Place Planned Community (Zoning Code) Consistency
The project site is located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) in the
Residential Overlay.
The Overlay allows for multi -unit residential development as a stand-alone use provided
that it includes a minimum of 15% of the base density for lower income households. The
future development project, as currently proposed, would provide this minimum number
12 22-182
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 12
of affordable units by providing 28 dwelling units as affordable for very -low-income
households (188 base units x 15% = 28.2 = 28 units). The Overlay also contains
development standards for multi -unit residential development, including density, height,
setbacks, parking, signage, airport noise compatibility, amenities, and landscaping.
The Overlay limits the density for a residential development to be between 30 and 50
dwelling units per acre. The Project includes 139 base units or 55.8 dwelling units per
acre, not including density bonus units or the requested units through the requested
GPA. The base density with the requested GPA results in a density of 75.5 dwelling
units per acre. The overall density of the project including the density bonus units is 113
units per acre. Both the base density and density bonus units are not consistent with the
PC Text density requirement; however, the Applicant is requesting a development
standard waiver pursuant to the NBMC and State Density Bonus Law. Furthermore, the
proposed building will likely exceed the 55-foot maximum height allowed by PC-11, and
therefore a development standard waiver is requested for this height restriction to allow
future development of up to 100 feet.
The future residential development is subject to a Major Site Development Review and
will be required to comply with all other development standards of the PC-11 Residential
Overlay.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The applicant has prepared a draft Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP),
dated April 22, 2024 (Exhibit D of Attachment No. PC 1) to illustrate compliance with
the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place
Planned Community and density bonus allowances pursuant NBMC Chapter 20.32
(Density Bonus Code) and Government Code Section 65915-65918 (Density Bonus
Law). Because the Project has not been designed yet, additional incentives or
development standards may be requested as part of a future site development review
and subject to approval of any changes through an AHIP amendment.
Consistent with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay, 15% or
28 units of the Project's 188 base units would be set aside as affordable units to very -
low -income households for 55 years.
Incentive/Concession Requests. -
The 15% allocation of very -low-income households makes the Project entitled to a
density bonus of 50% (94 units) above the maximum number of units allowed by the
General Plan and requested GPA increase.
In addition to the 94 density bonus units requested, the Project is entitled to receive
three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient,
and actual cost reductions. The applicant requests the following two incentives at this
time:
is 22-183
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 13
1. Partial In -Lieu Park Fee Waiver. Pursuant to General Plan Policy General Plan
Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13, the Applicant is required to dedicate 0.50 acre of
land for a neighborhood park or pay an in -lieu fee for the City to acquire and
improve parks in the Airport Area. The applicant is required to pay $1,837,500 for
the in -lieu park fee (0.50-acre park equivalent). The Applicant is contributing
approximately $714,212 for this purpose; therefore, an incentive/concession is
required to waive the remaining fee. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would
allow the applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area,
while providing identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable
units feasible. Because the request includes a waiver of a City imposed fee, the
Council has the discretion to approve, deny, or modify this concession pursuant
to Density Bonus Law.
2. Affordable unit mix that does not meet NBMC Section 20.32.110 (Design and
Distribution of Affordable Units). This section requires affordable units in a
density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the residential
development as a whole. See previous discussion regarding unit mix. Granting
this incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project
cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental subsidy costs associated with
the two -bedroom units and affording additional rental income for the project to
ensure financial feasibility.
Development Standard Waivers
In addition to the density bonus units and financial concessions, the Project is entitled to
receive unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards, including parking
reductions, if the development standard would physically prevent the project from being
built at the permitted density. In this case, the Applicant requests waivers of the
following three development standards:
1. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires
a public park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a
minimum one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.49-
acre project site is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park. The City
has granted this dedication waiver four times previously with the Newport Airport
Village Planned Community, the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street, Residences
at 1400 Bristol, and Residences at 1401 Quail projects.
2. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 and PC-11 limits
residential density between 30-50 units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion
units, the density would not comply at 55.8 dwelling units per acre. Including the
proposed GPA units, the conversion units, and density bonus the resulting
density would be 113 units per acre exceeding the limit and a waiver is
necessary to implement the project. Again, the City has previously granted this
policy waiver allowing excess density three times with the Newport Airport Village
1 4 22-184
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 14
Planned Community, the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street, and Residences at
1400 Bristol projects.
3. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building
height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is
necessary to accommodate 282 residential units within seven stories. The
Project is anticipated to have a height of 100 feet from established grade.
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Pursuant to General Plan Implementation Program 12.1, a fiscal impact analysis was
prepared for the project by Applied Development Economics dated April 17, 2024
(Attachment PC 3). The fiscal impact model used in the report calculates public service
impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment
base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues
that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes,
sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees.
The report concludes that the future residential rental project would generate a positive
fiscal impact for the City, compared to the negative fiscal impact of the existing office
use of the site. Annually, the existing office use generates a negative fiscal impact of
about $104,661 per year and the residential development would anticipate generating a
positive fiscal impact of approximately $41,732. This is based on the expected socio-
economic profile of the future tenants. A positive fiscal impact for a for -rent property is
not consistent with the original fiscal analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General
Plan, although in recent years some other very high value luxury residential projects
have shown a positive fiscal benefit. If the anticipated resident profile (i.e. demographic
profile of residents) turns out to be more like the average Newport Beach demographic
(e.g. older population), or if it changes in that direction over time, then the residential
development would have a lower, or possibly negative impact on the City budget.
However, even so, the 2006 General Plan anticipated an increased development
potential for commercial and lodging uses, in addition to the new residential units it
would permit. The net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan
compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a
positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7 million per year.' Thus, any
negative fiscal impacts of future residential development can potentially be mitigated as
long as commercial development keeps pace elsewhere throughout the City.
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.a (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, a development agreement is required as the proposed project includes a
General Plan Amendment and the development of 50 or more residential units.
Additionally, the project will be required to pay public benefit fees as part of the
'Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis Land Use Element Amendment, April 4, 2014. p. 3.
1 5 22-185
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 15
Development Agreement. The project would also provide much needed housing
opportunities in the City in furtherance of the certified Housing Element including 28
rental units affordable to very -low income households.
The applicant requests a 10-year term of agreement. The agreement provides
assurance that the applicant may proceed with the proposed project in accordance with
existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of approval. Additionally, the
agreement helps the applicant avoid a waste of resources and escalated costs of the
proposed project while encouraging a commitment to private participation in
comprehensive planning. Staff supports the requested 10-year term.
The DA provides vested rights to develop the project and the City will finalize the
payment of negotiated public benefit fees per each residential dwelling unit. The total
fee will have three components: a public safety fee, a reduced park in -lieu fee, and a
general public benefit fee (Table 4, below). The public safety fee will assist the City with
the costs of an additional ambulance unit that will be stationed at Fire Station No. 7 that
will serve this area or other public safety needs. The park fee will be used consistent
with City Council Policy B-1 (Park Fee Policy) or for the future acquisition and
development of a neighborhood park in the Airport Area. The public benefit fee will be
used solely at the City Council's discretion. The public benefit fee would be subject to
annual adjustments, based on the CPI Index after two years, and would be payable at
building permit issuance or prior to occupancy.
Table 4: Projected Public Benefit Fees
Category
Fee
Public Safety
$285,760
Reduced Park In -Lieu
$714,212
General Public Benefit
$3,555,268
Total
$4,555,240
Finally, the agreement includes all mandatory elements, including public benefits that
are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the
City's General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO)
NBMC Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) requires a traffic study to be prepared
prior to issuance of building permits if a proposed project generates in excess of 300
new average daily trips (ADT).
Ganddini Group Inc. has prepared a traffic study dated August 14, 2023 (Exhibit F of
Attachment No. PC 1), under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer, pursuant to
the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and its implementing guidelines. The traffic study
is focused on the conditions one year after project occupancy, or five years after project
1-0 22-186
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 16
approval for larger projects not expected to be complete within five years. Baseline
traffic conditions for a TPO traffic study include previously approved projects in the City.
The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 14
existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine. The
Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 622 daily trips,
including 12 peak a.m. trips and 22 peak p.m. trips. When these trips are distributed to
these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as
the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any
impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to
operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS). Additionally, the Traffic Study includes
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for informational purposes only. An analysis of
VMT was not required as a part of the CEQA Addendum because the adopted Program
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), adopted in 2006, did not utilize VMT analysis.
Nonetheless, the informational analysis concludes that the project is in an area mapped
with low residential VMT per capita. Therefore, the project is presumed to have a less
than significant impact on VMT since it satisfies the City established screening criteria.
Furthermore, the TPO requires findings that, based on the weight of the evidence in the
administrative record, including the traffic study, the proposed project complies with the
TPO. Findings related to the preparation of the traffic study are provided in the draft
resolution for project approval (Attachment No. PC 1).
Environmental Review
On July 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75, thereby certifying
the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in
compliance with the CEQA set forth in the California Public Resources Code Section
21000 et seq. and its implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of
Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines) and City Council Policy
K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City
prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This PEIR
analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan, and the goals and policies of
10 general plan elements.
Additionally, on November 22, 2011, the City Council adopted General Plan
Amendment No. GP2008-003, thereby approving the City of Newport Beach Housing
Element Update (2008-2014) and its associated Housing Element Initial Study/Negative
Declaration.
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR or prior Negative Declaration has been certified
for a project, no subsequent EIR or other analysis is required unless the lead agency
determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or
more of the following:
1-7 22-187
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 17
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe
than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to
adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents
decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The City contracted with an environmental consultant (Psomas, Inc.) to prepare an
Addendum to the PEIR. The entire Addendum and its technical appendixes are
available online at the City's website at: www.newportbeachca.gov/cega. The
conclusion of the Addendum analysis supports the finding that no additional
environmental documentation is required by CEQA.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the project will not result in any
new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General
Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) or the Housing Element Initial
Study/Negative Declaration. All potential impacts associated with this Project would
either be the same or less than those described in either the PEIR or Negative
Declaration that have been appropriately mitigated. In addition, there are no substantial
changes to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would
result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either
12 22-188
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 18
the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe
significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section
15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the
appropriate environmental document for the project.
Summary
Staff believes the findings for project approval can be made, with specific conditions of
approval for the AHIP and TPO Study. The proposed Project is consistent with the
existing MU-H2 General Plan Land Use designation and its land use policies related
residential developments in the Airport Area. The proposed project is also consistent
with the recently updated Noise Element and AELUP.
The existing Newport Place Residential Overlay allows multi -unit uses subject to
approval of a site development review, which would be requested once the Project is
designed. The site development review will ensure the design of the future project will
be implemented consistent with all applicable development and design standards.
Ultimately, the Project will lead to the redevelopment of underperforming office with a
multi -unit residential apartment development that will include affordable units consistent
with the Overlay and in furtherance of the adopted 611 Cycle Housing Element.
Alternatives
1. The Planning Commission has the discretion to recommend changes to the
proposed Project to address any areas of concern.
2. The Planning Commission can also recommend denial if the Project's
consistency with the MU-H2 and/or other applicable Airport Area policies are not
in evidence. If the Planning Commission chooses to deny the project, findings
must be made consistent with the Housing Accountability Act (Government Code
Section 65589.5) and Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915).
Therefore, if after consideration of all written and oral evidence presented, the
Planning Commission desires to either disapprove or impose a condition that the
project be developed at a lower density or with any other conditions that would
adversely impact feasibility of the proposed project, the Planning Commission
must articulate the factual basis for making the following findings and direct staff
to return with a revised resolution incorporating the articulated findings and
factual basis for the decision:
a. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon
the public health or safety. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse
impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact,
based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards,
policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed
complete.
19 22-189
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Page 19
b. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse
impact without rendering the development unaffordable to affordable
households financially infeasible.
Piihlir. NntirP
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and
waterways) including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at
City Hall and on the city website.
Prepared by:
Liz Wes moreland, AICP
Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS
Submitted by:
J*6e Murillo, AICP
Acting Deputy Community Development Director
PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2 Applicant's Project Description and Letters of Support
PC 3 Fiscal Impact Memorandum
PC 4 Conceptual Exhibits
20 22-190
Attachment F
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
22-191
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING — 6:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER- 6:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Langford
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Tristan Harris,
Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, and Commissioner
David Salene
ABSENT: Commissioner Lee Lowrey
Staff Present: Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Acting
Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murillo, Assistant City Attorney
Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Senior Planner Liz
Westmoreland, Associate Planner Joselyn Perez, Department Assistant Savannah
Martinez, and Department Assistant Jasmine Leon
I PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
V. UEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None
VI. CONSE ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1 UTES OF APRIL 18, 2024
Recommended Action: Approve and file
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Secretary Harris to approve the minutes of April
18, 2024.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Lang"'
rd, Kosene, and Salene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Lowrey
ITEM NO. 2 PETTEY FAMILY TRUST ENCROACH ENT (PA2024-0067)
Site Location: 521 Larkspur Avenue
Summary:
A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 to retain existing and cori-struct new non -compliant
private improvements consisting of 3-foot-tall vinyl fencing and 6-font-tall vinyl fencing
encroaching up to 6-feet and 2-foot 6-inches, respectively, within the 50-foot vide Third Avenue
public right-of-way. The Third Avenue right-of-way is approximately 10 feet from #iie face of curb
to the property line. City Council Policy L-6 prohibits the existing and proposed new vinyl fencing
to a 1-foot projection into the right-of-way and limiting encroachments to 36-inches maxo�ium.
Recommended Actions:
Pagel of 7
22-192
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) (Preliminary Review), and Section 15303 Class 3
(New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, because
it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
2. Waive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, to retain existing
and construct new non -compliant private improvements consisting of 3-foot-tall and 6-
foot -tall vinyl fencing that encroach into the Third Avenue public rights -of -way, contingent
Pon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process being met (Attachment No. PC
1 . and
3. Ado Resolution No. PC2024-009 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving
Encroa\Publ
mit No. N2024-0154.
City Traffic Engineer layed the request by the homeowner for private improvements in
the public right-of-walocation, project scope, findings from a review by Public Works,
support of the waiverorks, and condition of approval for anencroachment agreement
within a year of appro
In response to Secretary Harris'\question, City Traffic Engineer Sommers stated that the
encroachment agreement will allow th�City to take the land back for public improvements at the
expense of the homeowner.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's questioN City Traffic Engineer Sommers clarified that the 6-foot
fence is being relocated on the property to Im ove the sight distance coming out of the driveway.
There were no ex-parte communications disclose\byCd
mmissioners.
There was no public comment.
Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and secondeissioner Salene to approve the item as
recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Rosene, and S lene
NOES:
None
RECUSED:
None
ABSENT:
Lowrey
ITEM NO. 3 SMITH FAMILY TRUST ENCROACHMENT (PA2
Site Location: 3015 Cliff Drive
Summary:
A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 to retain private improvements cons)�ting of a various
retaining walls, steps, and pilasters with lights that encroach up to 4 feet within t e 40-foot-wide
La Jolla Drive public right-of-way and up to 13 feet within the 80-foot-wide Cliff Dri public right-
of-way. The La Jolla Drive public right-of-way is approximately 5-foot wide from the ce of curb
to property line and the Cliff Drive right-of-way is approximately 13-foot wide from t face of
curb to the property line. City Council Policy L-6 prohibits retaining walls, steps, and ' asters
with lights since structures are limited to a one 1-foot projection into the right-of-way, max um
height of 36-inches, and prohibits lighting.
Page 2 of 7
22-193
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2ESC4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Recommended Actions:
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) (Preliminary Review) of the CEQA Guidelines,
because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
2. Wive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, to retain non-
compli-ant private improvements consisting of varying height retaining walls, steps, and
pilasters vvit.h lights that encroach into the La Jolla Drive and Cliff Drive public rights -of -
way, conting-rat upon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process being met
(Attachment No`-F C 1); and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-010 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving
Encroachment Permit No. N2024-0163.
City Traffic Engineer Sommers relayed the quest by the homeowner related to private
improvements in the public right-of-way, findings frOm, a review by Public Works, and condition of
approval for an encroachment agreement within a yearXapproval.
There were no ex-parte communications disclosed by the Commissioners.
There was no public comment.
Motion made by Secretary Harris and seconded by Commissioner Salene approve the item as
recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Rosene, and Salene
NOES:
None
RECUSED:
None
ABSENT:
Lowrey
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 4 RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297)
Site Location: 1600 Dove Street
Summary:
The Applicant is requesting approval of the following entitlements for the future development of
a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units at 1600 Dove Street
(Project):
General Plan Amendment (GPA) - A request to add 49 dwelling units above the current
General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly 12 of the General
Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating the 49 residential dwelling to the
Property;
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
50% increase in density including a request for three development standard waivers
related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall residential density along with
two development concessions related to the payment of partial park in -lieu fees and mix
of affordable units pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach
Page 3 of 7
22-194
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2ESC4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Municipal Code (NBMC) and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density
Bonus Law");
Development Agreement (DA) — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and
the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project
for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report
(Addendum No. 9) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the
Project; and
Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of
the NBMC.
The Project would require a future Site Development Review approval prior to building permit
issuance as no specific design for the Project is included.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the
implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program
Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No.
2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative
Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously
adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-008 recommending the City Council adoption of
Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9, and approval of General Plan
Amendment, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study, and Development
Agreement, for the project located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297).
Secretary Harris recused himself from the item due to a business interest conflict
Senior Planner Westmoreland used a presentation to review the project location, land use and zoning,
project description, entitlements requested, dwelling unit summary, conceptual elevations, density
bonus and AHIP, development agreement, CEQA addendum and traffic study, Charter Section 423
Analysis, recommendation, and next steps.
In response to Commissioner Salene's question, Senior Planner Westmoreland stated that the reduced
park fee is based on a negotiated number.
Commissioners Barto and Langford disclosed ex parte communication by speaking with the
representative from the developer, while the remaining Commissioners had none.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Satish Lion, representing The Picerne Group, utilized a presentation to review the project team, sponsor,
and context map, current condition, product evolution, and community support and commitment. He
agreed to the recommended conditions.
Page 4 of 7
22-195
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Langford thought the project was thoughtful.
Commissioner Salene thought the project is pushing the density and expressed concern for the starting
base density, additional bonuses, and an aggressive approach.
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Chair Ellmore to approve the item as
recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Langford, and Rosene
NOES:
Salene
RECUSED:
Harris
ABSENT:
Lowrey
ITEM NO. 5 FLETCHER JONES AIRPORT SHUTTLE AND PARKING FACILITY (PA2023-
0172)
\ Site Location: 20071 Birch Street
mmary:
request for a conditional use permit to relocate the existing Fletcher Jones Motorcars
Pr rred Owners Airport Shuttle Facility from its current location at 2172, 2192, and 2222
South�ristol Street to a new site at 20071 Birch Street. If approved, the new site will be
develope with an approximately 1,134 square -foot, single -story, reception office and
surface pa g for 83 cars. Accessory improvements include security fencing and perimeter
walls, site Iightl hardscaping, and landscaping. No late hours are proposed. The request
is one phase of a rger future effort by Fletcher Jones Motorcars to redevelop 2172, 2192,
and 2222 South Bri -ol Street and the adjoining property at 20052 Birch Street into an
automotive inventory fa 'lity with accessory parking. With approval of this application, the
conditional use permit for lication PA2022-128 would be rescinded.
Recommended Actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the Califo Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Con uction or Conversion of Small Structures),
Section 15332 under Class 32 (In -Fill Dev pment Projects), and Section 15183
(Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, G eral Plan, or Zoning) of the CEQA
Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a si ificant effect on the environment;
and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-011 approving the conditl al use permit filed as
PA2023-0172.
Associate Planner Perez used a presentation to review the vicinity map, surroundland use and
zoning, existing airport shuttle facility, future redevelopment plans for the existing shu facility site,
the proposed relocation project, site improvements for the new airport shuttle facility, de ibed why
a conditional use permit is required, reviewed compatibility findings and conditions of app val for
the project, recommended adding three additional conditions of approval to the resolution, proled
an overview of the environmental review and CEQA, and recommended approval.
Page 5 of 7
22-196
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Acting Deputy Corrir -n i / Development Director Murillo noted that the next Planning Commission
meeting scheduled for June 5 I cial Meeting.
ITEM NO. 8 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSE - one
IX. ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, the meeting was adjourned it Ellmore at 6:40
p. M.
The agenda for the May 23, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, May 16,
2024, at 3:30 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, May 16, 2024,
at 3:33 p.m.
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
TVisf avu RAMS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
Page 7 of 7
22-197
Attachment G
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2024-008 (No Exhibits)
22-198
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
RESOLUTION NO. PC2024-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ADDENDUM NO. 9 TO THE 2006 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND 2008-2014
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND TRAFFIC
STUDY FOR THE RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE PROJECT
LOCATED AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by The Picerne Group ("Applicant"), with respect to the property
located at 1600 Dove Street, and legally described in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto
and incorporated by reference ("Property").
2. The Applicant requests approvals to that would allow future development of a seven -story
apartment complex consisting of up to 282 apartment units ("Project"), which requires the
following approvals:
General Plan Amendment ("GPA")- A request to add 49 dwelling units above the
General Plan allowance, and amend Anomaly Number 12 of the General Plan Table
LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to allow 49 residential dwelling units at the Property;
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP")- A preliminary plan specifying
how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange
for a request of 50% increase in density including a request for three development
standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall residential
density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park in -lieu
fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State
Density Bonus Law");
• Development Agreement ("DA") —A development agreement between the Applicant
and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project
for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
22-199
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 2 of 24
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance)
of the NBMC.
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact
Report ("Addendum No. 9") - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts
resulting from the Project; and
3. The Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land
Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Zoning
District Professional and Business Office Site 7.
4. The Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending the Local Coastal
Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required.
5. A public hearing was held on May 23, 2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center
Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing
was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M.
Brown Act"), and Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), and Chapter 20.62 (Public
Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and
considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75 on July 25, 2006, thereby certifying the
adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the General
Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with
California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State
regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter
3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with
Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program
Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR"). This PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of a
citywide land use plan and the goals and policies of 10 general plan elements.
2. The City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003 on November 22,
2011, thereby approving the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update
and its associated Housing Element and Initial Study/Negative Declaration under CEQA.
3. The City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 2007-79 and 2012-62 on December 11, 2007
and July 24th, 2012, respectively, approving Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to the 2006 General
Plan Update EIR to analyze changes to the development intensities within the North
Newport Center Planned Community ("NNCPC") Development Plan.
4. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-78 on September 8, 2020, approving
Addendum No. 3 (ER2020-002), to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR to amend the
General Plan Land Use Designation of the Newport Airport Village project located 4341,
4361, and 4501 Birch Street; 4320, 4340, 4360, 4400, 4500, 4520, 4540, 4570, 4600, and
01-17-23
22-200
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 3 of 24
4630 Campus Drive; and 4525, 4533, and 4647 MacArthur Boulevard, from Airport Office
and Supporting Uses (AO) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and amend Table LU2
(Anomaly Locations) to add Anomaly No. 86 to allow for the development of 329 dwelling
units, exclusive of any permitted density bonus, and 297,572 square feet of commercial
uses. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 3.
5. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-2 on January 26, 2021, approving
Addendum No. 4 (ER2020-003), to the PEIR to amend Planned Community Development
Plan No. 15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community) for the creation of a residential
overlay zone and a park overlay zone to allow for residential use and a public park within
the Koll Center Newport Professional and Business Office Site B, including a major site
development review, traffic study, lot line adjustment, affordable housing implementation
plan, and development agreement for the Residences at 4400 Von Karman Project. No
analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 4.
6. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-19 on March 22, 2022, approving
Addendum No. 5 (ER2022-001), to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1300 Bristol
Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 5.
7. The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. PC2022-011 on May 12, 2022,
approving Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002), to the PEIR to approve the Ritz Carlton
Residences Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No.
6.
8. The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-22 on April 9, 2024, approving Addendum
No. 7 (PA2022-0296) to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1400 Bristol Project. No
analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 7.
9. The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-25 on April 9, 2024, approving Addendum
No. 8 (PA2022-0040), to the PEIR for the consideration of the Residences at 1401 Quail
Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 8.
10. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent
EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence
in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions
of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project
is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects; or
01-17-23
22-201
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 4 of 24
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR
was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous
EIR;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure
or alternative; or
iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
11. Addendum No. 9 to PEIR was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs
and Negative Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration)
of the CEQA Guidelines.
12. The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project: Aesthetics, Air
Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water
Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing,
Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and
Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum includes analysis of new topics that were
not included in the previous EIRs; specifically, it includes a new Energy, Wildfire, and
Tribal Cultural Resources section. These additional analyses are appropriate for
inclusion in Addendum No. 9, but none result in new or increased significant impacts
that would require preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines.
13. On the basis of the PEIR and entire environmental review record, including Addenda
Nos. 1-9, the Project (inclusive of recommended conditions of approval) will not result
in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR, Addenda
Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR. Addendum No. 9, which is attached hereto as
Exhibit B and includes Addenda Nos. 1-8, confirms and provides substantial evidence
that the potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less
than those described in either the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the
PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which
the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental
impacts than previously addressed in either the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
and 8 to the PEIR nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more
01-17-23
22-202
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 5 of 24
severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with
Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR,
including Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR is the appropriate
environmental document for the Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested
applications for the Project, the data presented in the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR as augmented by Addendum No. 9 for this Project, are
considered part of the record.
14. Addendum No. 9 is hereby recommended for approval by the Planning Commission given
its analysis and conclusions. Addendum No. 9 and related and referenced documentation,
constitute the administrative record upon which this decision was based, are on file with
the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
15. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA
determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time-consuming. In
addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges.
As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate
that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial
challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that
may be awarded to a successful challenger.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
General Plan Amendment
An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element is a legislative
act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et
seq., set forth any required findings for approval of such amendments.
Finding and Facts in Support of Findings:
1. The Property is designated Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan. The
Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation applies to properties located in the Airport
Area. It provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional
commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel
rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses. No changes are proposed to the
underlying land use designation of the Property.
2. The GPA and the resulting increase in dwelling units is compatible with the existing
surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, because the
Project would introduce additional residential units in the Airport Area, within an area
that already allows residential development. The Airport Area includes a diverse mix of
land uses including the gradual development of residential multifamily dwellings. The
additional residential development would consolidate growth and support commercial
properties within the Airport Area.
01-17-23
22-203
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 6 of 24
3. The requested GPA to add 49 dwelling units within the Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2)
designation does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the
community given the site's size, location, and surrounding uses. The existing office
building on -site was built in the 1970's and there are sufficient office facilities in the
Airport Area to support the business needs of the community. The proposed change to
allow additional residential density would increase the City's housing stock including the
provision of units that will be affordable to lower incomes, as required by the PC-11
Residential Overlay.
4. The Property is located in an area of the city that has sufficient utility systems to serve
the Project. No off -site improvements other than typical utility connections are currently
proposed or required as part of the Project.
5. The Project is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach General Plan policies
that establish fundamental criteria for the formation and implementation of new
residential villages in the Airport Area with additional policy analysis included in the EIR
Addendum No. 9:
a. Land Use Element Policy LU 1.1 (Unique Environment): Maintain and enhance the
beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business districts,
and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design development to
reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and view sheds.
The Project enhances the distinct, urban character of the Airport Area by providing
a means for replacing parking lots and a 1970's era office building with functional
residential development, in line with the General Plan goal of transitioning the Airport
Area to a mixed -use community. The Property is not in or near any of the City's areas
that feature the harbor, unique topography, or view sheds. The proposed project
would introduce residential units to the Property consistent with the uses and
urbanized character of the Airport Area and the existing Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-
H2) designation.
b. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of Residential Choices). Provide
opportunities for the development of residential units that respond to community and
regional needs in terms of density, size, location, and cost. Implement goals, policies,
programs, and objectives identified within the City's Housing Element.
The Project includes up to 282 multi -family residential units, inclusive of 139 base
units from the conversion of 60,675-square-foot office building, 49 added units from
the requested GPA, and 94 units from the requested 50% density bonus. Of the 282
residential units, 28 or 15% will be set aside for very low-income households. The
Project responds to market needs and diversifies the City's housing stock by adding
additional dwelling units to the Airport Area.
c. Land Use Element Policy LU 3.8 (Project Entitlement Review with Airport Land Use
Commission) - Refer the adoption or amendment of the General Plan, Zoning Code,
specific plans, and Planned Community development plans for land within the John
01-17-23
22-204
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 7 of 24
Wayne Airport planning area, as established in the JW4 Airport Environs Land Use
Plan ("AELUP'), to the Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC') for Orange County
for review, as required by Section 21676 of the California Public Utilities Code. In
addition, refer all development projects that include buildings with a height greater
than 200 feet above ground level to the ALUC for review.
The Project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan
("AELUP"), therefore, the overseeing agency, ALUC, must review the proposed GPA
pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and Public Utilities Code Section
21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine whether the Project is
consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council taking action on the Project. The
Project is located within the City's updated 60 decibel ("dBA") community noise
equivalent level ("CNEL") contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the
General Plan as well as the 60 dBA contour identified in the AELUP, where
residential development is allowed. As a result, the Project will be required to comply
with the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use
Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC. Further, the Project site is located
within Safety Zone 6, which allows residential development.
d. Land Use Element Policy 6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility). Require that all
development be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set forth by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part
77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and that residential development shall be
allowed only on parcels with noise levels of less than John Wayne Airport 65 dBA
CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General
Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the
sites wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed
for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are,
however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour
area.
The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour as shown in Figure
N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan as well as the 60 dBA contour of the
AELUP, where residential development is allowed, subject to the development
standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use Proximate to John
Wayne Airport) of the NBMC.
e. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.5 (Residential and Supporting Uses).
Accommodate the development of a maximum of 2,200 multi -family residential units,
including work force housing, and mixed -use buildings that integrate residential with
ground level office or retail uses, along with supporting retail, grocery stores, and
parklands. Residential units may be developed only as the replacement of underlying
permitted nonresidential uses. When a development phase includes a mix of
residential and nonresidential uses or replaces existing industrial uses, the number
of peak hour trips generated by cumulative development of the site shall not exceed
the number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted
nonresidential uses. However, a maximum of 550 units may be developed as infill
01-17-23
22-205
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 8 of 24
on surface parking lots or areas not used as occupiable buildings on properties within
the Conceptual Development Plan Area depicted on Figure LU22 provided that the
parking is replaced on site.
General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.5 established a development limit of 2,200
maximum dwelling units for the Airport Area. Of the 2,200 residential units allowed,
1,650 units may be developed as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or
industrial uses. The remaining 550 units are classified as additive units meaning they
are not required to replace other units and they may be constructed as "in -fill" units
to existing commercial or office development within the Conceptual Development
Plan Area ("CDPA") of the Airport Area. Any eligible density bonus allowed by
Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law) and Chapter 20.32 (Density
Bonus) of the NBMC are not included in the 2,200-unit allowance.
The 550 additive units have been previously allocated to the Uptown Newport and
Residences at 4400 Von Karman projects. Considering the dwelling unit sum of the
previously approved projects, the remaining and available development allocation
within the Airport Area would be 209 dwelling units. With the development of this
Project, there would be 70 dwelling units (209-139=70) remaining, exclusive of
density bonus units and units authorized through a GPA.
The Property is developed with an existing 4-story commercial office building totaling
60,675 square feet. Since the Project can be developed only as the replacement of
the underlying nonresidential office use (without a GPA), and the number of peak
hour trips generated by cumulative development of the Property shall not exceed the
number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted
nonresidential uses, a conversion rate of 2.29 dwelling units per 1,000 square feet
of commercial floor area is required. This results in a total of 139 dwelling units. The
Project includes a request for a GPA to increase the base units by 49 dwelling units,
which results in a total base unit count of 188 dwelling units. With the application of
a 50% density bonus (i.e. 94 units), a maximum of 282 units could be constructed.
Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages). Allow
development of mixed -use residential villages, each containing a minimum of 10
acres and centered on a neighborhood park and other amenities (as conceptually
illustrated in Figure LU23). The first phase of residential development in each village
shall encompass at least 5 gross acres of land, exclusive of existing rights -of -way.
This acreage may include multiple parcels provided that they are contiguous or face
one another across an existing street. At the discretion of the City, this acreage may
also include part of a contiguous property in a different land use category, if the City
finds that a sufficient portion of the contiguous property is used to provide functionally
proximate parking, open space, or other amenity. The "Conceptual Development
Plan" area shown on Figure LU22 shall be exempt from the 5-acre minimum, but a
conceptual development plan described in Policy LU 6.15.11 shall be required.
The Property is 2.49 acres in size. The Residential Overlay of PC-11 allows
residential development on sites containing less than 10 acres if housing units
01-17-23
22-206
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 9 of 24
affordable to lower income households are provided. The Project will allocate a
minimum of 15% of the base dwelling units as affordable for very -low income
households. Therefore, the Project will be exempt from General Plan Policy LU
6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages).
g. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 (Overall Density and Housing Types). Require that
residential units be developed at a minimum density of 30 units and maximum of 50
units per net acre averaged over the total area of each residential village. Net
acreage shall be exclusive of existing and new rights -of -way, public pedestrian ways,
and neighborhood parks. Within these densities, provide for the development of a
mix of building types ranging from townhomes to high-rises to accommodate a
variety of household types and incomes and to promote a diversity of building
masses and scales.
The Project proposes 188 base units at a density of 75.5 dwelling units per acre on
the 2.49 net -acre site. A waiver from Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 regarding maximum
density is requested as part of the AHIP. The base density does not include the 50%
density bonus (94 units) that is allowed by the State Bonus Density law and Section
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC. Altogether, the Project would reach an overall
maximum density of 113 dwelling units per acre, which is exclusive of rights -of -ways,
public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks.
The Project is a for rent apartment building with up to 282 units. There will be a
mixture of unit types, ranging from studios to two -bedroom units, and possibly 3-
bedroom units, accommodating a variety of household types and incomes. Of the
dwelling units, 28 units will be affordable to very -low income households and the
remaining units will be market -rate housing, which will increase the City's overall
housing stock for various household income levels.
h. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.8 (First Phase Development Density). Require a
residential density of 45 to 50 units per net acre, averaged over the first phase for
each residential village. This shall be applied to 100 percent of properties in the first
phase development area whether developed exclusively for residential or integrating
service commercial horizontally on the site or vertically within a mixed -use building.
On individual sites, housing development may exceed or be below this density to
encourage a mix of housing types, provided that the average density for the area
encompassed by the first phase is achieved.
The Project would be developed in one phase on an individual site with a maximum
density of 113 units per acre. The Project provides a mixture of residential unit types
that include 28 units of affordable housing to very -low-income households. The
proposed density is above the required minimum of 45 units per acre and the
Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver allowed by State Density
Bonus Law to exceed the maximum density of 50 units per acre.
i. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and
Density). Subsequent phases of residential development shall abut the first phase or
01-17-23
22-207
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 10 of 24
shall face the first phase across a street. The minimum density of residential
development (including residential mixed -use development) shall be 30 units per net
acre and shall not exceed the maximum of 50 units per net acre averaged over the
development phase.
See finding LU 6.15.9 First Phase Development Density above.
Tribal Consultation (SB 18)
6. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government
is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General
Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of
preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from
the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the
proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 23, 2023.
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to
Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project
will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period, which expired on April
26, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes: the Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen
Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Based on consultation
with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of approval have been included
to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources.
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Finding:
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the
General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed
density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more
than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by more than
100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself,
plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood
(defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted
within the preceding 10 years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed
amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach
electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan
amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine if minor amendments
in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
Facts in Support of Findings:
01-17-23
22-208
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 11 of 24
The Project is the second General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L4 within the last 10
years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The proposed
amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the square footage of
non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial development is allowed by
the current General Plan (2,200 in -fill units maximum in the Airport Area based on
conversion of existing commercial floor area). Reductions in commercial floor area are not
tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units are not included in
Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
2. The 49 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and 19
p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE
11th Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is
given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was
converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less the density bonus
and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the
Greenlight thresholds.
3. There has been one other relevant GPA within Statistical Area L4 within the last 10 years,
which resulted in an increase of 64 dwelling units at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296).
Considering 80% of the prior amendments (80% of 64 dwelling units) results in 51 dwelling
units. The Project includes a GPA for 49 dwelling units. Therefore, cumulative development
of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10 years coupled with the Project results in an increase
of 100 dwelling units. In terms of peak hour trips, the prior GPA resulted in a net increase
of 24 a.m. peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips. Considering 80% of the prior
amendment, results in 19 and 20 a.m. and p.m. peak hour trips, respectively. Therefore,
cumulative development of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10 years coupled with the
proposed project results in a change of 37 and 39 a.m. and p.m. peak hour trips,
respectively. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no
vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The AHIP is consistent with the intent to implement affordable housing goals within the City
pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915-65918 (State Density Bonus Law), and Chapter
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC for the following reasons:
Consistent with the requested 50% density bonus, 28 units (15% of the base units) would
be set aside as affordable units to lower income households. Lower income households are
defined as households with 80% or less of the area median income, adjusted for family size
for minimum term of 55 years for very low-income households. The Project is consistent the
provisions of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community, which requires
a minimum of 15% of base units to be set aside for lower income households.
2. The State Density Bonus Law and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) provide for an increase
in the number of units above the General Plan and zoning limits for projects that include a
minimum of 15% of the base units affordable to very -low-income households earning 50%
or less of area median income. The Project's inclusion of 28 very -low-income units, which
01-17-23
22-209
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 12 of 24
is 15% of the base unit count of 188 units makes the Project eligible for 94 additional units.
Inclusive of all base units, density bonus units, and affordable units the total project includes
282 units.
3. In addition to the 94 density bonus units, the Project is entitled under California Government
Code Section 65915(d) and Section 20.32.070 of the NBMC, to receive up to three
incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual
cost reductions. The Project includes a development concession for the proposed
affordable unit mix that does not meet Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of
Affordable Units) of the NBMC.
Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC requires
affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the
residential development as a whole. In this case, the Project would provide a higher
percentage of affordable studio units and fewer affordable two -bedroom units and three -
bedroom compared to market rate units. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental
subsidy costs associated with the two- and three -bedroom units and affording additional
rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
The Project includes a second development concession to waive a portion of the required
in -lieu park fee for a half -acre park. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would allow the
Applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while providing
identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable units feasible.
4. In addition to the density bonus units and qualified concessions, the Project is entitled under
California Government Code Section 65915(e), Section 20.32.080 of the NBMC, and recent
caselaw to receive waivers or reductions of development standards where application of
the development standard would physically preclude construction of a density bonus
project. In this case, the following development standards are entitled to a waiver:
a. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires a public
park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum one-half acre,
whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.49-acre Project site is too small to
feasibly accommodate a half -acre park.
b. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 and PC-11 requires
residential density between 30-50 dwelling units per acre. Inclusive of only the
conversion units, the proposed density of 55.8 dwelling units per acre would exceed the
maximum density of 50 dwelling units per acre. Including the proposed GPA units,
conversion units, and density bonus units, the Project would not comply at a density of
113 dwelling units per acre and a waiver is necessary to implement the project.
c. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building height
to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is necessary to
accommodate 282 residential units within seven stories. The Project is anticipated to
have a height of 100 feet from established grade.
01-17-23
22-210
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 13 of 24
Traffic Study
In accordance with Section 15.40.030 (Standards for Approval -Findings -Exemptions) of the
NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and
Appendix A.
Fact in Support of Finding:
A traffic study, entitled 1600 Dove Street Residences Revised Traffic Impact Analysis,
prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., dated August 14, 2023, was prepared for the Project in
compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and Appendix
A of the NBMC.
Finding:
B. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic
study, one of the findings for approval in subsection 15.40.030(B) can be made:
Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval
in accordance with Section 15.40.030(B)(1) of the NBMC.
ii. Additionally, the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level
of traffic service at any impacted intersection in accordance with Section
15.40.030(B)(1)(a) of the NBMC.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the Traffic Study,
and the conditions of approval, all of the findings for approval in Section 15.40.030(B)(1)(a)
can be made in that:
a. The Project is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2029, within the 60-month
criteria. Therefore, the Traffic Study addresses the entire project development.
b. The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 14
existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine.
c. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 622 daily trips,
including 12 peak a.m. trips and 22 peak p.m. trips. When these trips distributed to these
studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as the
Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any
impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to operate
at acceptable Levels of Service.
01-17-23
22-211
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 14 of 24
Finding:
C. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the
contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all
conditions of approval.
Fact in Support of Finding:
No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the Project
will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any
impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. The Applicant will be
required to pay any applicable Traffic Fair Share fees for the net increase in vehicles
trips, which will be used to fund future planned improvements to the City's circulation
system. The Applicant will also be subject to the payment of San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor Fees.
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, a development agreement is required as the Project requires an amendment to the
General Plan that includes the development of more than 50 residential units. In this case the
Project has a total of 188 base residential units. The proposed development agreement
satisfies the requirements of Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements) of the NBMC as
follows:
1. A development agreement is requested by the Applicant, as the Project would include a
base density of 139 units and 49 units from the requested General Plan Amendment. The
development agreement includes all the mandatory elements including a term of 10 years
and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights
consistent with the City's General Plan, the NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864
et seq.
2. Public benefits include the payment of a public safety fee to satisfy any obligation the Project
could have to provide new emergency response services or Fire Department equipment to
serve the Airport Area whether a Community Facilities District is formed or not. The
Applicant has also agreed to pay a park fee to support the provisions of new parks in the
Airport Area and a separate public benefit fee to be used by the City Council as it deems
appropriate.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the following to the
City Council:
01-17-23
22-212
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 15 of 24
1. Adopt Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update
EIR (SCH2O06011119), as depicted in Exhibit "B" which is attached hereto and
incorporated by reference;
2. Approve General Plan Amendment as depicted in Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and
incorporated by reference;
3. Approve Affordable Housing Implementation Plan as depicted in Exhibit "D" which is
attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
4. Approve Development Agreement, as depicted in Exhibit "E" which is attached hereto and
incorporated by reference; and
5. Approve Traffic Study, as depicted in Exhibit "F" which is attached hereto and incorporated
by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd DAY OF MAY, 2024.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Langford, Rosene
NOES: Salene
RECUSED: Harris
ABSENT: Lowrey
BY:
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
BY: Tiisfav, RA.v'v'iS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
Attachment(s): Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR
(SCH NO. 2006011119)
Exhibit C — General Plan Amendment
1:7i11.7iiDa_1:11%
Exhibit E - Development Agreement
Exhibit F — Traffic Study
Exhibit G — Conditions of Approval
01-17-23
22-213
Attachment H
ALUC and Caltrans Comment Letters
22-214
ORANGE COUNTY
!�4sLuc:
August 8, 2024
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
Corn munity Development Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission
Determination Regarding Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Dear Ms. Westmoreland,
We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated July 10, 2024, and City Council
Resolution No. 2024-45 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County
of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed 1600
Dove Street Residences. In accordance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC
submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule findings for the above -
referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to
overrule the ALUC.
Please be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states: "With respect
to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to
Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the
operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury
caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to overrule the
commission's action or recommendation."
Background
On June 20, 2024, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Residences at 1600 Dove
Street to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne
Airport (JWA) on a 6-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2,
and 3.2.1. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to
safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the
continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the
adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas
susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect
navigable airspace.
22-215
1600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
Page 2
Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the
Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. The City's
proposed project would increase the maximum height and density of residential uses within the 60
dBA Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), and within Safety Zone 6. This would result
in exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are
inconsistent with the AELUP.
ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included
in Resolution No. 2024-45.
Response to Finding and Fact in Support A - Regarding Noise Standards:
Finding of Fact A correctly states that the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP and that the
AELUP identifies residential uses as " normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour.
The ALUC appreciates that, "as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be
conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure
that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45
dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of
windows." However, Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP states "... aircraft noise emanating from airports
may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport,"
and the ALUC believes that increasing the intensity and height of residential uses in the proposed
location would subject future residents to excessive noise.
Response to Fact in Support B - Regarding Safety:
Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are
acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of
these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility
and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for
persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
The proposed project is located in Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone. According to the
California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in
Safety Zone 6. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report which show
a high number of flights adjacent to the proposed project site. Considering the proposed density,
increased height, and proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, this project
is an inappropriate use for the site.
Response to Fact in Support C - Regarding "Intent of the AELUP":
By virtue of being clearly stated in AELUP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0
"Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports
from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the
health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and
as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise
in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC
22-216
t600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
Page 3
members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed 1600 Dove Street
Residences to be inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA.
We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to
deciding whether to overrule ALUC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments.
Sincerely,
Gerald Bresnahan
Gerald Bresnahan
Chairman
cc: Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County
Jonathan Huff, Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics
Signature: GemU a fmhaii
Gerald Bresnahan (Aug 9, 2024 09:28 PDT)
22-217
CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR
California Department of Transportation
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
P.O. BOX 942873, MS-40
SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001
(916) 654-4959
www.dot.ca.gov
August 7, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
Electronically Sent
<Iwestmoreland@newportbeachca.gov>
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics (Division) thanks the
City of Newport Beach (City) for providing the Notice of Intent, dated July 10, 2024, to overrule
a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has
reported that the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project (Project) is inconsistent with the
Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent
concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2024-45 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support"
related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling
the ALUC's determination, the Division is providing the following comments pursuant to
California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21676. The Division supports the position of the
ALUC in noting that the City has provided insufficient support for an overrule.
The ALUC has noted the following reasons this Project update is incompatible with the AELUP:
Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be
incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an
airport."
Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to
support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility
and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential
safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
Section 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any
land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people
so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in
areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... "
The Division notes that the intent of the California Airport Lane Use Planning Handbook
(Handbook) guidance aims to ensure the safety of both the aviation community and the
community members surrounding an airport. Within this framework, the ALUC has determined
that the City has inadequately addressed the safety concerns related to the proposed
significant increase of housing density within airport safety zones.
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment"
22-218
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
August 7, 2024
Page 2
The Division notes of the 282 proposed units on the 2.49 acre parcel, all are within the 60 CNEL
noise contour. While this is nominally allowed by the AELUP, the Division strongly recommends
that the Lead Agency or authority having jurisdiction require developers to adequately design
structures to ensure interior noise levels below 45 dB and to hold final permitting until the
developer can demonstrate adequate interior noise attenuation. Separate from interior noise
reduction is exterior noise, which cannot be mitigated, and must be addressed through
avigation easements to ensure that airport operations are not adversely impacted by noise
complaints from new residents.
The Division concurs with the ALUC's determination that the Housing Element Implementation
Program Amendments Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John
Wayne Airport. This conclusion is based on insufficient findings by the City and the safety
concerns for public health and welfare posed by allowing housing in incompatible safety
zones and noise contours.
The Division also notes that this is the seventh proposed overrule since 2020 for a component of
a larger redevelopment development program in Newport Beach. This ongoing pattern of
overrules raises concerns about the cumulative impact on safety. Each overrule potentially
compromises the safety of both aviation users at John Wayne Airport (JWA) and the new
residents of Newport Beach, by allowing developments that may not fully account for the
necessary safety and noise considerations.
In addition, PUC Section 21675.1(f) provides: If a city or county overrules the commission
pursuant to subdivision(d) with respect to a publicly owned airport that the city or county does
not operate, the operator of the airport is not liable for damages to property or personal injury
resulting from the city's or county's decision to proceed with the action, regulation, or permit.
Please note: These comments are to be included in the public record of any decision to
overrule the ALUC. If you have questions or if we may be of further assistance, please contact
me by email at jonathan.huff@dot.ca.gov or call (916) 879-6528.
Sincerely,
Originally signed by
Jonathan Huff
Associate Transportation Planner
Caltrans Aeronautics
c: Julie Fitch, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission
<JFitch@ocair.com>;
Matthew Friedman, Chief of Aviation Planning, Caltrans Aeronautics
<matthew.friedman@dot.ca.gov>
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment"
22-219
Attachment I
Fiscal Impact Memorandum dated April 17, 2024
22-220
MEMO
TO: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach
FROM: Doug Svensson
DATE: April 17, 2024
SUBJECT: Fiscal Analysis for the 1600 Dove St. Project
INTRODUCTION
The fiscal analysis uses the Newport Beach Fiscal Impact Model to help calculate revenue and cost
impacts of the proposed project. This model was initially developed in support of the General Plan
Update, which was adopted in 2006.1 The model has been updated to reflect Fiscal Year 2023-2024
costs and revenues from the Adopted Newport Beach City Budget. The fiscal impact model calculates
public service impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment
base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues that each type
of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes as
well as a variety of user charges and fees.
The fiscal impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by new
development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in approximately the
same way that existing development does. The model nets out certain costs that are unlikely to
change with expansion of City government, such as the number of City Department Directors and
Division managers, as well as the City Council and City Clerk expenditures, but otherwise assumes
that City administrative support and overhead tends to increase as City government activities grow to
provide services to an expanding population and employment base. Over the long term, this is clearly
the dynamic that local governments experience. In the short term, development projects may have
1 A technical description of the fiscal impact model may be found in: Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact
Analysis and Model, Newport Beach General Plan Update, January 2004.
3527 Mt. Diablo Blvd. #248, Lafayette, CA 94549 ■ Tel 925.934.8712
www.adeusa.com
22-221
lower or higher cost impacts depending on the existing capacity of City services to accommodate more
development, and the level of expenditure needed to expand services incrementally if existing
capacity is not available.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project would convert an existing 4-story office building, with a total of 60,675 sq. ft., to
a 7-story apartment building comprised of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, roof top
common space and parking. At this stage of project planning, the project sponsor has not determined
a mix of units types for the project. For purposes of this analysis, ADE reviewed project plans for
several other large multi -family developments in Newport Beach and devised a potential unit mix that
would include 25 studios, 141 one -bedroom units and 116 two -bedroom units. Based on available
market data, unit sizes may range from 526 sq. ft. for the studios to 1,153 for the two -bedroom units.
Of the 282 total units, 254 will be market rate and 28 will be affordable units.
SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
In order to calculate the fiscal effects of the proposed changes, it is necessary to estimate certain
socio-economic characteristics of the land uses, including population and employment, assessed value,
household spending on taxable retail goods in Newport Beach, and direct sales taxes from the existing
non-residential uses. Based on 2023 data from the State Department of Finance, the average
household size in Newport Beach is 2.17 persons, which would imply the proposed project would have
a resident population of 612 persons. The existing office uses are estimated to support 221 jobs based
on standard employee density ratios for office space.
The assessed value for the proposed project has been derived from analysis of estimated rents for the
proposed project and multifamily unit sales in Newport Beach over the past year July 2022 - July
2023. ADE researched current asking rents for several major apartment complexes in Newport Beach
on the Zillow website (Table 1). The average rents for units that are available ranged from $5.54/sq.
ft. for studios to $3.87/sq. ft. for two -bedroom units in the project sponsor has indicated that rents for
the proposed project would be similar to the One Uptown Newport project, at the upper end of the
range, which they also own and operate. These are market rate rents. The rents for affordable units
are specified under HUD guidelines for Orange County and range from $1,042 for studios (1-person
household) to $1,340 for two -bedroom units (combined 3- and 4-person households) (Table 2).
In terms of assessed value for the units for property tax purposes, ADE obtained sales records for 198
multi -family and condominium units that sold between July 2022 and July 2023 in Newport Beach. As
shown in Table 3, while there is some variation in sales price for condos based on the age of the units,
there is no correlation with age for units classified as multi -family units in this sample. Also, there is
no correlation based on whether the units are owner occupied or rented. In most market settings,
however, we would expect for -sale units to carry a higher value than rental units.
Applied Development Economics I Page 2
22-222
SELECTED APARTMENT
PRO]ECT/SIZE
ASKING RENTS, TABLE 1:
AUGUST 2023
STUDIO
1 BDRM 2 BDRM
One Uptown
Newport - 21
Units
Sq. Ft.
515
839
1,147
Monthly Rent
$3 039
4,079
5,313
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.90
$4.86
$4.63
Newport North
- 18 Units
Sq. Ft.
779
1,056
Monthly Rent
3,170
3,756
Rent/Sq. Ft
$4.07
$3.56
Colony at
Fashion Island
- 28 Units
Sq.Ft.
1,087
1,395
Monthly Rent
$4,480
5,095
Rent/Sq. Ft
$4.12
$3.65
Newport Bluffs
- 46 Units
Sq. Ft.
549
795
1,104
MonthlyRent
$3,050
3,429
4,141
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.56
$4.31
$3.75
Park Newport -
51 Units
Sq. Ft.
513
745
1,163
MonthlyRent
$2 650
3,120
3,951
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.17
$4.19
$3.40
Total Average
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.54
$4.38
$3.87
Source: ADE, Inc., based on data obtained from Zillow.com
ESTIMATEDTABLE
AVERAGE
UNI
2:
=W4
PROPOSED
1 1 DOVE PROJECT
MARKET RATE
AFFORDABLE
RENT/
UNIT
SQ.
RENT/
RENT/
RENT/
TOTAL
TYPE
SIZE
NO.
FT.
UNIT
NO.
SQ. FT.
UNIT
UNITS
Studio
526
23
$6.10
$3,210
2
$1.98
$1,042
25
1 Bdrm
815
127
$4.98
$4,060
14
$1.46
$1,191
141
2 Bdrm
1,153
104
$4.20
$4 840
12
$1.16
$1 340
116
254
28
282
Source: ADE, Inc.
In order to correlate the anticipated rent levels for the proposed units with the sales data in Table 3,
ADE researched recent cap rates in the multi -family real estate market.z Data published by CBRE, Inc.
indicate that cap rates for multi -family developments in the Los Angeles market area in 2022 ranged
from 4.0% to 4.5%.3 Based on the rent levels estimated for the proposed project in Table 2, the
overall average building value of $1,111/sq. ft. shown in Table 3 would be equivalent to a cap rate of
z In investment terms, rental projects create a stream of revenue for the building owner and the capitalization
("cap") rate calculates how much an investor would be willing to pay for that income stream.
3 CBRE Research, "Underwriting Assumptions Exceed Pre -Pandemic Levels or Prime Multifamily Assets". January
13, 2023.
Applied Development Economics I Page 3
22-223
about 4.1%, which falls within the reported range. Therefore, for the property tax analysis in this
report, we have used an average assessed value for the proposed project market rate units of $1,180
per sq. ft., which equates to an average of $1.1 million per unit. For the affordable units, the value is
prorated to $351 per sq. ft. based on the difference in rent levels. Based on these values, the
apartment units would have an aggregate assessed value of $287.3 million.
AVERAGE SALES
SALES IN
UNIT
CLASSIFICATION
TABLE
PRICES PER
NEWPORT BEACH,
YEAR BUILT
3:
•FOR
2022-2023
NO. OF
DDRESSES
MULTI -FAMILY
AVERAGE SALES
PRICE PER SQ. FT.
Multi -Family
1924-1977
37
$1337
Condominium
1960-1997
140
$981
Condominium
2001-2012
12
$1,098
Condominium
2015-2021
9
$1,392
Total Average
198
$1,111
Value Assumed for 1600 Dove Market
Rate Units
$1,180
Value Assumed for 1600 Dove Affordable Units
$351
Source: ADE, Inc., based on data obtained from CoreLogic, Inc.
The analysis also estimates household income for the residents for the purpose of calculating annual
sales taxes that may be generated for the City. The project sponsor has indicated that at the One
Uptown Newport project, the average household income is $180,000, with a significant number of the
residents earning above $200,000 and $300,000. For the affordable units, the allowable household
incomes are set by HUD guidelines. The combined spending profile for the project is shown in Table 4.
. AIDE has analyzed consumer expenditure surveys published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and at
these income levels, households typically spend less than 30 percent of their income on taxable retail
goods, and the percentages decline as income goes up. We have assumed for purposes of these
calculations that households would spend two-thirds of their annual retail budget in Newport Beach,
and the remaining one-third would be spent at retail centers in other cities or on out-of-town trips.
The City receives sales tax at the rate of one percent of taxable sales.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The analysis, summarized in Table 5 below, estimates the projected fiscal impact of the proposed
project as well as the estimated current impact of the existing office use on the site. For the
residential project and office buildings, the primary revenue source generated for the City is the
property tax. The City receives about 16 percent of the base property tax that property owners pay,
but in addition the City gets a share of property tax from the state in lieu of vehicle license fees, which
adds about ten percent to the total property tax revenues for Newport Beach.
Applied Development Economics I Page 4
22-224
4W�-
UNIT
TYPE
INCOME
PERCENT
TAXABLE
SALES
UNITS
TOTAL
ANNUAL
SALES
TAX
Affordable Units
Studio
$47,450
27.5%
2
$175
1 Bdrm
$54,200
24.6%
14
$1,260
2 Bdrm
$64,375
23.5%
12
$1,176
Market Rate Units
Studio
$128,400
20.0%
23
$3,957
1 Bdrm
$162 400
18.8%
127
$25 959
2 Bdrm
$250,000
13.8%
104
$24,132
Total
282
$56,658
Source: ADE, Inc.
In addition to the property tax and sales tax, the residents of the proposed project would be expected
to generate a variety of other more incidental revenues for the City General Fund, including fees for
recreation programs, parking fees and fines, utility franchise fees and other permit revenue. The total
General Fund revenue is projected to be about $697,500 per year. In terms of non -General Fund
revenue, the added population will contribute to the City receiving additional Gas Tax revenues from
the state for street maintenance. Also, Measure M is a countywide sales tax fund which is used for
transportation projects. The added taxable sales purchases made by project residents will add to these
funds. The total revenue generated from all sources by the proposed project is estimated at
$_747, 300.
The proposed project is estimated to cost the City about $705,600 per year for services. The bulk of
these costs are for police and fire protection, but they also include street maintenance and costs for
recreation, library, and senior services as well as general government functions. The project site is in
an intensely developed urban area of the City and existing service capacities are likely sufficient to
provide services to the proposed uses on the site. However, with the more intensive residential uses,
it may be expected that there would be some additional calls for service, particularly for public safety
and perhaps traffic related incidents, compared to the existing use on the site.
It is important to recognize that the fiscal model cost factors are based on citywide averages across all
socioeconomic groups in the City. The project sponsors have indicated that their experience at the
One Uptown Newport project suggests that these types of units attract a younger demographic, with a
median age of 35 years and an average age of 40 years. The median age in the City of Newport Beach
is 42.8 years. In general, the City does not have data to indicate how different age groups impact City
services, with the exception of emergency medical (EMS) response calls by the Fire Department,
where the age of patients is tracked. As may be expected, the data indicate the older segments of the
Applied Development Economics I Page 5
22-225
City population generate a higher rate of EMS calls. Based on the anticipated age breakdown for the
proposed project provided by the project sponsor, AIDE estimates that the project may generate 28
percent fewer EMS calls than the City population as a whole. This has been factored into the Fire
Department costs shown in Table 5 below.
5:
PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 1600 DOVE AND THE
OFFICETABLE
EXISTING
Annual Revenues/Costs
Budget Category Proposed Project Existing Office Use
REVENUES
GENERALFUND
Property Tax
$459,157
$19,856
Property Tax in lieu of Vehicle License Fees
$47,074
$2,036
Sales Tax
$56,658
$27,403
Transient Occupancy Tax
$0
$0
Franchise Fees
$5,740
$7,124
Business Licenses
$0
$12,780
Other Intergovernmental
$7,632
$2,757
Charges for Service
$61,019
$22,047
Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures
$12,667
$4,577
Licenses and Permits
$1,422
$514
Use of Property
$30,222
$10,920
Other Revenue
$11,892
$4,297
Interest Income
$3,991
$658
SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND
$697,474
$114,968
GAS TAX
$29,799
$0
MEASURE M
$20,068
$3,521
SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS
$49,867
$3,521
TOTAL REVENUE
$747,341
$118 489
EXPENDITURES
GENERALFUND
General Government
$48,224
$15,251
Police
$120,973
$63,803
Fire
$161,419
$69,930
Public Works
$167,565
$60,544
Community Development
$12,160
$4,394
Community Services
$184,559
$0
SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND
$694,901
$213,922
GAS TAX
$6,246
$5,383
MEASURE M
$4,462
$3,845
SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS
$10,708
$9,228
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$705,609
$223,150
NET (COST)/REVENUE
$41,732
($104,661)
Source: ADE, Inc.
The City was also able to provide data on police calls for service for the One Uptown Newport project.
The data indicate about one -quarter the rate of calls and 15% fewer arrests compared to the per
capita rates for the City as a whole. To some extent, these rates may reflect differences in
socioeconomic variables at the project compared to the Citywide population. Factoring these
reductions into the calculation of police costs, ADE estimates the total police services costs for the
1400 Dove project would be about half of what the fiscal model would otherwise calculate. Other
Applied Development Economics I Page 6
22-226
police costs included in the analysis relate to offsite traffic enforcement, animal control and support
services.
Overall, the service cost figures by Department in Table 5 are generally below levels equivalent to
hiring an additional fulltime staff person, and it is possible that the service impacts would be an
incremental increase of service activity for existing personnel. Based on the fiscal model analysis the
proposed project may generate positive net revenue of $41,700 per year.
The existing office use is estimated to generate a negative fiscal impact for the City, estimated at
about $104,700 per year. This is consistent with the original General Plan Fiscal Analysis for office
uses. Office uses have lower assessed values than residential and therefore create less property taxes.
The figures in Table 5 are based on the assessed value of the site in 2022. At $12.4 million, the
assessed value is equivalent to about $195 per sq. ft. for the office space. This is low in comparison to
other office properties in the market area. It is possible a new office building on this site would
generate more property taxes than the existing use.
Office uses also generate much less sales tax than do retail uses, which generate a high positive fiscal
benefit for the City. At times, office -based businesses have a point of sale operation that generates
sales tax even though it is not a store front retail operation, but most often professional services,
financial offices and other businesses that occupy office space do not provide taxable goods or
services. Office workers do generate some sales taxes in restaurants and other retail stores. In terms
of municipal services, however, the high employee densities in offices increase costs for traffic related
services. The post -pandemic trends toward increased remote working may lessen this impact, but it
also further reduces market values for office real estate.
CONCLUSION
The proposed rental residential use of the site would generate a positive fiscal impact for the City,
compared to the negative fiscal impact of the existing office use of the site. This is due to the
assumption that this project would attract a younger, higher income demographic that would have
lower demands on City services than the typical Newport Beach resident. This is not consistent with
the original fiscal analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General Plan, although in recent years some
other very high value luxury residential projects have shown a positive fiscal benefit. If the proposed
project resident profile turns out to be more like the average Newport Beach demographic, or if it
changes in that direction over time, then the project would have a lower, or possibly negative impact
on the City budget. However, even so, the General Plan increased development potential for
commercial and lodging uses substantially, in addition to the new residential units it would permit. The
net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in
2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of
$21.7 million per year .4 Thus, any negative fiscal impacts of future residential development can
potentially be mitigated as long as commercial development keeps pace throughout the City.
4 Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis Land Use Element Amendment, April 4, 2014. p. 3.
Applied Development Economics I Page 7
22-227
Attachment J
Applicant's Project Description and Letters of Support
22-228
1600 Dove Street
Project Description
The Picerne Group Inc. ("Applicant"), applicant of the proposed project at 1600 Dove Street in
the City of Newport Beach ("Property"), hereby submits the following project description to
the City's Community Development Department.
The 1600 Dove Street Project ("Project") is a proposed 7-story apartment building comprised
of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, a leasing office, roof -top common space,
and approximately 530 parking spaces within an on -grade parking garage with two and a half
subterranean levels. Residential units within the Project will include a mix of studios, one -
bedroom units, two -bedroom units and potentially three -bedroom units.
The Project is located on a 2.49 acre site at the corner of Dove Street and Dolphin Strike Way.
The current use is a 60,675 sq. ft., 4-story office building with a surface parking lot. The
Property is currently zoned Planned Community ("PC")- I I and is situated in the Residential
Overlay, and is designated as Mixed Use Horizontal 2 ("MU-112") under the City's General
Plan. The Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to obtain additional density allocated to
the Airport Area (Statistical Area L4).
The Project's base density consists of 188 units (139 units from the conversion of the office
building to residential and 49 additional units allocated to the Airport Area (Statistical Area
L4), which are sought via a General Plan Amendment). The Project qualifies for a 50% density
bonus (94 units) in exchange for providing the necessary level of affordable housing. Of the
282 total units, 254 will be market rate units and 28 will be affordable units. The 49 additional
base units referenced above will not constitute a "major amendment" for purposes of Section
423 of the City's Charter.
Under the State Density Bonus Law ("SDBL"),1 the Project is entitled to a 50% density bonus,
three (3) concessions/incentives,2 and unlimited waivers from development standards that
would physically preclude construction of the Project at the density sought.3
The entitlements currently requested for the Project include (i) a General Plan Amendment; (ii)
a Traffic Study pursuant to Newport Municipal Code Chapter 15.40; (iii) a Development
Agreement, and (iv) preparation and approval of an Addendum to the City's General Plan
Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Applicant will submit an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") for the City's
review and approval at a future date when project design approvals are sought. Applicant
reserves the right to utilize any SDBL concessions, incentives or waivers that the Project is
entitled to, for either the currently requested entitlements or subsequent design approvals.
1 Gov. Code §§ 65915 et seq.
2 Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(C).
s Gov. Code § 65915(e).
#182881468_vl
22-229
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
&w^ RaTe ^ C kzre-ir,�
22-230
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-231
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
1 am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, 1 am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
�QpPl BE40B
r �'E SiN "1 .1 e4
CLASSIC__:_
- �/�!/g9pS 8 SPOHSS��JO
Ronnie Lutfi
Owner
Q Classic Q
4251 MacArthur Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Twitter: ®theclassicq
Facebook: The Classic Q
Instagram: theclassicq
Tel: (949) 261-9458
Fax:(949) 261-1065
Email: ron®classicq.com
www.classicq.com
22-232
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
YOOO
/�QJ �LLAMAS I MAR �*
949.316.4318
gR10SBUTCHERSHOP EL':C�M
MpR10@M ERSHOPD
MARIOSBUTGH
22-233
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
CRISTIAN
BECERINE
OWNER
MAIN
(949) 316-4216
SERVICE
(949) 316-4444
IN info@bikehouseca.com
Op' @bikehouseca
♦ r Bike House Newport Beach
0 1000 Bristol St N suite 26
Newport Beach, CA 92660
house
22-234
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
OWb
22-235
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-236
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
IC��a �Y CAS , - Pu
22-23 7
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
1
(D &f � 4 f, � halvl_(
of{- 9-00,;�y
22-238
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
I am writing to express my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street in Newport Beach. As an active member of the City's business
community, I have seen the positive impact that thoughtful development has on the area. This
project will bring new life to the community, expand the customer base for local retail
businesses, and provide needed housing for the City.
The Picerne Group is a committed local development group with a strong interest in the success
of the City. Their unique nature of long-term ownership and proven track record at One Uptown
Newport have assured me they are the right people to develop this project. 1600 Dove will help
alleviate a severe housing shortage while creating a dynamic village in the Airport Area. I
encourage you to approve this development, which I believe is a positive step towards creating
a community where people will live, work, and shop.
p
Sincerely,
Scott Baugh
4040 MACARTHUR BLVD. STE zoo
NEwFoar BEACH, CA 9266o
OFFICE - 949-274-828o
FAx - 949-823-3956
MOBILE - 7i4-470-5220
SBAUCH@S BAUGH. COM
22-239
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely, %
L;
//o/ Z QZy
22-240
�7�PVX SC&Ado /_�\4 S11S) P I
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-241
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
0, .5�,4
Sincerely,
22-242
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, 1 am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
IL
Sincerely,
LI - + z - `- `1
SuNoy FvcsL eIEQ��rs
22-243
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
2-
22-244
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-245
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
l
J
�C)cK10
(_�z.A
22-246
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
/6 %
22-24 7
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,���c
22-248
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council,
I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment
development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the
customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know
that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful,
high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
22-249
Attachment K
Conceptual Plans
22-250
. 4t
1600 DOVE
ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT &
REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS
APRIL 18, 2023
-rAPICERNEGROUP
A R C H I T E C T S
ky
4F
22-251
1600 DOVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
TCA # 2022-060
VEHICULAR ENT
RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS
1
VEHI ULARENTRY
mk
LPHIN-STRIKER WAY
'
T9\ ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT & REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS o' 40' 80' 160' O
APRIL 18, 2023
..°.IT.°T= PICERNEGROUP
LEGEND
6 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL
OVER PARKING
COURTYARD
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
22-252
a
1600 DOVE -rrA �� ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT & REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA APRIL 18, 2023
TCA#2022-060 ..-T-T. PICERNEGROUP
22-253