Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.0_Uptown Newport_PA2011-134CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT December 6, 2012 Meeting Agenda Item 5 SUBJECT: Uptown Newport Village - (PA2011 -134) 4311 -4321 Jamboree Road • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011- 003 • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001 • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005 • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002 • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001 • Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003 APPLICANT: Shopoff Management, Inc. (Uptown Newport LP) PLANNER: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3208, rung @newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY A proposed mixed -use residential planned community on 25.05 -acre project site for the development of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail use, and two acres of public park space. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. _ (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council take the following actions: a. Certification of Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2010051094); and b. Approval of Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003, Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005, Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001, and Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003. 1 2 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 2 GENERAL VICINITY MAP i i y Costa Mesa % John Wayne Airport 0 Irvine Site.Y a• v%. Newport Beach > \ \ San Diego Creek Cha ,,'�e` � Upper Newport Bay 3 4 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 3 5 0 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 4 GENERAL PLAN COG AO ' C B MU-H2 o MU -H3 MU -HP AO % 0 O A PF COG I MU -H3 A O� � I Ao OO M P O ' m- MU -H2 2 OO� 0.H3 ' I M M Airport Area C Integrated Conceptual j Development Plan zz _ Uptown Newport ZONING / X, W OA p,:tt I PC Is 7 q Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 5 GENERAL PLAN FIGURE LU22 B F I AO co, % / MII X2 ® I i C ` I M0 cos /) rr cow e C U✓ �� O t M�.N2 MU-H2 e 'a U o PF 6 A MU X2 /1� I O/I H2 tat % M Airport Area C Integrated Conceptual Development Plan + � _Uptown Newport GENERAL PLAN FIGURE LU23 . � � r 9 Legend _ OPPORTLINiTY SITES - PROPOSED OPEN SPACES MPRDVED RESDwiAL STREETS PROPOSED RESDENRAI SIREETS '1111 PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN WAYS - - • • 66 CNEL NOISE CONTOUR' — — CONCEMAL PLAN REQUIRED 9 10 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 6 LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE Industrial Site 1 of ON -SITE MU -H2 (Mixed -Use PC 15 (Koll Center Office /Industrial Horizontal 2) Newport Planned Community) NORTH MU -H2 PC 15 Office Developments SOUTH UCI North Campus UCI North Campus UCI North Campus MU -H2 /UCI North PC15 & UCI North Office /Commercial EAST Campus Campus Developments & UCI North Campus WEST MU -H2 PC 15 Office Develo ments INTRODUCTION Proiect Setting The subject property is located within the Airport Area and approximately 25.05 acres in size. The property is currently developed with two office /industrial buildings that are being leased to TowerJazz Semiconductor. The northernmost building located at 4321 Jamboree Road ranges from 40 to 50 feet in height and 311,452 square feet in size. The southernmost "Half Dome" building located at 4311 Jamboree Road, is approximately 25 feet in height and 126,675 square feet in size. A Southern California Edison (SCE) substation is located at the southwest corner of the property and it presently serves the existing industrial uses. The balance of the site is developed with landscaping and surface parking lots. Vehicular access to the project site is provided by two driveways from Jamboree Road (one signalized) and one driveway from Birch Street. The site is surrounded to the north, west, and south by commercial /office uses within the Koll Center Newport office park. To the north are clusters of office buildings ranging from 1 to 15 stories in height, and three restaurants. To the west are office buildings ranging from 1 to 4 stories high, landscaped areas, and two man -made lakes. To the south are two 20 -story office buildings, surface parking, and a fast -food restaurant. Jamboree Road forms the eastern boundary of the project site, and beyond Jamboree Road to the east is undeveloped open space within the North Campus of the University of California, Irvine. The North Campus is designated for mixed -use development with office, commercial and retail, university and non- university related residential and support uses. The San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve is approximately 875 feet southeast of Jamboree Road. 11 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 7 Project Description The proposed Uptown Newport project consists of the removal of existing office and industrial uses over time in two primary phases and the construction of a mixed use community consisting of 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of neighborhood - serving retail space, and approximately two acres of park space. Residential product types would be for -sale and rental with a mix of townhomes, mid- and high -rise apartment or condominiums. Of the 1,224 housing units, 185 units would be set aside for affordable housing. Proposed buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height; with several residential towers up to 150 feet high. Vehicular access to the site would be from Jamboree Road, Birch Street, and Von Karman Avenue. Phase 1 will include demolition of the existing single -story office building "Half Dome ", and development of the westerly portion of the property and the frontage along Jamboree Road. Phase 1 will include up to 680 residential units and up to 11,500 square feet of retail space, and is projected to commence in 2013 and to be completed in 2018. Phase 2 will include demolition of the existing TowerJazz building, and development of the remaining 564 residential units on the easterly portion of the property. Timing for Phase 2 construction would be contingent on the existing lease of the TowerJazz facility, which will expire in March 2017, but could be extended to March 2027 by TowerJazz. It is conservatively assumed that Phase 2 construction could commence as early as Spring 2017, with project build -out through the year 2021. The applicant, Shopoff Management, Inc. on behalf of Uptown Newport LP, is the master developer and would be responsible for the project implementation including the followings: • Demolition, site preparation, and rough grading; • Backbone storm drain, sanitary sewer, water distribution, and utility systems; • Street improvements within the development, including street paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk /bike improvements, and lighting; • Common area fencing and walls; • Two (2), 1 acre neighborhood parks; • Landscape improvements within common areas and paseos, project entries, and Jamboree Road sidewalk/bike trail improvements • Community signage The application consists of the following components: • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2010051094): An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting 12 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 8 from the proposed project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003: An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community) to remove the subject property from the Koll Center Newport Planned Community, pursuant to Chapter 20.66 (Amendments) of the Municipal Code. • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001: A Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) adoption to establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as zoning document for the construction of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial, and 2.05 acres of park space, pursuant to Chapter 20.56 of the Municipal Code. The PCDP has three (3) components: 1) Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures; 2) Phasing Plan; and 3) Design Guidelines. • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002: A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001: A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, pursuant to Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Municipal Code. • Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003: A Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits, pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.a & c of the Municipal Code and General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12. Background On October 4, 2012, a study session was held for the proposed project to provide the Planning Commission and the public an opportunity to review and discuss the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and proposed project. During the study session, the Planning Commission provided both oral and written comments on the proposed zoning documents, tentative tract map, and master site plan. The Planning Commission also commented on the overall approval process for the project implementation and expressed the need to review the master site development plans (preliminary grading, street improvement, landscape, wall /fence, lighting and signage plans) prior to recordation of any final subdivision maps. A discussion of vehicular and pedestrian connectivity between the Koll Center and project site also occurred. Comments by the general public were also considered. 13 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 9 DISCUSSION Environmental Review A DEIR has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The DEIR was released for public review and comment on September 10, 2012. The 45 -day public review period ended on October 24, 2012. During that period the City received 26 comment letters from governmental agencies, regional organizations, and individuals. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, the City has evaluated all substantive comments received on the Draft EIR, and has prepared written responses to these comments. The Final EIR, consists of the DEIR, public comments, responses to comments, Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program, and revisions to the DEIR, is attached as Attachment PC 1 B. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures through the implementation of Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, with the exception of the following significant and unavoidable impacts: • Air Quality — Short term construction - related emission for Phases 1 and 2 of the project • Land Use — A determination of inconsistency with the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) (discussed below) • Noise — Construction - related noise impacts for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project The DEIR identified three (3) significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level through the adoption of mitigation measures or project alternatives. Therefore, if the Planning Commission chooses to support the project, the Planning Commission will need to decide whether the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the identified significant environmental impacts. If the Planning Commission believes the overriding considerations, including project benefits, outweigh these unavoidable impacts, the Planning Commission may make a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment PC 1 C), 14 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 10 which states the reasons that support its actions as part of their review of the Final EIR and the proposed project. General Plan and Integrated Conceptual Development Plan The subject property has a General Plan Land Use Element designation of 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. The MU -H2 designation applies to a majority of properties in the Airport Area outside the high noise levels from John Wayne Airport. The MU -H -2 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 adjusted gross acre. A total of 550 of these units are identified as additive units meaning they are not replacement units. These 550 units may be constructed as infill on existing surface parking lots or areas not used as occupiable buildings on properties within the Conceptual Development Plan Area (east of MacArthur Boulevard), as depicted on Figure LU22 Airport Area of the Land Use Element. The Conceptual Development Plan Area has strong potential for the introduction of new residential development and is further identified in Figure LU23 Airport Area Residential Village Illustrative Concept Diagram. Figures LU22 and LU23 are shown on page 5 of the staff report. Prior to any residential development within the Airport Area, the General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.11 requires the preparation of a Conceptual Development Plan to: "Demonstrate the compatible and cohesive integration of new housing, parking structures, open spaces, recreational amenities, pedestrian and vehicular linkages, and other improvements with existing non - residential structures and uses. " In September of 2010, the City approved the Koll - Conexant Integrated Conceptual Development Plan (ICDP), which provides a framework for the redevelopment of the 25- acre subject site (formally known as Conexant), and for the redevelopment of a 15 -acre portion of the 75 -acre Koll Center Newport office park between Birch Street and Von Karman Avenue with new residential development and open space, carefully integrated with the existing office buildings and parking structures. The ICDP allocates a total of up to 1,504 new residential units: 1,244 of which are planned and could be developed on the property and the remaining 260 on the Koll property. All 260 of the new residential units on the Koll site would be "additive" units since no existing office or industrial uses would be removed. On the property site, up to 632 units would replace existing industrial and office uses that are planned to be demolished. The remaining 290 units would be additive. Also, on the property site includes the ability to construct up to 322 density bonus units onsite, to provide affordable housing in addition to that needed to satisfy the City's inclusionary housing 1� Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 11 requirements. Together, the two properties would use all of the 550 additive units prescribed for the Conceptual Development Plan area by the General Plan. The approval of the ICDP was a pre- requisite for the preparation of the regulatory documents, pursuant to General Plan Policy LU6.15.11. The ICDP is aimed at fulfilling the policies of the General Plan, ensuring cohesive and livable neighborhoods oriented to parks and pedestrian ways, and a finer - grained network of pedestrian - friendly streets. The ICDP also establishes the direction for each of the property owners to separately prepare and submit a regulatory plan for their holdings as a basis for environmental review, public hearings and City action. Regulatory Plans must be in substantial compliance with the intent of the ICP, particularly in terms of the number of additive residential units (except for any density bonuses for affordable units) and the connectivity between the Koll and subject property. The subject property has a maximum development limit of 442,775 square feet per Anomaly No. 8 of the General Plan Land Use Element. In order to accommodate the proposed development, the applicant is requesting to convert only the existing office and industrial square footage of 438,127 to residential and commercial retail uses and forfeit the remaining unused square footage of 4,648. The conversion results in a total of 632 residential units and 11,500 square feet of retail commercial to be developed as replacement units for redevelopment of the existing office /industrial uses. The application of the conversion factors is documented in a report titled "Airport Area Residential & Mixed Use Adjustment Factors for Traffic Analyses in Newport Beach" prepared by Richard M. Edmonston, dated March 10, 2009. Additionally, General Plan Land Use Policy 6.15.7 allows a maximum density of 50 units per net acre average over the total area of each residential village in the Airport Area. The net acreage is to be exclusive of existing and new rights -of -way, public pedestrian ways and neighborhood parks. The project has a net developable residential land area of 18.46 acres, which could allow for a maximum of 922 dwelling units (18.46 x 50 du /ac) inclusive of 290 additive and 632 replacement units (62 less units converted to 11,500 sf. of retail). The 290 "additive" units have been allocated to the subject property in accordance with General Plan Land Use Element and ICDP. This density is consistent with General Plan policies. And lastly, up to 322 density bonus units are proposed based on the maximum 35% allowance pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Municipal Code. All together, a total of 1,244 residential units are being proposed for the project. The table below illustrates the project's proposed replacement, additive and density bonus residential units. 1% Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 12 As of note, the density bonus units are not a part of the 2,200 units assigned to the MU- H2 properties and therefore, the remaining developable residential units for other MU- H2 designated properties within the Airport Area would be 1,278 residential units (2,200 -922). The project is eligible for a density bonus of up to 35 percent above and beyond the allowable base residential units in accordance with Government Code Sections 65915 through 65917 and Chapter 20.32 Density Bonus of the Municipal Code. The General Plan Land Use policies promote the introduction of residential and mixed - use development within the Airport Area, provided that such development contributes to the creation of viable neighborhood clusters with appropriate infrastructure, pedestrian - oriented features and open spaces, and with a pattern of development that offers a strong sense of community and livability. A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies could be found in the Land Use Section of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The analysis concludes that the project is consistent with each of the adopted goals and policies. Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Plan Amendment The subject property is currently zoned Planned Community and subject to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community (PC -15) regulations. The site is designed Industrial Site 1 which allows light industrial, office, and commercial uses; and residential is not permitted. In order to accommodate the proposed development, the applicant is requesting an amendment to PC -15 to remove the property and all relevant development standards pertaining to Industrial Site 1. The redlined PC -15 Planned Community Development Plan (Attachment No. PC 1D) illustrates the proposed deletions. 17 Phase 1 Units Phase 2 Units Total Units Replacement Units Half Dome Building - 126,675 sf. 276 0 276 TowerJazz Building - 311,452 sf. 0 418 418 Total Replacement Units 276 418 694 Additive Units 290 0 290 Sub -Total Units 566 418 984 Less Units Converted to 11,500 sf. of Retail -62 0 -62 Base Units Before Density Bonus 504 418 922 Density Bonus 35% Requested 176 146 322 Total Units Affordable Units (20 %) Market Rate Units 680 100 580 564 85 479 1,244 185 1,059 As of note, the density bonus units are not a part of the 2,200 units assigned to the MU- H2 properties and therefore, the remaining developable residential units for other MU- H2 designated properties within the Airport Area would be 1,278 residential units (2,200 -922). The project is eligible for a density bonus of up to 35 percent above and beyond the allowable base residential units in accordance with Government Code Sections 65915 through 65917 and Chapter 20.32 Density Bonus of the Municipal Code. The General Plan Land Use policies promote the introduction of residential and mixed - use development within the Airport Area, provided that such development contributes to the creation of viable neighborhood clusters with appropriate infrastructure, pedestrian - oriented features and open spaces, and with a pattern of development that offers a strong sense of community and livability. A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies could be found in the Land Use Section of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The analysis concludes that the project is consistent with each of the adopted goals and policies. Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Plan Amendment The subject property is currently zoned Planned Community and subject to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community (PC -15) regulations. The site is designed Industrial Site 1 which allows light industrial, office, and commercial uses; and residential is not permitted. In order to accommodate the proposed development, the applicant is requesting an amendment to PC -15 to remove the property and all relevant development standards pertaining to Industrial Site 1. The redlined PC -15 Planned Community Development Plan (Attachment No. PC 1D) illustrates the proposed deletions. 17 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 13 Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan Adoption To be consistent with the General Plan and ICDP, the applicant submitted the draft Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) that will serve as the zoning document for the entire project. It establishes the allowable land uses, development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, consistent with the ICDP and in compliance with the PCDP requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The draft PCDP consists of three (3) components: Land Use Development Standards and Procedures, Phasing Plan, and Design Guidelines. The Land Use Development Standards and Procedures document provides land use development regulations, site development standards, and planned community development plan implementation process. The use of the City's density bonus provisions for affordable housing and for the transfer of development rights from other properties are being addressed in this document. The Phasing Plan describes how the project development will be evolved in two primary phases which include demolition, on -site improvements, and off -site improvements. The Design Guidelines document identifies site planning standards, architectural guidelines, site development and infrastructure criteria, landscape design guidelines and signage allowance for the entire project. The proposed site plan of PCDP and tentative tract map dictate the location and configuration of residential development, major network of streets and pedestrian ways, and locations of parks and open space. The site plan is also identified pedestrian connectivity between the Koll property and subject property, vehicular and pedestrian access to Birch Street via an existing access easement, and an emergency access to Von Karman Avenue via an existing access easement. During the October 4, 2012, study session, drafts of the proposed Uptown Newport PCDP were considered, and the Planning Commission provided a number of comments pertaining to the project's approval and implementation processes, overall permitted uses, parking standards, tentative tract map, master site plan, design guidelines, and phasing plan. Staff has worked with the applicant to incorporate a number of revisions to Uptown PCDP that are intended to address the issues. The revised PCDP documents (Land Uses Development Standards & Procedures, Phasing Plan and Design Guidelines) are provided in Attachment PC 1 E and the more substantive revisions summarized below. Land Uses Development Standards & Procedures (PC Text) • Duration of Existing Industrial Uses WrA Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 14 Existing industrial uses on the property would continue to be operated as nonconforming uses until the termination of TowerJazz's lease, which expire in March 2017, unless TowerJazz exercises options to extend the lease until 2027. The applicant indicated that they will not extend the lease and has made this commitment within the Development Agreement. • Permitted Land Use Regulations and Their Interface with Residential Uses The proposed land use regulation table has been expanded to allow more neighborhood - serving retail uses, to benefit the local residents and businesses. • Parking Provisions, On- and Off - Street As proposed, parking for the entire development will be provided within parking structures which will be encapsulated (i.e., wrap style architecture), below grade (i.e., podium style), or screened (i.e., podium with a portion of the garage wall above grade with landscape screening). Parking for the residential and retail uses including their visitors, employees and service staff will be provided within these parking structures. Surface parking is not proposed, except for on- street parking along the residential streets. On- street visitor parking is provided and made available to adjacent to retail uses and residents throughout the project. The parking management plan to deviate from the parking standards has been removed from the PCDP. • Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan has been revised as follow: • Widening of the vehicular travel lanes at the primary entry Fairchild intersection to provide additional lane width. Two inbound travel lanes are provided (12 feet - wide and 16 feet wide), and two outbound lanes are provided (12 -feet wide and 14 feet wide); • Widening of "E" Street from 24 feet to 32 feet with a cul -de -sac at the end with parking on one side. "E" Street will provide access to the Phase 1 neighborhood park and residential parcels adjacent to the streets as well as provide emergency access to Von Karman Avenue; • F" Street has been shifted to the west to align with the a traffic roundabout circle on "B" Street resulting the elimination of "G" Street, and to allow for future vehicular and /or pedestrian connection between the Uptown Newport project and the Koll Center Newport as envisioned by the City of Newport Beach General Plan; • A traffic roundabout has been provided on "B" Street to provide an alternative for residents and guests to exit the project and go east on Jamboree Road at the 19 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 15 Fairchild intersection, additional traffic calming along "B" Street and enhance vehicular circulation within the project; and • D" Street has been shifted southerly to provide functional -sized parcels; A Phase 1 Site Plan is also provided to depict the overall development within Phase 1. The overall location and size of the neighborhood parks will not be altered. Each of the parks will be a minimum of one -acre in size, having public streets on at least two sides and be connected with adjacent residential parcels by pedestrian walkways, paseos, and residential streets, and a minimum dimension no less than 150 feet in order to promote useable and cohesive open space. The proposed design features of the parks are consistent with General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.13 and LU6.15.14. Furthermore, the parks will be deeded to the City upon completion of each phase. These parks along with common landscape areas such as pedestrian paseos and greenbelts and Jamboree Road parkway landscaping will be improved and maintained by the applicant under the master association maintenance agreement. • Master Site Development Plan Approval Process The PCDP has been revised to clarify the process for approval of subsequent implementing projects. This includes a master site development plan that will require review and approval by the Planning Commission. The purpose of the master site development plan is to ensure that as project is developed in phases consistently is maintained with the Uptown Newport PCDP, Development Agreement, environmental mitigation measures, and applicable City codes and standards. In addition this process will ensure that the infrastructure improvements are constructed and completed in a complete and cohesive manner. Master Site Development Plans for subsequent phases of this project will include the following preliminary plans: 1. Grading 2. Street improvements 3. Landscape and plant palette 4. Public parks and paseos 5. Master wall /fence 6. Master lighting (streets & common areas) 7. Signage Subsequent to the adoption of the master site development plans by the Planning Commission, individual site development review applications will be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director. This process is required prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for the following: 20 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 16 1. New buildings 2. Neighborhood parks and paseos 3. On -site recreational amenities Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines have been revised to provide additional clarity and details to articulate the quality intent of the proposed architecture and landscape standards, and to provide the regulatory framework and standards for implementing projects through the site development review process set forth in the PCDP. In addition to the above revisions, the applicant has submitted a list of responses to Commissioner Tucker's study session list of issues dated October 4, 2012. The applicant's response list is attached as Attachment PC 3. Phasing Plan The Phasing Plan has been revised to provide a minimum and maximum range for Phases 1 and 2; reaffirm the role of the master developer in completing the master site improvements within each phase; and provide additional details in response to questions and comments raised during the study session. Tentative Tract Map The proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 (Attachment PC 1 H) is the implementing subdivision map for the project. The Tentative Tract Map describes the subdivision of the project site into lots for public dedication, conveyance for financing purposes, and conveyance to future builders. The Tentative Tract Map also describes the plan for grading, roadways, infrastructure, and other public improvements to serve the subdivision. Approval of the proposed Tentative Tract Map in conjunction with the PCDP would permit rough and precise grading, site remediation, construction of roadways, drainage and water quality improvements, backbone infrastructure, and utilities, including domestic water and sewer facilities. Future development of buildings may involve subsequent tentative and final maps. Section 19.12.070 of the Municipal Code establishes findings that must be made in order to approve a tentative map. These findings and facts in support of findings are provided in Attachment PC 1 F. Staff has recommended an extensive list of conditions of approval (Attachment PC 1G) to ensure consistency with other components of the proposed project and compliance with City policies and regulations. 21 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 17 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) of the Municipal Code requires a traffic study to be prepared and findings be made prior to issuance of building permits if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). The TPO traffic study differs from the cumulative traffic analyses in the EIR in that, typically, the TPO's focus is on conditions one year after project occupancy, or five years after project approval for larger projects that are not expected to be completed within five years. The entire Uptown Newport project is not anticipated to be completed within five years of approval. Therefore, the TPO analysis addresses only Phase 1 of the project since it is planned to be completed within the next five years (Attachment PC 1J). A separate TPO analysis for Phase 2 of the project will be required to prepare prior to the issuance of building permits within Phase 2. Phase 1 will generate an additional 5,012 daily trips, 317 during the AM peak hour and 443 during the PM peak hour. At the project's build -out (Phase 2), the Project is anticipated to generate 8,286 daily trips, 542 during the AM peak hour and 727 during the PM peak hour. Traffic patterns to and from the site due to the change in land use are accounted for (e.g. residential use and office /industrial have near reverse AM and PM trip generation). As a result, while the proposed project increases in daily trips, there is a reduction of trips on some intersection movements and an increase on others in each of the morning and evening peak hours. The analysis concludes that there is no significant impact to the studied intersections. 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. These findings and facts in support of findings are provided in Attachment PC 11. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan The Municipal Code requires the preparation of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) pursuant to Chapter 19.54 Inclusionary Housing and Chapter 20.32 Density Bonus. The purpose of the plan is to prescribe the project's obligation to provide affordable housing. The applicant has requested a 35 percent bonus density and the City is obligated to allow it provided the project includes the construction of certain amounts of affordable housing depending upon the income level targeted. 22 Units Maximum Units allowed by the General Plan 922 35% Bonus Density 322 Affordable Housing Obligation: • Minimum Very Low Income (11%), or 102 • Minimum Low Income (20%), or 185 • Minimum Moderate Income 40% 369 22 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 18 Low and very -low income units can be available to rent while moderate - income units are restricted to ownership. If a combination of income levels is constructed, the AHIP specifies the following equivalency factors: • A very-low income unit shall be deemed to be the equivalent of 3.6 moderate - income units or 1.8 low- income units. • A low- income unit shall be the equivalent of 2 moderate - income units. • For example, if 30 very-low income units are constructed, either 131 low- income or 261 moderate - income units would be required to complete the affordability requirements. If 89 low- income units are constructed, 191 moderate - income units are required. Affordable rentals will be restricted for a minimum of 30 years and moderate - income ownership opportunities will be made affordable to the initial buyer. When those units sells in the future, the City will be entitled to the initial subsidy minus some accrued equity pursuant to an equity- sharing formula prescribed in the Municipal Code and State Density Bonus Law. The AHIP provides for the following phasing of construction of affordable housing: • One -third of the total affordable units must be either under construction or completed prior to occupancy of 50 percent of the market -rate units. • The next one -third of the total affordable units must be must be either under construction or completed prior to occupancy of 75 percent of the market -rate units. • The remaining one -third of the affordable units be under construction or completed prior to occupancy of the remaining market rate units. • Additionally, since the project will be constructed in two phases, each phase will be required to provide the pro -rata share of affordable housing based upon the final number of houses constructed in each phase. The proposed construction of affordable housing in accordance with the draft AHIP (Attachment PC 1K) is consistent with Chapter 19.54 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus). Development Agreement General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12 and ICDP require a development agreement for all projects that include infill residential units in the Airport Area. The proposed development agreement (Attachment PC 1 L) between the applicant and the City describes the development rights and public benefits to be provided by the applicant. The agreement would vest the proposed project's development approvals to 23 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 19 allow build -out of the project site under the development standards and requirements in place at the time of project approval. The proposed term of the agreement is 15 years, with two 5 -year extensions. Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination California Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) and John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Section 4.11 require the City to refer the Uptown Newport project to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for consistency determination with the AELUP due to the proposed zoning amendments (planned community development amendment and adoption). On October 18, 2012, the ALUC found the proposed project to be inconsistent with the AELUP on a 4 -1 -1 vote. During the meeting, ALUC expressed their concerns with the proximity of the residential towers to the airport and based their decision on Section 2.1.3 of the John Wayne AELUP, which states "the ALUC may utilize criteria for protection aircraft traffic patterns at individual airports which may differ from those contained in FAR Part 77, should evidence of health, welfare or air safety surface sufficient to justify such an action." As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may, after a public hearing, choose to overrule the ALUC's decision by following the procedure established in Public Utilities Code Sections 21676 and 2176.5. This two -step procedure requires the City Council to conduct two separate noticed public meetings. The initial step is to notify ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics of the City's intention to override the ALUC's determination by adopting a resolution of intent at least 45 days in advance of the overruling; and the second meeting is to make specific findings that the proposed overruling is consistent with the purposes stated in Public Utilities Code Section 21670. The hearing date for the City Council consideration on the resolution of intent has been scheduled for December 11, 2012. The Council's adoption of the notification resolution does not constitute the project's approval nor does it predispose the City's future action on the project. In the event that the Planning Commission does not conclude their deliberation and project recommendations to the City Council, this matter will be continued on the City Council calendar at a future date. Alternatives Staff believes the findings for approval can be made and the facts in support of the required findings are presented in the draft resolution (Attachment No. PC1). The following alternatives are available to the Planning Commission should the facts are not in evidence of support for the project application: 1. The Planning Commission may suggest specific changes to the master site plan, tentative tract map, and /or the draft PCDP that are necessary to alleviate any 24 Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 20 concerns. If any additional requested changes are substantial, the item could be continued to a future meeting. Should the Planning Commission choose to do so, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings and /or conditions. 2. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission may deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in the attached draft resolution for denial (Attachment No. PC 2). Public Notice Public notice of this meeting has been provided in the following manner: 1) mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the property and to project interest groups; 2) posting of the site; and 3) noticing through the City's Select Alert System. The mailing, posting of the site, and notification occurred at a minimum 10 days in advance of the meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code. The environmental assessment process has also been noticed consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: (a4rf-� o alinh Ung As ociate Planner ATTACHMENTS Submitted by: .0 !/_ Lei/ / 1 PC 1 Draft Resolution of Approval containing the following exhibits A. Legal Description B. Final Environmental Impact Report C. Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations D. Revised Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Newport) E. Draft Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan dated November 29, 2012 F. Required Findings for TTM No. 17438 G. TTM No. 17438 Conditions of Approval H. Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 I. Required Findings for Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005 J. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005 K. Uptown Newport Affordable Housing Implementation Plan 25 L. Draft Development Agreement PC 2 Draft Resolution of Denial PC 3 List of Responses to Commissioner Tucker PC 4 Site Plan (Phase 1 Master Site Plan and Master Site Plan) PC 5 Correspondence Uptown Newport December 6, 2012 Page 21 20 Attachment No. PC 1 Draft Resolution of Approval 27 M RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. ER2012 -001, ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND APPROVAL OF PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. PD2011- 003, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION NO. PC2012 -001, TENATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2012 -002, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN NO. AH2012 -001, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -005, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2012 -003 FOR THE 25.05 ACRE PLANNED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS UPTOWN NEWPORT LOCATED AT 4311 -4321 JAMBOREE ROAD (PA2011 -134) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Uptown Newport LP ( "Uptown Newport' or "Applicant') with respect to a 25.05 -acre property generally located on the north side of Jamboree Road between Birch Street and the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard, legally described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, (the "Property ") requesting approval for the development of up to 1,244 residential dwelling units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial uses and 2.05 acres of parklands (the "Project'). The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: a. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003: An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Planned Community) to remove the subject property from the Koll Center Planned Community, pursuant to Chapter 20.66 (Amendments) of the Municipal Code. b. Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001: A Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) adoption to establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as the zoning document for the construction of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial, and 2.05 acres of park space to be built in two separate phases on a 25.05 -acre site, pursuant to Chapter 20.56 of the Municipal Code. The PCDP has three (3) components: 1) Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures; 2) Phasing Plan; and 3) Design Guidelines. C. Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002: A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. d. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005: A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. 29 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001: A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, pursuant to Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Municipal Code. f. Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003: A Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits, pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.a of the Municipal Code and General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12. 2. The Property has a General Plan designation of Mixed -Use District Horizontal -2 (MU- H2), and the Property is located within the Airport Business Area, for which the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan ( "ICDP ") has been adopted. The ICDP allocates a maximum of 1,244 residential units and up to 11,500 square feet of retail to be developed on the Property. 3. The Property is currently located within the City of Newport Beach ( "City ") Koll Center Newport Planned Community and is designated as Industrial Site 1. 4. On October 4, 2012, the Planning Commission held a study session for the project in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, on the DEIR and Project. 5. A public hearing was held on December 6, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in accordance with CEQA and the Newport Beach Municipal Code ( "NBMC "). The DEIR, draft Responses to Comments, draft Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the scheduled hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA "), the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K -3, the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "). 2. On December 8, 2011, the City, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR and mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Project. 3. On December 15, 2011, the City held a public scoping meeting to present the proposed Project and to solicit input from interested individuals regarding environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR. 30 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 4. The City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (No. ER2012 -001, SCH No. 2010051094) ( "DEIR ") in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K -3, which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from. 5. The DEIR was circulated for a 45 -day comment period beginning on September 10, 2012 and ending October 24, 2012. 6. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures, with the exception of the following significant and unavoidable impacts: A. Air Quality — Short term construction - related emission for Phases 1 and 2 of the project B. Land Use - A determination of inconsistency with the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) C. Noise - Construction - related noise impacts for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project 7. The mitigation measures identified in the DEIR are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level, with the exception of those impacts identified above. The mitigation measures would be applied to the Project through the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. 8. The record supports a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA in that the Project includes public benefits that outweigh the air quality, land use and noise impacts of the proposed Project. 9. The FEIR, consisting of the DEIR, Comments and Responses to Comments, Revisions to DEIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program attached as Exhibit B, was considered by the Planning Commission in its review of the proposed Project. 10. 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 which may be awarded to a successful challenger. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. 1. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Newport Beach General Plan and Integrated Conceptual Development Plan. The Planning 31 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 4 of 4 Commission concurs with the conclusion of the consistency analysis of the proposed project with these goals and policies provided in the DEIR. 2. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Final Environmental Impact Report are provided in Exhibit C. 3. Findings and facts in support of such findings for the approval of the Tentative Tract Map in accordance with NBMC Section 19.12.070 are provided in Exhibit F. 4. Findings and facts in support of such findings for the approval of the Traffic Study in accordance with NBMC Section 15.40.030 are provided in Exhibit I. 5. The proposed affordable housing implementation plan (AHIP) is consistent with the intend to implement affordable housing goals within the City pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 -65918 ( "State Bonus Density Law "), Title 19, Chapter 19.54 (Inclusionary Code), and Title 20, Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus Code) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The State Density Bonus Law and the City's Density Bonus Code provide for an increase in the number of units of up to thirty -five percent (35 %) above the maximum number of units allowed by the General Plan provided the Project constructs a minimum number of affordable units depending upon what income category is served. At the maximum density bonus of 35 %, the Project could accommodate up to 322 additional units above the 922 base units allowed by the General Plan for a total of 1,244 total units. 6. In accordance with NBMC Section 15.45.020.A.2.a and c, a development agreement is required pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 6.15.12 as the project: 1) requires a zoning code amendment that includes the development of more than fifty (50) residential units and 2) includes new non - residential development in Statistical Area L4 (Airport Area). The Development Agreement includes all the mandatory elements for consideration and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the General Plan and Government Code Section 65867.5. yx.�ri:.7►[�.]xy69i:.7►� NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach determines that, based on all information, both oral and written, provided to date, that there has not been any no new significant information, data, or changes to the Project which either result in the creation of a new significant environmental impact, or the need to adopt a new mitigation measure, or a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, or in a finding that the draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends to the City Council certification of the Uptown Newport Final Environmental Impact Report 32 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 5 of 5 No. ER2012 -001 (SCH No. 2010051094), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B, based upon the draft Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations including Project benefits that outweigh the air quality, land use and noise impacts of the proposed Project attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference. 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends to the City Council approval and adoption of: a. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003, attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference; b. Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001, consisting of three documents: 1) Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures, 2) Phasing Plan, and 3) Design Guidelines, attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by reference; C. Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002, attached hereto as Exhibit H and incorporated herein by reference, and subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit G, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; d. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005, attached hereto as Exhibit J and incorporated herein by reference. e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001, attached hereto as Exhibit K and incorporated herein by reference; and f. Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003, attached hereto as Exhibit L and incorporated herein by reference; PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6T" DAY OF DECEMBER, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman go Fred Ameri, Secretary 33 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being a subdivision of Lots 1 and 2 of Tract No. 7953, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 310, Pages 7 to 11 inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, recorded of said County. 34 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT B UPTOWN NEWPORT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ER2012 -001 (SCH No. 2010051094) Consists of: 1. Volume I: Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) a. and Appendix A dated September 2012 2. Volume II: Appendices B through H dated September 2012 3. Volume III: Appendices I though O dated September 2012 4. Final EIR dated November 29, 2012 a. Responses to Comments b. Revisions to the Draft EIR 5. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program dated November 29, 2012 The Final Environmental Impact Report is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http : / /newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2029 35 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT C A. FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR THE UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTSTATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2010051094 1. INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21081, and the State CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15091 (collectively, CEQA) require that a public agency consider the environmental impacts of a project before a project is approved and make specific findings. The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can or should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. so Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 9 of 9 (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. (f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further provides: (a) CEQA requires the decision - making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and /or other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. Having received, reviewed, and considered the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Uptown Newport project, SCH No. 2010051094 (collectively, the EIR), as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings) and Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) are hereby adopted by the City of Newport Beach (City) in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for the discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City for the development of the project. These actions include the approval of the following for Uptown Newport: • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2010051094). • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003 • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001. The PCDP has three components: 1) Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures; 2) Phasing Plan; and 3) Design Guidelines. • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002. A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. s7 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 10 of 10 • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001. • Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003. These actions are collectively referred to herein as the project. A. Document Format These Findings have been organized into the following sections: (1) Section 1 provides an introduction to these Findings. (2) Section 2 provides a summary of the project, overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the project, and a statement of the project's objectives. (3) Section 3 provides a summary of previous environmental reviews related to the project area that took place prior to the environmental review done specifically for the project, and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the project. (4) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding the environmental impacts that were determined to be —as a result of the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation (NOP), and consideration of comments received during the NOP comment period — either not relevant to the project or clearly not at levels that were deemed significant for consideration at the project- specific level. (5) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the City has determined are either not significant or can feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level through the imposition of Project Design Features, standard conditions, and /or mitigation measures. In order to ensure compliance and implementation, all of these measures will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project and adopted as conditions of the project by the Lead Agency. Where potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through adherence to Project Design Features and standard conditions, these findings specify how those impacts were reduced to an acceptable level. Section 5 also includes findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that will or may result from the project and which the City has determined cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level. (6) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the proposed project. WrA Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 11 of 11 B. Custodian and Location of Records The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related to the project are at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92658. The City of Newport Beach is the custodian of the Administrative Record for the project. 2. PROJECT SUMMARY A. Project Location The 25.05 -acre project site is within the Airport Area of the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California. It is situated approximately 0.6 mile southeast of John Wayne Airport and occupies Assessor's Parcel Nos. 445 - 131 -02 and 445 - 131 -03. It is on the west side of Jamboree Road between Birch Street and the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard. The two existing onsite industrial buildings are at 4311 and 4321 Jamboree Road. Regional access to the site is from State Route 73 (SR -73) via Jamboree Road. Vehicular access to the site is from Jamboree Road, Birch Street, and Von Karman Avenue. MacArthur Boulevard and Von Karman Avenue pass west of the site, and Birch Street passes to the north. B. Project Description Proposed Site Plan and Land Use At buildout, Uptown Newport is intended to be a multifamily residential community with neighborhood - serving retail uses. The project site is within the Airport Business Area, for which the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan (ICDP) has been implemented (General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.11). Consistent with the ICDP and allocated residential units and commercial square footage, the site plan includes up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail, and 2 acres of planned park area. The land use summary by phase is summarized in Table 1, Uptown Newport Land Use Summary. Table 1 Uptown Newport Land Use Summary 39 Phase 1 Phase 2 Total Number of Units 680 564 1,244 Developable Area (ac) 8.65 10.02 18.67 Park Area (ac) 1.03 1.02 2.05 Retail (sf) 11,500 0 11,500 Right of Way Area (ac) 2.61 1.72 4.33 Total Area (ac) 12.29 12.76 25.05 39 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 12 of 12 Housing A variety of housing developments are anticipated. Residential product types would be for sale and rent with a mix of apartments, townhouses, and condominiums. Residential buildings may include low -rise row - houses and 4- and 5 -story apartments or condominiums featuring a range of floor plan sizes. Mid -rise to high -rise buildings are also envisioned. High rise buildings would not exceed 150 feet in height. Live -work units would also be a permitted use. Of the total 1,244 residential units, up to 184 units would be set aside for affordable housing. Commercial A retail component would provide neighborhood- serving retail and services. Permitted uses would include but not be limited to restaurants and retail uses such as bakeries, clothing /boutique shops, jewelry, and convenience stores. Business, medical, dental, and professional offices would be permitted uses as well as personal service uses such as dry cleaners, hair salons, optometry, and postal services. The permitted and conditional uses for Uptown Newport are detailed in the Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures section of the Planned Community Development Plan (PC Development Plan). Parks The two 1 -acre minimum park areas would be principal focal points for the development. The parks would be privately maintained but publicly accessible. In addition to the neighborhood parks, public open space areas, private open space area, and ancillary amenities would be provided to serve residents and visitors. Circulation The development would be accessed from two intersections at Jamboree Road and one access from Birch Street. An emergency access would be provided to Von Karman Avenue via Koll Center Newport office park through an existing access drive. An internal pedestrian and open space network is envisioned to connect plazas, courtyards, parks, paseos, and retail uses. Minimum five - foot -wide sidewalks would be provided on both sides of internal streets. Operations At buildout, Uptown Newport is projected to house approximately 2,724 residents and employ approximately 26 people in the retail component of the project. The hours of the retail and office uses would be typical of neighborhood - serving uses and would be governed by the PC Development Plan. As envisioned, the project could also host a variety of special events and temporary uses throughout the year, including street fairs, farmers' markets, parades, trade shows, car shows, pageants, community concerts, outdoor displays, and recreation /entertainment events, subject to an applicable Special Event Permit issued by the City. 40 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 13 of 13 General Phasing The project would be developed in two primary phases. The first phase of the project is projected to commence in 2013 and be completed by 2018. Timing for Phase 2 would be contingent on the existing lease of the TowerJazz building, which is currently set to expire in March 2017, but could be extended to as late as March 2027. The analysis in the Draft EIR conservatively assumed that Phase 2 could commence as early as spring 2017 with buildout through 2021. The operation of the TowerJazz facility, an existing semiconductor manufacturing facility, is expected to continue as an interim use after the development of Phase 1. The Draft EIR therefore addressed the potential impacts of the Phase 1 development (an interim condition with 680 residential units and 11,500 square feet of commercial uses) operating adjacent to the TowerJazz facility. Similarly, an SCE substation at the northwest corner of Fairchild Road and Jamboree Road would remain after Phase 1 development and be eliminated during Phase 2 development. C. Discretionary Actions Implementation of the portion of the project within the City of Newport Beach will require several actions by the City, including • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2010051094). An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.). • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003. An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community) to remove the subject property from the Koll Center Newport Planned Community, pursuant to Chapter 20.66 (Amendments) of the Municipal Code. • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001. A Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) adoption to establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as the zoning document for the construction of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial, and 2.05 acres of park space, pursuant to Chapter 20.56 of the Municipal Code. The PCDP has three (3) components: 1) Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures; 2) Phasing Plan; and 3) Design Guidelines. • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002. A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. 41 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 14 of 14 Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001. A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, pursuant to Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Municipal Code. • Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003. A Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits, pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.a & c of the Municipal Code and General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12. The Final EIR would also provide environmental information to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and other public agencies that may be required to grant approvals and permits or coordinate with the City of Newport Beach as a part of project implementation. These agencies include, but are not limited to: • Airport Land Use Commission of Orange County (ALUC). The project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). The overseeing agency, ALUC, must review the proposed project and determine its consistency with the AELUP. The ALUC considered the project at its October 18, 2012, public hearing and voted to find the project inconsistent with the Commission's AELUP. Approval of the project would require the Newport Beach City Council to override this determination with a two- thirds vote. • Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). Approval of the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for the proposed project is needed from IRWD at the time of project approval by the City. • Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). The Santa Ana RWQCB would approve the project's compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Statewide General Construction Activity permit (2009- 0009 -DWQ) and Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System (MS4) permit. In addition, the RWQCB is the agency with lead oversight of the project site's remediation and is responsible for clearing the site for residential development. • South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD). The project would require permitting by SCAQMD for Rules 201 (permit to construct), 402 (nuisance odors), 403 (fugitive dust), 1113 (architectural coatings), 1403 (asbestos emissions from demolition), and 1186 (street sweeping). D. Statement of Project Objectives The statement of objectives sought by the project and set forth in the Final EIR is provided as follows: 42 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 15 of 15 1. Implement the goals and policies that the Newport Beach General Plan has established for the Airport Area and the Integrated Conceptual Plan Development Plan. 2. Develop a mixed -use residential village characterized by a diversity of building and housing types that is consistent with the prescribed minimum density of 30 dwelling units and maximum of 50 dwelling units per net acre average over the 25.05 acre project site. 3. Develop up to 11,500 square feet of retail commercial uses to serve local residents, businesses and visitors. 4. Provide housing in close proximity to jobs and supporting services, with pedestrian - oriented amenities that facilitate walking and enhance livability. 5. Integrate neighborhood parks inter - connected by pedestrian walkways to encourage a sense of community. 6. Develop an attractive, viable project that yields a reasonable return on investment. 7. Provides for the phased transition from existing industrial and office uses to a mixed -use residential village. 8. Provide beneficial site and improvements including implementing a Water Quality Management Plan. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The Final EIR includes the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) dated September 10, 2012, written comments on the Draft EIR that were received during the 45 -day public review period, and written responses to those comments and clarifications /changes to the EIR. In conformance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City conducted an extensive environmental review of the Uptown Newport project: • Completion of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), which was released for a 30 -day public review period from December 8, 2011, through January 9, 2012. The NOP was sent to all responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the Office of Planning Research and posted at the Orange County Clerk- Recorder's office and on the City's website on December 8, 2011. • During the NOP review period, a Scoping Meeting was held to solicit additional suggestions on the content of the Uptown Newport EIR. Attendees were provided an opportunity to identify verbally or in writing the issues they felt should be addressed in the EIR. The scoping meeting was held on Thursday, December 15, 2011, at Newport Beach City Hall at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658. The notice of the public scoping meeting was included in the NOP. • Preparation of a Draft EIR by the City that was made available for a 45 -day public review period (September 10, 2012, to October 24, 2012). The Draft EIR consisted of 43 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 16 of 16 three volumes: Volume I contains the text of the Draft EIR and analysis of the Uptown Newport project and Appendix A, Initial Study and Notice of Preparation, and NOP Comment Letters. Volumes II and III contain the technical appendices. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was published in the September 9, 2012, edition of the Daily Pilot, a newspaper of general circulation. The NOA was sent to all interested persons, agencies and organizations. The Notice of Completion (NOC) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk- Recorder's office on September 10, 2012. Copies of the Draft EIR were made available for public review at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, Newport Beach Central Branch Library, Newport Beach Balboa Branch Library, Newport Beach Mariners Branch Library, and Newport Beach Corona del Mar Branch Library. The Draft EIR was available for download via the City's website: http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov. • Preparation of a Final EIR, including the comments and Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR. The Final EIR contains: comments on the Draft EIR, responses to those comments, clarifications /revisions to the Draft EIR, and appended documents. The preliminary Response to Comments were provided to City Planning Commissioners on November 21 and November 30, 2012, and posted on the City's website. The Final EIR was released on November 30, 2012. In compliance with Section 15088(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines), the City has met its obligation to provide written Responses to Comments to public agencies at least 10 days prior to certifying an EIR. • The Environmental Quality Affairs Committee (EQAC) scheduled a meeting on October 1, 2012, to review and comment on the Draft EIR. The meeting was not held due to the lack of quorum in attendance. EQAC members were encouraged to submit their comments individually on the Draft EIR. • A Planning Commission Study Session was held for the proposed project and Draft EIR on October 4, 2012. • A Planning Commission public hearing was held on December 6, 2012. A notice for this meeting was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site and to all interested persons, agencies and organizations, and posted at the project site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing, consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum: • All information submitted to the City by the Applicant and its representatives relating to the project and /or the Final EIR, including but not limited to the Uptown Newport Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map, AHIP, Development Agreement, and the Traffic Study pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance; • NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project; • The Scoping Meeting notes held during the 30 -day NOP period; 44 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 17 of 17 • The Final EIR, including the Draft EIR and all appendices, the Responses to Comments document, and all supporting materials referenced therein. All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and Final EIR. The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Response to Comments of the Final EIR; • All written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public and testimony provided at the October 4, 2012, Planning Commission Study Session during the 45- day public review comment period on the Draft EIR; • All responses to written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public provided at the December 6, 2012, Planning Commission Public Hearing; • All testimony provided by agencies and members of the public at the Planning Commission public hearing on December 6, 2012; • All final City Staff Reports relating to the Draft EIR, Final EIR, and the project; • All other public reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps, or other planning documents relating to the project, the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or Responsible or Trustee Agencies. • The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) adopted by the City for the project; the Ordinances and Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project; and all documents incorporated by reference therein; • These Findings of Fact and Overriding Considerations adopted by the City for the project, any documents expressly cited in these Findings of Fact; • Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e). The documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. The custodian for these documents is the City of Newport Beach. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 California Code Regulations Section 15091(e). 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WERE DETERMINED NOT TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT Impacts Determined Less than Significant in the Initial Study As a result of the Notice of Preparation circulated by the City on December 8, 2011, in connection with preparation of the EIR, the City determined, based upon the threshold criteria for significance, that the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on the following potential environmental issues, and therefore, determined that these potential environmental issues would not be addressed in the Draft EIR. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR, and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City which indicated that the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: 45 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 18 of 18 (a) Aesthetics. The project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic buildings within a scenic highway. (b) Agriculture and Forest Resources: The project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, the project site does not include forest resources, including timberlands, and is not zoned for agriculture. (c) Biological Resources. The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community or have an effect on federally protected wetlands. It would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, or conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. (d) Geology and Soils. The project would not expose people or structure to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Zoning Map or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault, or expose people or structures to landslides. The proposed project would not use septic systems or alternative waste water disposal systems. (e) Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The closest school is UCI which is greater than one - quarter mile from the project site. (f) Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project site is not within a 100 -year flood hazard area and would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, or failure of a levee or dam. The project site is not subject to risks related to a seiche. tsunami or mudflows. (g) Land Use and Planning. The project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. (h) Mineral Resources: The project would not impact mineral resources of local, regional, or statewide importance. (i) Population or Housing. There is not existing housing on the project site, and therefore, the project would not displace housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing. (j) Recreation. The project includes the development of two onsite parks. The potential impacts of developing these parks are addressed in association with the development of the entire site (e.g., grading, air quality, noise, etc.) within the respective areas of the DEIR. 40 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 19 of 19 (k) Transportation/Traffic. The project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns or result in increased traffic levels or involve design features that would result in substantial safety risks. Project access roads would meet the requirements for fire access pursuant to the 2010 California Fire Code and adequate emergency access would be provided. (1) Utilities and Services Systems. The project would comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant in the DEIR The following impacts were evaluated in the DEIR and determined to be less than significant solely through adherence to the project design and adherence to the provisions of the Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) and standard conditions of the City of Newport Beach. Since the DEIR specifically evaluated the environmental impacts associated with each development phase, Phase 1 and Phase 2, the Findings are also presented by project phase. Where the Findings for Phase 1 and Phase 2 are the same, they are presented under a combined heading. Phase 1 Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City indicating that Phase 1 (only) of the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: (a) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The existing Southern California Edison substation would not cause significant impacts related to electric and magnetic field health hazards. Phase 2 Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City indicating that Phase 2 (only) of the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: (b) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: After the removal of the TowerJazz manufacturing facility, residents would not be at risk from accidental release of chemicals stored at the TowerJazz facility. Phases 1 and 2 Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR, and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City indicating that the project (Phases 1 and 2) would have an impact on the following environmental areas: 47 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 20 of 20 (a) Aesthetics and Visual Resources: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas, alter the visual appearance of the site, cause shade /shadow impacts, or generate additional light or glare in the project area. (b) Biological Resources: The project would not directly impact sensitive, threatened, or endangered species or affect sensitive species listed in a local or regional plan or policy. (c) Cultural Resources: The project would not impact historic resources or disturb any known human remains. (d) Geology and Soils: The project would not have any significant impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction hazards, soil erosion, or soil subsidence. (e) Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Phase 1 of the project would not produce GHG emissions that exceed the per capita threshold of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. At buildout (Phase 2), the project would result in a net decrease in GHG emissions. The project would not conflict with the plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. (f) Hydrology and Water Quality: The project would reduce the amount of impervious surfaces on the site, reducing stormwater volumes and peak flow rates. The project would not have significant impacts related to increases in onsite pollutants during construction or after project development. (g) Land Use and Planning: The project would not divide an established business community. (h) Noise and Vibration: The project traffic would not cause a substantial increase in noise levels and the project site is outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour for John Wayne Airport. (i) Population and Housing: The project would not result in substantial increase in population or housing. Q) Public Services: The project would not create significant impacts related to fire protection, police protection, school, or library services. (k) Recreation: The project would meet the City's parkland dedication requirements, and physical impacts to recreational and park spaces would not be significant. (1) Transportation and Traffic: The project - generated traffic would not conflict with applicable City plans governing the performance of the area -wide circulation system; result in traffic impacts per the City's traffic phasing ordinance analysis requirements; cause significant impacts to the Congestion Management Plan facilities or state highways intersections; result in level of service impacts along freeway segments; or conflict with adopted policies, plan, or programs for alternative transportation. The construction - generated traffic would not detrimentally impact levels of service at intersections and roadways in the service area. (m) Utilities and Service Systems: Project - generated wastewater would not exceed the capacity of existing sewer pipelines and treatment plants; the project would be adequately served by existing water supply and delivery systems; stormwater flow would be reduced in comparison with existing conditions; the Frank R. Bowerman al Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 21 of 21 landfill would have sufficient capacity to accommodate project - generated solid waste; and the project would substantially reduce onsite electricity and natural gas consumption. 5. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The following potentially significant environmental impacts were analyzed in the EIR, and the effects of the project were considered. Because of environmental analysis of the project and the identification of project design features; compliance with existing laws, codes, and statutes; and the identification of feasible mitigation measures (together referred herein as the Mitigation Program), some potentially significant impacts have been determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than significant, and the City has found —in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) (1) —that "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. This is referred to herein as "Finding 1." Where the City has determined — pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(2) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(2) —that "Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency," the City's finding is referred to herein as "Finding 2." Where, as a result of the environmental analysis of the project, the City has determined that either (1) even with the identification of project design features, compliance with existing laws, codes and statutes, and /or the identification of feasible mitigation measures, potentially significant impacts cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant, or (2) no feasible mitigation measures or alternatives are available to mitigate the potentially significant impact, the City has found in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3) that "Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report." This is referred to herein as "Finding 3." A. Air Quality (1) Potential Impact: Short-term construction emissions generated by the Uptown Newport project would result in NOx emissions that exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District's regional significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 3. Mitigation measures would not reduce construction emission levels to less than significant levels. The City hereby makes Finding 3 and determines that this impact is significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of Finding �9 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 22 of 22 Phases 1 and 2: Mitigation Measure 2 -1 would reduce NOx generated by exhaust. Table 5.2 -16 shows construction emissions with adherence to Mitigation Measures 2 -1 and 2 -2. Use of newer construction equipment would reduce construction emissions onsite. However, onsite emissions in addition to offsite emissions generated by haul trucks would generate substantial quantities of NOx and would continue to exceed SCAQMD's regional significance threshold during site preparation (year 2014 for Phase 1 and years 2017 and 2018 for Phase 2) and when construction activities of various phases overlap (year 2017 and 2018). Off -road construction equipment and on -road haul trucks for demolition, soil export, and construction materials are the primary source of NOx emissions. Therefore, of the eight years of construction, project - related construction activities would only exceed SCAQMD's threshold for three years because significant off -road equipment use and haul trucks are not necessary during vertical building construction. Therefore, Impact 5.2 -2 would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures MM 2 -1 The construction contractor shall use construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 or higher exhaust emission limits for equipment over 50 horsepower that are onsite for more than 5 days. Tier 3 engines between 50 and 750 horsepower are available for 2006 to 2008 model years. After January 1, 2015, equipment over 50 horsepower that are onsite for more than 5 days shall be equipment meeting the Tier 4 standards, if available. A list of construction equipment by type and model year shall be maintained by the construction contractor onsite. A copy of each unit's certified Tier specification shall be provided at the time of mobilization of each applicable unit of equipment. Prior to construction, the City of Newport Beach shall ensure that all demolition and grading plans clearly show the requirement for United States Environmental Protection Agency Tier 3 or higher emissions standards for construction equipment over 50 horsepower during ground- disturbing activities. In addition, equipment shall properly service and maintain construction equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Construction contractors shall also ensure that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with California Air Resources Board's Rule 2449. MM 2 -2 The construction contractor shall implement the following measures or provide evidence to the City of Newport Beach that implementation would not be feasible: • If electricity is not available onsite, generators, welders, and air compressors shall use alternative fuels (i.e., electric, natural gas, propane, solar). 50 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 23 of 23 • Construction parking shall be configured to minimize traffic interference. • Construction trucks shall be routed away from congested streets and sensitive receptors. • Construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system shall be scheduled to off -peak hours to the extent practicable. • Temporary traffic controls, such as a flag person(s), shall be provided, where necessary, to maintain smooth traffic flow. • Large shipments of construction materials and /or equipment requiring use of heavy -heavy duty tractor trailers (e.g., 53 -foot truck) shall use EPA - certified SmartWay trucks. MM 2 -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the construction contractor shall provide a statement to the City of Newport Beach that the construction contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew, such as carpools, shuttle vans, transit passes, or secured bicycle parking for construction workers. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to air quality that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project - specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. (2) Potential Impact: Construction activities associated with the Uptown Newport project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of PM2.5- Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce construction impacts to sensitive receptors. Thereby, the City makes Finding 1 and impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: Mitigation Measures 2 -4 through 2 -5 would reduce particulate matter concentration generated from exhaust and fugitive dust during construction activities. Table 5.2 -17 shows project - related construction emissions compared to SCAQMD's LSTs with adherence to Mitigation Measures 2 -1 through 2 -6. Mitigation Measure 2 -1 would require use of newer construction equipment, and Mitigation Measure 2 -4 would require additional fugitive dust control measures to be implemented during ground - disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure 2 -5 requires diesel particulate filters installed on equipment used for site improvements during Phase 2 or prohibits overlap of site improvements associated with Phase 2 during construction of Phase 1. As shown in 51 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 24 of 24 the table, Mitigation Measures 2 -1 through 2 -6 would reduce localized construction emissions below the localized significance thresholds. Therefore, Impact 5.2-4 would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures MM 2-4 The construction contractor shall prepare a dust control plan and implement the following measures during ground- disturbing activities for fugitive dust control in addition to South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to reduce particulate matter emissions. The City of Newport Beach shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. • During all grading activities, the construction contractor shall reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186— compliant, PM10- efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. • During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 24 -inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other cover that achieves the same amount of protection. • During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site and a minimum of three times per day. Recycled water should be used, if available. • During site preparation, the construction contractor shall stabilize stockpiled materials. Stockpiles within 300 feet of occupied buildings shall not exceed 8 -feet in height, must have a road bladed to the top to allow water truck access, or must have an operational water irrigation system that is capable of complete stockpile coverage. During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall limit onsite vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour. MM 2 -5 The construction contractor during Phase 2 activities shall adhere to one of the following if construction of Phase 1 overlaps with construction of Phase 2: 152 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 25 of 25 • The construction contractors shall install Level 2 Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (VDES) diesel particulate filters (DPF) on large off -road equipment that have engines rated 50 hp or greater during grading, utilities installation, paving, and concrete activities that overlap with Phase 1 building construction. A list of construction equipment by type and model year and type of DPF shall be maintained by the construction contractor onsite. Or • Phase 2 site improvements (grading, utilities installation, paving, and concrete construction subphases) shall not overlap with Phase 1 building construction. • The City of Newport Beach shall verify compliance that one of these measures has been implemented during normal construction site inspections. MM 2 -6 The construction contractor shall post a sign at the entrance to the construction site. The sign shall identify the designated contact person, telephone number, and email address for construction - related complaints. Upon receipt of a compliant, the complaint shall be investigated and corrective action shall be taken, if needed. The construction contractor shall file a report to the City of Newport Beach of the nature of the compliant and action taken to remedy the complaint within two working days. A log of the complaints and resolutions to the complaints shall be maintained onsite. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to air quality that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project - specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. B. Biological Resources (1) Potential Impact: The proposed project would remove habitat that could be used for nesting by migratory birds. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding 53 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 26 of 26 Phases 1 and 2: Mitigation Measure 3 -1 requires survey and identification of any active nests in or near the project site by a qualified biologist during construction. Compliance with the requirements of Mitigation Measure 3 -1 would reduce potential impacts to migratory birds to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures MM 3 -1 Prior to any proposed actions during the breeding season, January 31st through September 15th, the monitoring biologist shall conduct a pre - construction survey(s) to identify any active nests in and near the project area no more than three days prior to project initiation. If the biologist does not find any active nests that would be potentially impacted, the proposed action may proceed. Any active nests observed during the survey shall be mapped on a recent aerial photograph, including documentation of GPS coordinates. If the biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the action area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest using temporary plastic fencing or other suitable materials, such as barricade tape and traffic cones. The buffer zone shall range from a 300- to 500 -foot radius at the discretion of the biologist. Only activities approved by the qualified biologist shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. Once the nest is no longer active, the proposed action may proceed within the buffer zone. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. C. Cultural Resources (1) Potential Impact: Development of the project site, including excavation as deep as 15 feet, could impact archaeological and /or paleontological resources. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: Mitigation Measure 4 -1 requires a professional archaeologist to be retained to monitor ground- disturbing activities, determine potential to disturb cultural resources, and halt construction activities if necessary. Mitigation Measure 4 -2 54 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 27 of 27 requires an Orange County— certified professional paleontologist to be retained during ground- disturbing activities to assess potential impacts to paleontological resources and prepare a paleontological mitigation plan if required. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measures 4 -1 and 4 -2 would reduce paleontological impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures MM 4 -1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department that an Orange County — certified professional archaeologist has been retained to monitor any potential impacts to archaeological or historic resources throughout the duration of any ground- disturbing activities at the project site. The archeologist shall develop a Cultural Resources Awareness Training program, which shall provide examples of the types of resources that might be encountered and detail procedures to be implemented in that event. The qualified archeologist shall be present at the pregrade meeting to present the training program to all earthmoving personnel and their supervisors and to discuss the monitoring, collection, and safety procedures of cultural resources, if any are found. If subsurface cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during ground- disturbing activities, the construction contractor shall ensure that all work stops within 25 feet of the find until the qualified archeologist can assess the significance of the find and, if necessary, shall develop appropriate treatment or disposition of the resources in consultation with the City of Newport Beach and a representative of the affected Native American tribe (Gabrielino). The archeological monitor shall have the authority to halt any project - related activities that may be adversely impacting potentially significant cultural resources. Suspension of ground disturbances in the vicinity of the discoveries shall not be lifted until an archeological monitor has evaluated the discoveries to assess whether they are classified as significant cultural resources, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. MM 4 -2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department that an Orange County— certified professional paleontologist has been retained to monitor any potential impacts to paleontological resources throughout the duration of any ground- disturbing activities at the project site. The paleontologist shall review the project's final plans and develop and implement a Paleontological Mitigation Plan, which shall include the following minimum elements: • All earthmoving activities eight -feet or more below the current surface shall be monitored full -time by a qualified paleontological monitor. 55 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 28 of 28 • If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor has the authority to temporarily divert work within 25 feet of the find to allow recovery of the fossils and evaluation of the fossil locality. • Fossil localities shall require documentation including stratigraphic columns and samples for micropaleontological analyses and for dating. • Fossils shall be prepared to the point of identification and evaluated for significance. • Significant fossils shall be cataloged and identified prior to being donated to an appropriate repository. • The final report shall interpret any paleontological resources discovered in the regional context and provide the catalog and all specialists' reports as appendices. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: • The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures below. D. Geology and Soils (1) Potential Impact: Development of the project could expose people and structures to hazards arising from expansive soils. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: On the project site, sandy to silty clays from onsite borings were found to have medium to high expansion indices. During grading operations within approximately the upper five feet of soils, the mixing and placement of various onsite soils as engineered, compacted fills would reduce hazards from expansive soils. However, additional testing of soil for expansion potential shall be conducted before the design - building phases of buildings in the Uptown Newport project. 50 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 29 of 29 Mitigation 6 -1 requires soil testing for expansion potential to be conducted by a professional engineering geologist or registered geotechnical engineer. Compliance with the requirements of this mitigation measure would reduce expansive soil impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures MM 6 -1 Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the project, the project applicant shall have soil testing for expansion potential conducted by a professional engineering geologist or registered geotechnical engineer. The geologist or engineer shall prepare a report describing the sampling and testing; findings; any hazards related to the findings; and recommendations for reducing any hazards identified. The project applicant shall submit a copy of the report to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department for review and approval by the City Building Division. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to geology and soils that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (1) Potential Impact: Prior to the demolition of the TowerJazz manufacturing facility in Phase 2 of the project, residents of Phase 1 of the project could be at risk from an accidental release of chemicals stored at the TowerJazz facility. Phase 1 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. (Under Phase 2, this impact is not potentially significant.) Facts in Support of Finding Phase 1: The provisions of Mitigation Measures 7 -1 through 7 -4 would reduce the hazards impacts of the TowerJazz facility to residents during the first phase of the project. These mitigation measures require compliance for specific sections of the California Fire Code and City of Newport Beach Fire Department standards, emergency notification and disclosures, and new requirements for the use of extremely hazardous substances at the TowerJazz facility. Compliance with the provisions of Mitigation Measures 7 -1 through 7 -4 would reduce the risk of potential exposure of Phase 1 residents to hazards on the project site, and impacts would be less than significant. M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 30 of 30 Mitigation Measures MM 7 -1 In compliance with CFC Section 381.1 (Amendment), prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1, the project applicant shall submit a geologic study from a state - licensed and department- approved individual or firm to the Newport Beach Fire Department Fire Prevention Division for review and approval (due to the proximity of the proposed project to a semiconductor facility). MM 7 -2 Prior to issuance of any building permit for Phase 1, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with CFC Section 27041.1 (Amendment), which prohibits the storage of any amount of extremely hazardous substances equal to or greater than the disclosable amounts listed in Appendix A, Part 355, Title 40, of the Code of Federal Regulations in a residential zone or adjacent to property developed with residential uses. Compliance shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Newport Beach Fire Department and shall include the following: • Installation of a new anhydrous ammonia tank at a minimum distance of 200 feet from the nearest existing or proposed residential structure (including the adjacent Koll property project). The new tank shall be approved by the Newport Beach Fire Department, and the tank and installation shall include mitigation safeguards such as: automatic shut -off valves, excess flow valves, restrictive flow orifices, toxic gas detection system, automatic sprinkler system, water deluge system, alarm system, and double containment piping. An updated Offsite Consequence Analysis (OCA) shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Fire Department prior installation of the new tank. • In the event a new anhydrous ammonia tank is not installed or the existing tank relocated, no residential structures shall be constructed within 200 feet of the anhydrous ammonia tank. • Demonstration of maintenance of industry best practices and provision of minimum EPGR -2 separation distances as defined by the EPA for any extremely hazardous substances (EHS) in excess of disclosable amounts. The use of the term "adjacent to" (per CFC Section 27041.1 (Amendment) shall be interpreted to be a greater distance than an offsite consequence analysis would require as a safe EPGR -2 (or an equivalent and accepted standard) separation distance (ibid). MM 7 -3 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach Fire Department that the following disclosures and emergency notification procedures /programs are in place: WrA Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 31 of 31 • Disclosure to potential Uptown Newport residences that hazardous chemicals are used and stored at the adjacent TowerJazz facility. • Inclusion of property manager or authorized representative of the Uptown Newport residential community to the emergency notification list of the TowerJazz Business Emergency Plan. • Program to inform /train the property manager or authorized representative of the Uptown Newport residential community in emergency response and evacuation procedures and to incorporate ongoing coordination between the Uptown Newport representative and TowerJazz to assure proper action in the event of an accident at the facility (shelter in place and /or evacuation routes). • Upgrade TowerJazz emergency alarm system to include concurrent notification to Uptown Newport residents of chemical release. Provisions of the alarm system and emergency notification procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach Fire Department. MM 7-4 Prior to the introduction of a new extremely hazardous substance (EHS) or increase in quantity of any existing EHS at TowerJazz, an updated OCA shall be prepared and reviewed and authorized by the City of Newport Beach Fire Department. Any new EHS shall be appropriately located and the installation designed with all necessary mitigation safeguards specified by the City of Newport Beach Fire Department. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The project would be subject to the Newport Beach Fire Department Guidelines and City of Newport Beach Fire Code (City Municipal Code Chapter 9.04). Specific Conditions of Approval pursuant to these requirements would be specified by the Newport Beach Fire Department, and would include compliance with the following California Fire Code (CFC) requirements: • Sections 318.1 (Amendment). A geological study from a state - licensed and department- approved individual or firm will be required due to the proximity of the proposed project to a semiconductor manufacturing facility. • Section 2704.1.1 (Amendment). No person shall use or store any amount of extremely hazardous substances equal to or greater than the disclosable amounts as listed in Appendix A, part 355, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulation in a residential zone or adjacent to property developed with residential uses. 159 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 32 of 32 (2) Potential Impact: The project site is included on a list of hazardous material sites. Project development, including soil disturbance from site grading and construction activities, could pose substantial hazards to people or the environment through the release of hazardous materials. Phase 1 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact (migration of VOCs from TowerJazz) would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Phase 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact (contaminated soil disturbance from removal of TowerJazz) would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phase 1: Based on conclusion in the ESA and Vapor Intrusion HRA, contamination of the Phase 1 portion of the site is limited to potential migration of VOCs from the Phase 2 portion of the site. A "No Further Action" declaration or a Letter of Allowance for residential construction for Phase 1 must be is provided by the RWQCB in order for impacts to be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure 7 -5 requires issuance of this letter prior to the issuance of building permits. (A "No Further Action" letter, dated November 1, 2012, was issued by the RWQCB for Phase 1 and is included as an Appendix to Final EIR.) Mitigation Measure MM 7 -5 Prior to the issuance of building permits for development within Phase 1, the project applicant shall obtain a "No Further Action" declaration or Letter of Allowance for residential construction for Phase 1 from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under E.1. Phase 2: Soil disturbance from site grading and construction activities within the Phase 2 portion of the site could result in the release of hazardous materials that could impact Phase 1 residents and nearby office occupants. Phase 2 development could not occur until the RWQCB provides a "No Further Action" declaration or a Letter of Allowance for residential construction. The provisions of Mitigation Measures 7 -6 and 7 -7 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures ON Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 33 of 33 MM 7 -6 The project applicant shall submit copies of applicable reports and plans as submitted to the RWQCB for remedial activities within the Phase 2 portion of the project site to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. Such copies shall include remediation action plans and annual soil and groundwater remediation progress reports. MM 7 -7 Prior to the issuance of building permits for development within Phase 2, the project applicant shall obtain a "No Further Action" declaration or Letter of Allowance for residential construction for Phase 2 from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under E.1. (3) Potential Impact: Demolition of onsite buildings could result in a health risk due to the release of hazardous building materials, including asbestos and lead paint. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. Both phases of development require the demolition of buildings that likely contain asbestos - containing material (ACM) and /or lead -based paint (LBP). Mitigation Measure 7 -8 would reduce impacts related to ACM and LBP to less than significant levels. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: Mitigation Measure 7 -8 requires compliance with LBP and ACM regulations and documentation of testing. This would reduce the potential LBP and ACM impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures MM 7 -8 Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project applicant shall have the following inspections and assessments conducted for the Half Dome building (Phase 1) and TowerJazz building (Phase 2) and shall provide the Community Development Department with a copy of the report of each investigation or assessment. • The applicant shall retain a certified lead inspector /assessor to inspect buildings onsite including any structures at the SCE substation for lead -based paint (LBP). The inspector /assessor's report shall describe regulatory requirements for lead containment applicable to any LBP discovered onsite. • The applicant shall retain a licensed or certified asbestos consultant to inspect buildings onsite including any structures at the SCE substation for asbestos - containing materials (ACM). The 01 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 34 of 34 asbestos consultant's report shall include requirements for abatement, containment, and disposal of ACM in South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under E.1. (4) Potential Impact: Future residents and visitors of Phase 1 of the project would not be exposed to unacceptable levels of VOCs as a result of vapor intrusion into buildings. The health risk associated with potential soil vapor intrusion of VOCs for future Phase 2 residents is undetermined. Phase 1 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Phase 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phase 1: Phase 1 development could not occur until the Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWCCB), as lead oversight for the remediation of the project site, has cleared the site for residential development. The RWQCB may issue a "No Further Action" declaration or Letter of Allowance for residential construction for Phase 1, as stated in Mitigation Measure 7 -3. Compliance with this requirement would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. (A "No Further Action" letter, dated November 1, 2012, was issued by the RWQCB for Phase 1 and is included as an Appendix to Final EIR). Mitigation Measure 7 -3 applies to this impact. Phase 2: The Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) concluded that potential soil vapor intrusion of VOCs north and northwest of the TowerJazz building would be a significant concern for development of Phase 2 and recommended additional soil -gas characterization of the site. Mitigation Measures 7 -9 and 7 -10 require additional health risk assessments pursuant to the RWQCB requirements and the remediation of any soil and groundwater contamination. Again, the RWQCB must issue a "No Further Action" declaration or Letter of Allowance for residential construction. Compliance with the requirements in Mitigation Measures 7 -9 through 7 -10 would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 02 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 35 of 35 Mitigation Measures MM 7 -9 Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 2, the project applicant shall retain a registered environmental assessor or other professional qualified to conduct a human health risk assessment (HHRA) of potential volatile organic compound contamination. The HHRA shall be conducted under the guidance and review of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Approval of tentative tract map(s) for Phase 2 shall not occur until the project applicant obtains a "No Further Action" declaration or a Letter of Allowance for residential construction from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. MM 7 -10 Prior to issuance of a building permits for Phase 2 development, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development Department that contamination in soil and groundwater on Phase 2 has been remediated to meet the cleanup goal for the site for total volatile organic compounds set by the State Water Resources Control Board and shall have obtained a "No Further Action" declaration or Letter of Allowance for residential construction from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under E.1. (5) Potential Impact: The existing SCE substation may present health hazards related to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) and /or upon demolition, release of hazardous materials. Phase 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. (Under Phase 1, this impact is not potentially significant.) Facts in Support of Finding Phase 2: The demolition of the SCE substation presents risks of exposure to PCBs and related material. Mitigation Measure 7 -11 requires certified inspection and the establishment of a mitigation program should PCBs or other hazardous materials be identified. Compliance with this mitigation measure would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures MM 7 -11 Prior to the issuance of demolition permits for Phase 2, the construction dates for the SCE Substation shall be confirmed. If the facility was constructed prior to the 1980's, a certified inspector approved by the City 63 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 36 of 36 of Newport Beach Fire Department shall be retained to test for PCBs and related hazardous materials. If PCBs or other hazardous materials are determined to be present, a mitigation program to abate, contain and dispose of the materials shall be prepared and approved by the City Fire Department. Such program shall be implemented prior to the issuance of Phase 2 building permits. Mitigation Measures 7 -9 and 7 -10 also apply to this impact. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under E.1. F. Land Use and Planning (1) Potential Impact: Project implementation would potentially conflict with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect. The Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 3. The City hereby makes Finding 3 and determines that there are no mitigation measures to reduce this impact to less than significant levels. This impact is significant and unavoidable and would require the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: Due to the proximity of the proposed project to the Orange County John Wayne Airport, the project must be consistent with the Airport Land Use Commission's (ALUC) regulations. Since the proposed project requires an amendment to the Koll Center Newport PCDP and adoption of its own zoning (PCDP), a consistency determination by ALUC is required prior to the Newport Beach City Council taking action on the project. The ALUC considered the proposed project at its October 18, 2012, public hearing and voted to find the project inconsistent with the Commission's AELUP for John Wayne Airport (JWA) and AELUP for heliports. The Commission based their inconsistency decision on Section 2.1.1 of the JWA AELUP, which states: "the Commission may utilize criteria for protecting aircraft traffic patterns at individual airports which may differ from those contained in FAR Part 77, should evidence of health, welfare, or air safety surface sufficient to justify such an action." Since the ALUC has made the determination that Uptown Newport is not consistent with the AELUP, approval of the project will require a two- thirds vote to override this determination. No mitigation measures are available to reduce the potentially significant impact. This impact is a significant unavoidable adverse impact and would require a Statement of Overriding Considerations. 04 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 37 of 37 City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to land use and planning that are applicable to the proposed project at this time. However, project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. Additionally, other applicable standard conditions are encompassed in the topical conditions that affect land use compatibility, including air quality, noise, and traffic. � I ! � [ 71 T � -.Ti r \ � / 17 F i t [ •T i 1 (1) Potential Impact: The proposed project would introduce new stationary noise sources that would result in small noise increases in the vicinity of noise- sensitive land uses. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: Proposed noise- sensitive uses would be exposed to noise levels from subterranean parking garage activity and truck deliveries exceeding thresholds stated in the City's Municipal Code for residential uses. Mitigation Measures 10 -1 and 10 -2 would require design and operation practices that limit noise generation. Compliance with these mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures MM 10 -1 The parking lot surface of all parking garages shall be textured to eliminate tire squeal noise. Ventilation equipment for the parking garages shall be designed to meet the City's noise limits for Zone III, not exceed a daytime maximum of 60 dBA Leq (or 80 dBA Lmax) and a nighttime maximum of 50 dBA Leq (or 70 dBA Lmex)• This can be accomplished by selecting quieter equipment or by enclosing ventilation equipment. MM 10 -2 Truck deliveries shall be restricted to the daytime hours between 7 AM and 10 PM. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: 05 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 38 of 38 • The project must comply with the exterior noise standards for residential uses of the Noise Ordinance. The exterior noise level standard is 65 dBA between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM and 60 dBA between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. An acoustic study shall be performed by a qualified professional that demonstrates compliance with these standards of the Noise Ordinance. This acoustic study shall be performed and submitted to the Community Development Department as part of the Site Development Review permit application for each residential structure. If the exterior noise levels exceed applicable standards, additional mitigation shall be required, which may include the installation of additional sound attenuation devices as recommended by the acoustic study and subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. • The operator of the proposed commercial uses shall be responsible for the control of noise generated by the subject facility including, but not limited to, noise generated by patrons, food service operations, and mechanical equipment. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than noise limits specified in Table 5.10 -3 for the specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets for each residential structure, as authorized by a Site Development Review permit, and shall be sound - attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. • The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 10.32, Sound - Amplifying Equipment requires a permit for use of any sound - amplifying equipment and regulates the volume so sound - amplifying equipment is not a nuisance to persons. The use of sound - amplifying equipment is prohibited outdoors between the hours of 8 PM and 8 AM. • The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element, thru Policy N 3.2, requires that residential development in the airport area be outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour no larger than shown in the 1985 JWA Master Plan and require residential developers to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise. (2) Potential Impact: Proposed onsite noise - sensitive uses would be exposed to exterior noise levels from vehicular traffic and from operation of the TowerJazz facility exceeding the 65 dBA CNEL standard for residential and park uses. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 39 of 39 Phase 1: Exposure of patios and balconies facing the TowerJazz to noise levels of 65 dBA. Phase 2: Exposure of patios and balconies facing Jamboree Road to noise levels of 65 dBA. Phase 1 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Phase 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1: Residential patios and balconies facing the TowerJazz facility and constructed during Phase 1 would be exposed to noise levels above 65 dBA CNEL. Mitigation Measure 10 -3 would reduce noise levels from operation of the TowerJazz facility and provide noise reduction at the common and private exterior living areas to meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 10 -3, this impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure MM 10 -3 Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. The study shall demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard for all patios, balconies, and common outdoor living areas (playgrounds, parks, and swimming pools). The necessary noise reduction may be achieved by implementing noise control measures at the TowerJazz facility and at the receiver locations, as described in detail in the Technical Memorandum provided by Wilson Ihrig and Associates (Appendix J). The technical memorandum includes noise control measures that would be implemented at the rooftop mechanical equipment and at the cooling towers of the TowerJazz facility, summarized below: Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Noise Control o Exhaust Fan Noise Control: The exhaust fan noise can be most effectively controlled by constructing noise barriers M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 40 of 40 around three sides of each of the exhaust stacks, such that the barriers would be located between the stacks and the future Phase 1 development. In addition to a barrier, sound levels can be reduced by modifying the exhaust stack and fan. o Other Equipment: Other specific pieces of rooftop equipment can be treated with barriers lined with acoustical absorption. Ducts and pipes that radiate significant noise can be treated by adding mass to the duct walls, or lined with acoustical absorption or lead- loaded vinyl. o Screen: The performance of the existing sheet metal parapet wall /screen can be enhanced by treating the upper eight feet of the screen with acoustical absorption. • Cooling Towers Noise Control o Relocation: Moving the cooling towers away from the Phase 1 development would be an effective approach to noise control. o Replacement: Replacement of the existing cooling towers can be considered, as new towers would have new coils with improved air flow and efficiency. o Additional Cooling Towers: Additional cooling towers would reduce the cooling demand on individual units, allowing the fans to operate at lower speed. o Fan Noise: The cooling tower fans appear to be the primary noise source. The fan noise emanates from the top of the cooling towers and from the coils. Waterfall noise, though not readily apparent, also transmits through the coils to the exterior. The following provisions may be applied to the existing cooling towers to reduce cooling tower noise: coil replacement, variable frequency drives, tip seals, aerodynamic fan blades, treatment of the discharge stack, acoustical louvers, and sound barriers. The measures described above, or some combination thereof, would reduce the exterior noise levels at units facing the TowerJazz facility to 65 dBA CNEL. The property owner /developer shall implement these noise control measures at the TowerJazz facility and demonstrate with noise level measurements that noise from the operation of mechanical equipment at the TowerJazz facility would not exceed 65 dBA CNEL at the property boundary or at the nearest receptors. W: Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 41 of 41 In addition, the final grading and building plans shall incorporate the required noise barriers at common exterior areas and patios (glass /Plexiglas patio enclosures, wall, berm, or combination wall /berm) and at balconies (glass or Plexiglas balconies enclosure). Patio enclosures for units facing the TowerJazz facility would need acoustical absorption to absorb sound in the balcony. The property owner /developer shall install these barriers and enclosures. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under G.1. Phase 2: Residential patios and balconies constructed during Phase 2 and facing Jamboree Road would be exposed to noise levels above 65 dBA CNEL. Mitigation Measure 10 -4 would reduce noise levels from Jamboree Road and provide noise reduction at the common and private exterior living areas to meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 10-4, this impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures MM 10-4 Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 2, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Department to demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard for all patios, balconies, and common outdoor living areas. The necessary noise reduction may be achieved by implementing noise control measures at the receiver locations. The final grading and building plans shall incorporate the require noise barriers (patio enclosure, wall, berm, or combination wall /berm), and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers and enclosures. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under G.1. (3) Potential Impact: Proposed noise- sensitive uses would be exposed to interior noise levels exceeding the 45 dBA CNEL standard. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 42 of 42 Phases 1 and 2: Standard residential windows and doors would not provide the required exterior -to- interior noise reduction to meet the interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. Mitigation Measures 10 -5 and 10 -6 would incorporate noise reduction measures in the building construction for each individual residential structure to provide the necessary exterior -to- interior noise reduction to meet the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 10 -5 and 10 -6, this impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures MM 10 -5 Prior to issuance of building permits for each residential structure located within Phase 1, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Department to demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards for habitable rooms (i.e., bedrooms, living rooms, dens, kitchens) due to exterior noise from traffic, aircraft overflights, and stationary noise from the TowerJazz facility. The report shall evaluate the effects of the precise building placement and design materials used for construction. It shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the buildings, the amount of outdoor to indoor noise reduction provided by the structure, and any upgrades required to meet the interior noise standard. This standard must be achieved with the windows closed in conjunction with a fresh air mechanical ventilation or air conditioning system, and it may require upgraded construction methods and materials. According to the preliminary assessment provided by Wilson Ihrig and Associates, the required noise reduction at units facing the TowerJazz facility would be achieved with acoustically rated doors and windows with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) no greater than 35. The measures described in the report shall be incorporated into the architectural plans for the buildings and implemented with building construction. MM 10 -6 Prior to issuance of building permits for each residential structure located within Phase 2, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Department to demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards for habitable rooms (i.e., bedrooms, living rooms, dens, kitchens) with exterior noise from traffic and aircraft overflights. The report shall evaluate the effects of the precise building placement and design materials used for construction. It shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the buildings, the amount of outdoor to indoor noise reduction provided by the structure, and any upgrades required to meet the interior noise standard. This standard must be achieved with the windows closed in conjunction with a fresh air mechanical ventilation or air conditioning system, and it may require upgraded construction 70 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 43 of 43 methods and materials. The measures described in the report shall be incorporated into the architectural plans for the buildings and implemented with building construction. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under G.1. Potential Impact: Construction of the Uptown Newport project would generate vibration levels that exceed the FTA criterion for human annoyance at nearby residential structures and affect the operation of vibration - sensitive equipment at the TowerJazz facility. Phase 1 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Phase 2 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Phase 1: The operation of construction equipment during Phase 1 construction would generate vibration that exceeds thresholds for annoyance and architectural damage at the TowerJazz facility, thus with the potential to adversely interfere with the operation of vibration - sensitive equipment at the TowerJazz facility. Mitigation Measures 10 -7 and 10 -8 would incorporate vibration control measures during construction. With Mitigation Measures 10 -7 and 10 -8, feasible vibration control provisions can be incorporated to reduce Phase 1 construction vibration to acceptable levels at the TowerJazz facility. Mitigation Measures MM 10 -7 During Phase 1 construction, the construction contractor shall implement a vibration control program to reduce vibration levels at the TowerJazz facility. The Technical Memorandum prepared by Wilson Ihrig and Associates includes several measures to control vibration at the TowerJazz facility, outlined below: • Pile Driving: o Augured piles shall be employed to the extent possible. Impact and vibratory pile drivers shall not be used during construction unless TowerJazz is consulted to avoid excessive vibration during operation of sensitive equipment. Constant frequency pile drivers might be acceptable if operated at sufficient distance from the 71 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 44 of 44 TowerJazz facility and if demonstrated to not impact TowerJazz operations. • Heavy Construction Equipment: o Within 200 feet of the TowerJazz facility, wheel loaders and dozers shall be employed rather than the track - laying heavy equipment. Contractor training and notification should be conducted to minimize dozer blades and buckets being dropped on the ground for wheeled equipment operated within 200 feet of the TowerJazz facility. o Static rollers should be employed where compacting is required. To avoid excessive vibration during operation of sensitive equipment, vibratory rollers should not be used unless TowerJazz is consulted and ground vibration produced by such rollers is found to be acceptable to TowerJazz operations. o Hoe rams shall be not be used to break up concrete grade slabs within 100 feet of the TowerJazz facility and office uses adjacent to the project site. Concrete slabs can be sawed and lifted away to another location where they may be broken up by the hoe ram. • Haul Trucks: Haul trucks shall be routed away, to the extent possible, from the TowerJazz facility. • Lay -Down Areas: Lay -down areas include material storing areas such as piles, steel shapes, and other heavy items. The lay -down area should be located in portions of the construction site that are at least 200 feet away from the TowerJazz facility. • Vibration Monitoring: Vibration monitoring shall be conducted in the TowerJazz building during development and construction of Phase 1. Vibration monitors shall be located in select locations where sensitive equipment is located in consultation with TowerJazz. The most appropriate location for monitoring would be at the building foundations along the exterior sides facing the construction work. Recommended thresholds for vibration monitoring have been developed based on past vibration monitoring at the TowerJazz facility during the seismic retrofit and on the vibratory characteristics of construction equipment that are anticipated to be used during construction of Phase 1. Recommended thresholds for vibration monitoring are: o A vibration level of 0.125 in /sec will trigger a warning that will notify the construction operator and TowerJazz; 72 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 45 of 45 o A vibration level of 0.250 in /sec will trigger a warning that will notify the construction operator and TowerJazz of excessive vibration and that the construction activity that is causing the excessive vibration should be stopped. o Construction activity may recommence upon satisfactory assessment that the continued construction activity will not substantially affect the use of vibration- sensitive equipment or interfere with operations at the TowerJazz facility. Final protocol for notification to TowerJazz and construction equipment operators will be determined and documented in a vibration monitoring plan prepared prior to construction. MM 10 -8 Augured piles shall be employed to the extent possible. Impact and vibratory pile drivers shall not be used during construction within 75 feet of any building. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under G.1. Phase 2: The operation of construction equipment during Phase 2 construction would generate vibration that exceeds thresholds for annoyance and architectural damage at the Phase 1 offices and residences. Mitigation Measure 10 -8 would incorporate vibration control measures during construction. With Mitigation Measure 10 -8, feasible vibration control provisions can be incorporated to reduce Phase 2 construction vibration to acceptable levels at the offices and residences. Mitigation Measure 10 -8 applies to this impact. (4) Potential Impact: Construction activities at Uptown Newport would substantially elevate the daytime noise environment in the vicinity of nearby uses. Phases 1 and 2 Finding: 3. The City hereby makes Finding 3 and determines that although mitigation measures are able to reduce the significance of this impact, the impact is not avoided. This impact would be significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of Finding Phases 1 and 2: During construction of Phase 1, construction activity would have the potential to cause annoyance and interfere with activities at the office buildings and the TowerJazz facility facing the construction area. In addition, construction of Phase 2 would result in high noise levels at the residential uses built during project Phase 1 and at existing office buildings adjacent to the project site. Mitigation Measures 10 -9 to 10 -12 would reduce noise levels from construction activities at the nearby uses during Phase 1 and Phase 2. However, because of the height of the buildings adjacent to the 7-5 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 46 of 46 project site, sound walls blocking line of sight between construction activities and nearby noise- sensitive receptors would be infeasible. Because many of the residential areas overlook proposed construction activities, sound walls would not be effective at these locations. Despite the application of mitigation measures, nearby noise - sensitive uses would be temporarily exposed to elevated noise levels during construction activities. This impact would remain significant and unavoidable, and a statement of overriding considerations would be required. Mitigation Measures MM 10 -9 The construction contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment onsite is properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. MM 10 -10 The construction contractor shall ensure that construction equipment is fit with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer. MM 10 -11 The construction contractor shall locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from residential and recreational receptor locations as is feasible. MM 10 -12 Material delivery, soil haul trucks, equipment servicing, and construction activities shall be restricted to the hours set forth in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, Section 10.28.040. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions See the City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions listed under G.1. : 4111111111aI. U] I .[�l:7XH_1:7r71.[Ha1�1�:7a_��1� /may A. Alternatives Considered and Rejected During the Scoping /Project Planning Process The following is a discussion of the land use alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in the DEIR. 1. Alternative Project Location CEQA requires that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][A]). Key factors in evaluating the feasibility of potential offsite locations for EIR project alternatives include: 74 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 47 of 47 • if it is in the same jurisdiction; • whether development as proposed would require a General Plan Amendment; • whether the project applicant could reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]). Since the project applicant does not own or control other property within the City, the evaluation of potential alternate sites focused on sites that could accommodate a development similar to the proposed project without a General Plan Amendment within the City limits. In addition to the Airport Area, three other areas in the City allow mixed use similar to the proposed project. These include a strip of parcels along the northern side of Coast Highway in the Mariner's Mile Corridor, a number of parcels along the northern end of Newport Center fronting San Joaquin Hills Road, and a number of interior parcels of the Cannery Village area. As shown in the City's General Plan Land Use Element in Figures LU26, "Mariner's Mile," LU21, "Newport Center /Fashion Island," and LU19, "Balboa Peninsula, Lido Village, Cannery Village, McFadden Square," these areas are designated Mixed Use Horizontal 1 (MU -H1), Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3), and Mixed Use Horizontal 4 (MU -1­14), respectively. The allowed residential density for these areas, however, is less than allowed for the proposed project site. The MU -H1 and MU -H4 designations permit a density of 20.1 to 26.7 dwelling units per net acre (du /acre), and the areas designated MU -H3 are only permitted a maximum of 450 dwelling units. These areas of mixed -use designation do not have adequate size or density to accommodate a project similar to Uptown Newport, which would include 1,244 dwelling units at a density of 50 du /acre. Other sites within the Airport Area could accommodate the proposed project without a General Plan Amendment (see Draft EIR Figures 3 -3, Aerial Photograph, and 3 -4, Airport Area Planning Designations). There are other parcels with the same land use designation (Mixed -Use Horizontal -2 [MU -H2]) as the proposed project site. However, these parcels are developed, privately owned, and currently occupied. Also, as described in Section 4.0 of the Draft EIR, Environmental Setting, an application for development of the adjacent Koll Center site has been filed with the City. There are no vacant parcels within the Airport Area of sufficient size to accommodate a project similar to Uptown Newport. In general, any development of similar size and type proposed by the project within the Airport Area could experience ongoing operational impacts similar to the proposed project, including air quality (regional), greenhouse gas emissions, population /housing, public services, recreation, transportation /traffic, and utilities /service systems. Demolition impacts, including air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and noise, therefore, could likely not be avoided. However, without a detailed analysis, site - specific impacts for an alternate Airport Area site, including aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology /soils, hydrology /water quality, and hazards /hazardous materials, cannot be directly compared. With the exception of hazards /hazardous materials, these impacts would be anticipated to be similar to the project site. 75 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 48 of 48 An alternate location within the Airport Area would likely eliminate the unique impacts associated with the development of the TowerJazz site and inherent incompatibility of the semiconductor manufacturing facility with the interim residential use for Phase 1 of the proposed project. The significant impacts associated with this adjacency, however, including operational noise and potential hazards, are less than significant for the proposed project upon mitigation. Development of the proposed project at another location within the Airport Area would not eliminate the significant construction - related air quality and noise impacts or significant land use impact pending a consistency determination of the project with the AELUP. For these reasons, the City determined that an alternative development site for the proposed project would not be a feasible alternative (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][B]). 2. Optional Project Phasing Alternative This alternative was considered for its potential to reduce or eliminate significant impacts related to the concurrent operation of the TowerJazz facility adjacent to Phase 1 residences that would occur under the proposed project. Under this alternative, demolition of the Half Dome building and Phase 1 site improvements and building construction would proceed as currently defined for the proposed project. Building occupancy of Phase 1 residential structures, however, would be postponed until expiration of the TowerJazz lease and cessation of the semiconductor manufacturing operation. Under the proposed project, it is anticipated that the earliest residential units in Phase 1 could be constructed and ready for occupancy as early as mid -2015 (the entire phase is anticipated to be complete by 2018). Under the Optional Project Phasing alternative, no residences could be occupied until at least 2017; if TowerJazz renewed the lease, Phase 1 residences could not be occupied until 2027. This alternative, however, would allow the retail operations in Phase 1 (11,500 square feet, including an upscale restaurant) to commence operation. The Optional Phasing Alternative would reduce the following project - related significant impacts associated with the adjacency of occupied residential uses and the TowerJazz operation: operational noise and hazards (potential chemical release). Under the proposed project, this interim condition could exist for 6 to 12 years assuming occupancy of some Phase 1 units as early as mid -2015 and extension of the TowerJazz lease to 2027. This alternative would not reduce the construction - related impacts of Phase 2 demolition and development on Phase 1 residents, nor potential hazards related to building demolition of final Phase 2 area, since these activities would occur after Phase 1 occupancy. Moreover, it would not reduce or eliminate the potentially significant vibration impact of Phase 1 construction on sensitive TowerJazz equipment. This alternative would not modify the impact significance of construction - related air quality or noise impacts, or the significant land use impact (AELUP consistency finding). Although this alternative has the potential to eliminate significant impacts related to the adjacency of Phase 1 residents during TowerJazz operation, it was rejected for further analysis. Both the impacts that would be eliminated under this alternative would be mitigated to less than significant under the proposed project. Although Phase 1 residential units could 70 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 49 of 49 be constructed, occupancy would be postponed until 2017 under the best case for this alternative (up to 2 years for some of the units) and potentially until 2027 under the lease option (at least 9 years for all of Phase 1 residents and up to 12 years for some units). It would not be economically feasible for the project applicant to incur the development cost for this extended period of time without a return on investment. Moreover, property and building maintenance costs would be incurred while the residential buildings remained vacant. And finally, vacant buildings would not be desirable for the City and may be subject to vandalism and /or other criminal activity. B. Alternatives Selected for Analysis Based on the criteria listed above, the following three alternatives have been determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives that could potentially attain most of the basic objectives of the project and have the potential to avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects of the project. These alternatives are analyzed in detail in the following sections. • Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative • Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative Reduced Density Alternative Additionally, this section analyzes the No Project Alternative, as required by CEQA. An EIR must identify an "environmentally superior" alternative, and where the No Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is required to identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated. Each alternative's environmental impacts are compared to the proposed project and determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior. However, only significant and unavoidable impacts are used in making the final determination of whether an alternative is environmentally superior or inferior to the proposed project. Only the impacts involving air quality (short -term construction related), land use and planning, and noise (short -term construction related) were found to be significant and unavoidable. Section 7.8 identifies the environmentally superior alternative. The proposed project is analyzed in detail in Chapter 5 of the DEIR. 1. Alternatives Comparison Table 2, Statistical Summary Comparison, identifies information regarding dwelling units, proposed land uses, and population and employment projections, and also provides the jobs - to- housing ratio for the proposed project and each of the alternatives. M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 50 of 50 Table 2 Statistical Summary Comparison 1 Assumes 2.19 persons per household as determined in 2010 Census for Newport Beach (Census 2012). 2 Assumes 450 square feet per employee, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). 3 Assumes 352 square feet per employee for low -rise office uses, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). 4 Assumes 1,804 square feet per employee, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). Since SCAG's report does not provide a square foot per hotel employee rate for Orange County, the regional rate of 1,804 was used to develop the number of employees for this alternative. 5 Jobs -to- housing ratio is based on SCAG projections for the City of Newport Beach in 2035, similar to what was analyzed for the proposed project in Section 5.11, Population and Housing. For each of the alternatives analyzed herein, with the exception of the No Project Alternative, the following components /elements would be similar to the proposed project: • Development would be consistent with the City's General Plan and would require the preparation of a regulatory plan (i.e., Planned Community Development Plan) and related implementation plans (Phasing Plan and Design Guidelines). • Development would occur in two primary phases, and the phase boundaries would be the similar to the boundaries shown in Figure 3 -6 of the Draft EIR, Site Plan and Phasing Plan. • Operation of the TowerJazz facility would continue as an interim use after the development of Phase 1 and would be demolished under Phase 2. • Phase 1 would commence in 2014 and be completed by 2018. Timing for Phase 2 would be contingent on the existing lease of the TowerJazz building, which is currently set to expire in March 2017, but could be extended to as late as March 2027. F Proposed Project No Project Alternative Hotel /Office/ Commercial Alternative Office /Commercial/ Residential Alternative Reduced Density Alternative Land Use Statistics Dwelling Units 1,244 DU 830 DU 561 DU Commercial /Retail 11,500 sf — 20,000 sf 7,000 sf 11,500 sf Office — 126,675 sf 160,000 sf 100,000 sf — Industrial — 311,452 sf 0 0 0 Hotel (Rooms) — — 174 — — Park Space 2.05 ac — 1.52 ac 1.40 ac 2.05 ac Population' 1 2,724 — — 1.,818 1,229 Employment Commercial a 26 — 44 16 26 Office 3 — 135 455 284 — Hotel" — — 96 — — Industrial — 3,000 Total 26 3,135 595 300 26 Jobs -SO- Housing Ratio 178 1.91 1.85 1.88 1.81 1 Assumes 2.19 persons per household as determined in 2010 Census for Newport Beach (Census 2012). 2 Assumes 450 square feet per employee, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). 3 Assumes 352 square feet per employee for low -rise office uses, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). 4 Assumes 1,804 square feet per employee, per SCAG's Employment Density Study Summary Report (2001). Since SCAG's report does not provide a square foot per hotel employee rate for Orange County, the regional rate of 1,804 was used to develop the number of employees for this alternative. 5 Jobs -to- housing ratio is based on SCAG projections for the City of Newport Beach in 2035, similar to what was analyzed for the proposed project in Section 5.11, Population and Housing. For each of the alternatives analyzed herein, with the exception of the No Project Alternative, the following components /elements would be similar to the proposed project: • Development would be consistent with the City's General Plan and would require the preparation of a regulatory plan (i.e., Planned Community Development Plan) and related implementation plans (Phasing Plan and Design Guidelines). • Development would occur in two primary phases, and the phase boundaries would be the similar to the boundaries shown in Figure 3 -6 of the Draft EIR, Site Plan and Phasing Plan. • Operation of the TowerJazz facility would continue as an interim use after the development of Phase 1 and would be demolished under Phase 2. • Phase 1 would commence in 2014 and be completed by 2018. Timing for Phase 2 would be contingent on the existing lease of the TowerJazz building, which is currently set to expire in March 2017, but could be extended to as late as March 2027. F Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 51 of 51 • The Southern California Edison (SCE) substation would remain during the initial operation of Phase 1 to serve the electricity needs of the TowerJazz facility, and would be demolished in Phase 2. • The overall project acreage (25.05 acres) and acreage by phase (12.29 for Phase 1 and 12.76 for Phase 2) would remain the same. • The overall land use mix would be trip neutral as required by the City's General Plan (by definition, projects consistent with allowed uses under the General Plan would be trip neutral). • Parking would include a mix of surface and structure parking (subterranean and above - ground). • Vehicular and pedestrian site access would be similar. • Building heights would be regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations and standards outlined in the required regulatory plan. Table 3 provides a comparison of the vehicle trips that would be generated by the proposed project and each of the alternatives. Table 3 Trip Generation Comparison a) No Project Alternative Description: Under the No Project Alternative, no development would occur on the project site, the existing buildings and structures onsite (TowerJazz building, Half Dome building, and Southern California Edison substation) would remain and not be demolished, and the TowerJazz facility would continue operating. All other site improvements (e.g., parking areas, landscaping, sidewalks) would also remain in their existing condition. It is assumed for this alternative that the TowerJazz facility would remain onsite and operate indefinitely. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project Alternative's environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project is set forth in Section 7.4.1 of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, and vibration, public services, and recreation. This alternative would eliminate the �j Trip Generation Estimates AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Project 9,033 134 511 644 537 292 829 No Project 747 90 12 102 15 88 102 Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative 3,983 289 76 365 126 278 404 Commercial /Office /Residential Alternative 6,805 223 362 584 362 311 672 Reduced Density Alternative 4,139 64 233 297 236 135 370 a) No Project Alternative Description: Under the No Project Alternative, no development would occur on the project site, the existing buildings and structures onsite (TowerJazz building, Half Dome building, and Southern California Edison substation) would remain and not be demolished, and the TowerJazz facility would continue operating. All other site improvements (e.g., parking areas, landscaping, sidewalks) would also remain in their existing condition. It is assumed for this alternative that the TowerJazz facility would remain onsite and operate indefinitely. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project Alternative's environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project is set forth in Section 7.4.1 of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, and vibration, public services, and recreation. This alternative would eliminate the �j Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 52 of 52 significant unavoidable construction - related impacts for air quality and noise, as well as the significant, unavoidable land use and planning impact related to the inconsistency finding by AELUP for the Uptown Newport project. Aesthetic and transportation and traffic impacts under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project. GHG impacts would be substantially greater for the No Project Alternative, and population /housing and utilities /services impacts would also be greater than the proposed project. Overall, the No Project Alternative would have less environmental impacts than the proposed project and would eliminate all its significant, unavoidable impacts. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the objectives of the proposed project, because it would not implement the goals and objectives that the City's General Plan and ICDP have established for the project site. The General Plan's policies for the Airport Area and the ICDP call for the orderly evolution of this area from a single - purposed business park to a mixed -use district with cohesive residential villages integrated within the existing fabric of the office, industrial, retail, and airport- related businesses. This alternative would not provide housing in close proximity to jobs and supporting services, with pedestrian- oriented amenities that facilitate walking and enhance livability. Feasibility: Since the No Project Alternative would allow the existing land uses (TowerJazz facility, Half Dome building, and Southern California Edison substation) to continue operating on the project site, the feasibility of this alternative would rely on the economic feasibility of indefinite operation of the TowerJazz manufacturing operation. No changes to the existing conditions would occur, and all operations would continue indefinitely. Finding: In comparison to the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise and vibration, public services, and recreation. This alternative would eliminate the significant unavoidable construction - related impacts for air quality and noise, as well as the significant, unavoidable land use and planning impact related to the inconsistency finding by AELUP for the Uptown Newport project. Aesthetic and transportation and traffic impacts under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project. GHG impacts would be substantially greater for the No Project Alternative, and population /housing and utilities /services impacts would also be greater than the proposed project. From a policy perspective, this alternative would fail to provide the City with additional housing opportunities, including affordable housing, which is an identified need in the City's Housing Element. It would also fail to implement the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan (]CDP), which calls for the redevelopment of the project with residential villages integrated with the existing fabric of the office, industrial, retail, and airport- related businesses. Overall, the No Project Alternative would have fewer environmental impacts than the proposed project and would eliminate all its significant, unavoidable impacts, making it the environmentally superior alternative. However, since the No Project Alternative fails to meet project objectives, provide affordable housing, and implement the ICDP, it has been rejected by the City in favor of the proposed project. :I Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 53 of 53 b) Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative Description: This alternative was selected for its potential to eliminate impacts associated with the adjacency of residential uses to the operating TowerJazz manufacturing facility during Phase 1. Land use incompatibility concerns associated with the proximity of residential uses to TowerJazz include noise and hazards. Under this alternative, Phase 1 would include up to 174 hotel rooms (including conference, banquet facility, etc.), and Phase 2 would provide up to 160,000 square feet of office uses and 20,000 square feet of commercial uses, as shown in Table 2, Statistical Summary Comparison. This alternative could potentially include subterranean parking for one or more of the uses. Phase 1 The Half Dome building and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, landscaped and common areas, and other hardscape improvements, would be demolished. Upon demolition, this phase would include the development of up to 174 hotel rooms (including conference, banquet facility, etc.) and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. The hotel rooms could be accommodated within low- and midrise buildings with a maximum building height of 75 feet. Phase 2 Under Phase 2, the TowerJazz building, northern parking area, and other remaining site improvements would be demolished to develop 160,000 square feet of office uses and 20,000 square feet of commercial uses and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. The office and commercial uses could be accommodated within low- and midrise buildings with a maximum building height of 75 feet. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative's environmental impacts compared to the proposed project's is set forth in Section 7.5.2 of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, the Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, GHG, hazards, noise, public services, recreation, and utilities and services. As shown in Table 3, this alternative would substantially reduce traffic trips, reducing average daily trips by approximately 56 percent in comparison to the proposed project. In comparison to the proposed project, however, peak trips would contribute to the existing peak trip patterns (AM peak into site, PM peak departure), so overall traffic impacts would be similar to the proposed project. It would comply with CFC Section 2704.1.1 (Amendment), since it would not locate residents adjacent to extremely dangerous chemicals and thus would eliminate a potentially significant impact associated with the project as proposed. This impact, however, would be mitigated to less than significant, so this alternative would not eliminate a significant, unavoidable impact. Land use and planning, and population and housing impacts for this alternative would be greater than for the proposed project; aesthetics, biological resource, cultural resources, geology and soils, and hydrology /water quality impacts would be similar. This alternative would not eliminate any of the significant, unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: With the exception of the provision of beneficial site improvements, including implementing a WQMP, the Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 54 of 54 would not achieve any of the key objectives of the proposed project. It would not implement the goals and objectives that the City's General Plan and ICDP have established for the project site. The General Plan's policies for the Airport Area and the ICDP call for the orderly evolution of this area from a single - purpose business park to a mixed -use district with cohesive residential villages integrated with the existing fabric of the office, industrial, retail, and airport- related businesses. This alternative would not provide housing in close proximity to jobs and supporting services, with pedestrian- oriented amenities that facilitate walking and enhance livability. Feasibility. Although the Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative would be physically feasible, it may not be economically feasible. It is uncertain whether this alternative would yield a reasonable return on investment. Although statistics are not readily available for the demand for hotel units, information does indicate a depressed market demand for office use in the Orange County airport area as of the 4th quarter of 2011 (CBRE 2011). As of that quarter, the office vacancy rate was 24.9 percent, and it was estimated that it would take 8.5 years to absorb all of the available and under - construction Class A office space based on an annual absorption rate (2011) of 769,204 square feet for the Greater Airport area. Office use by Phase 2 of the project could be feasible if the economy picks up. If the office vacancy rate drops to approximately 7 percent, the existing office availability (including under construction) could be absorbed in approximately 4.2 years, and new office uses could be marketable. With a 5.7 percent vacancy rate, the retail market is better than the office market, but still depressed. Finding: This alternative would only meet one of the eight project objectives, but it would reduce environmental impacts to air quality, GHG, hazards, noise, public services, recreation, and utilities and services. Also, because it does not include the development of residential land uses, it would comply with CFC Section 2704.1.1 (Amendment) regarding the location of residents adjacent to extremely dangerous chemicals (a potentially significant impact associated with the proposed project), and it would be consistent with the AELUP (a significant impact of the proposed project since the Airport Land Use Commission did not grant a consistency finding). It would not eliminate any of the significant, unavoidable impacts associated the proposed project. Moreover, it would not provide affordable housing, an identified need in the City's Housing Element, it would not implement the ICDP, and it may be economically infeasible. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this alternative. c) Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative Description: This alternative was selected for its potential to eliminate impacts associated with the adjacency of residential uses to the operating TowerJazz manufacturing facility during Phase 1 while still providing residential uses in Phase 2. Land use incompatibility concerns associated with the proximity of residential uses to TowerJazz include noise and hazards. Other impacts that could potentially be reduced by this alternative, although not determined significant for the proposed project, were anticipated to be aesthetics, air quality, and health risk (TowerJazz air emissions). This alternative would include the development of office, commercial, and residential uses. More specifically, Phase 1 would include up to 100,000 square feet of office uses and 7,000 square M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 55 of 55 feet of commercial uses, and Phase 2 would include up to 830 dwelling units, as shown in Table 2, Statistical Summary Comparison. This alternative could potentially include subterranean parking for one or more of the uses. Phase 1 Phase 1 would include demolition of the Half Dome building and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, landscaped and common areas, and other hardscape improvements. Upon demolition, this phase would include the development of up to 100,000 square feet of office uses and 7,000 square feet of commercial uses and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. The office and commercial uses could be accommodated within low- and midrise buildings with a maximum building height of 75 feet. The commercial land use has been situated with frontage on Jamboree Road and might encompass restaurant uses as does the proposed project. Phase 2 Under Phase 2, the TowerJazz building, northern parking area, and other remaining site improvements would be demolished to develop up to 830 dwelling units and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. As with the proposed project, a variety of housing developments could be anticipated under this alternative. Residential product types could be for sale and /or rent —a mix of apartments, townhouses, and condominiums. Residential buildings may include low - rise rowhouses and 4- and 5 -story apartments or condominiums featuring a range of floor plan sizes. Mid- to high -rise buildings are also envisioned. Midrise buildings would not exceed 75 feet in height, and high -rise buildings would not exceed 150 feet in height. Phase 2 would also include a 1.02 -acre neighborhood park similar to proposed project. The park would be privately maintained and publicly accessible. In addition to the neighborhood park, public open space areas, private open space area, and ancillary amenities would be provided to serve residents and visitors, and paseo and walkway connections would be provided onsite and to surrounding areas. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the Office /Commercial /Residential's environmental impacts compared to the proposed project's is set forth in Section 7.6.1 of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, the Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, GHG, hazards, noise, public services, recreation, and utilities and services. As shown in Table 3, traffic trips would be reduced by approximately 25 percent in comparison to the proposed project. Since residential uses would not be introduced until Phase 2 after the TowerJazz facility is removed, it would comply with CFC Section 2704.1.1 (Amendment); that is, it would not locate residents adjacent to extremely dangerous chemicals. This would eliminate a potentially significant impact associated with the project as proposed. This impact, however, would be mitigated to less than significant, so it would not eliminate a significant, unavoidable impact. Land use and planning and population and housing impacts for this alternative would be greater than for the proposed project, and aesthetics, biological resource, cultural resources, geology and soils, and hydrology /water quality impacts would be similar. W Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 56 of 56 Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: With the introduction of 830 residential units as part of a mixed -use residential village, this alternative would meet several of the project's objectives. It would be consistent with several of the goals and policies of the General Plan for the Airport Area, although it would not be consistent with the ICDP approved for the site, which provides for the development of 1,244 residential units. This alternative would provide 7,000 square feet of commercial use (or potentially more) and therefore achieve the objective to provide retail commercial to serve local residents, businesses, and visitors. Although less than the proposed project, this alternative would provide housing near jobs and supporting services, with pedestrian- oriented amenities, and would provide the phased transition from the existing use to the office, commercial, and residential uses. It would also provide several of the beneficial impacts of the proposed project, including implementing a WQMP. Feasibility: As with the Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative, the Office /Commercial /Residential alternative would be physically feasible but it may not be economically feasible. It is uncertain whether this alternative would be a viable project that could yield a reasonable return on investment. As discussed in Section 6.B.1.b., there is currently a high vacancy rate for offices (24.9 percent). It is highly unlikely that office use in Phase 1 of this alternative would be viable. It is more likely that the 7,000 square feet of commercial use could be absorbed under this alternative. Finding: The Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, GHG, hazards, noise, traffic, public services, recreation, and utilities and services, and it would meet several of the project's objectives. However, this alternative would increase the land use and planning and population and housing impacts when compared to the proposed project. Based on the ALUC's inconsistency finding for the proposed project, it is anticipated that this alternative would also be inconsistent with the AELUP since it would be place residential uses within the AELUP planning area. It would also be inconsistent with the ICDP, since it does not provide 1,244 units, unlike the proposed project. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this alternative. d) Reduced Intensity Alternative Description: This alternative evaluates the minimum number of residential units that could be developed on the project site and still comply with the 30 dwelling units /acre minimum density prescribed for the site in the City's General Plan and the ICDP. Based on an estimated, net developable 12.34 acres for the site, 561 units could be developed: 260 dwelling units in Phase 1 and 301 in Phase 2. As with the proposed project, this alternative is assumed to include 11,500 square feet of commercial use in Phase 1. This alternative was evaluated for its potential to reduce overall long -term operational project impacts due to the substantial reduction in housing units. This alternative was also designed to provide a larger open -space buffer between the TowerJazz facility and Phase 1 to evaluate the potential to minimize compatibility impacts in Phase 1 of the proposed project related to the proximity of the TowerJazz facility and residences. M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 57 of 57 As with the proposed project, a variety of housing developments could be anticipated under this alternative. Residential product types would be for sale and rent with a mix of apartments, townhouses, and condominiums. Since the number of units would be reduced by 55 percent in comparison to the proposed project, both the overall footprint and height of residential buildings could be reduced in comparison to the proposed project. Residential buildings would include low -rise townhouses and 4- and 5 -story apartments or condominiums featuring a range of floor plan sizes. Mid- to high -rise buildings are also envisioned at a maximum height of 75 feet. This alternative would not include any high -rise towers up to 150 feet, as proposed under the proposed project. The commercial component would include neighborhood - serving retail and services. As with the proposed project, it is assumed that this alternative would include some improved park space that would be available for public use. With the reduction in housing units, it is anticipated that open space acreage could be increased relative to the proposed project (as shown in the conceptual plan, Figure 7 -3 of the Draft EIR). As shown in the conceptual layout, approximately eight acres may be available for open space uses. It has not been defined whether the entire open space area would be maintained privately and be available to the public. In addition, public open space areas, private open space areas, and ancillary amenities would be provided to serve residents and visitors, and paseo and walkway connections would be provided onsite and to surrounding areas. Phase 1 Phase 1 would include demolition of the Half Dome building and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, landscaped and common areas, and other hardscape improvements. Upon demolition, this phase would include the development of up to 260 dwelling units and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. The dwelling units could be accommodated in low -, mid- or high -rise buildings or a mix of these building types. Phase 1 would also include up to 11,500 square feet of neighborhood - serving commercial uses and likely improvements to a portion of the open space to serve as a neighborhood park, available also for public use. Phase 2 Under Phase 2, the TowerJazz building, northern parking area, and other remaining site improvements would be demolished to develop up to 301 dwelling units and other associated site improvements, including parking areas, drive aisles, walkways, landscaping, and common areas. The dwelling units could be accommodated within low -, mid- or high -rise buildings, or a mix of these building types. Phase 2 would also include open space area that could accommodate a neighborhood park, which would be available to the public. Environmental Effects: In comparison to the proposed project, the Reduced Density Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, GHG, hazards, noise, public services, recreation, traffic, and utilities and services. Average daily traffic trips would be reduced approximately 54 percent (see Table 3). Since residential uses would still be included in Phase 1, it would not eliminate the significant impacts associated with resident incompatibility with adjacency to the TowerJazz facility during an interim period. It would reduce these impacts, PON Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 58 of 58 however, because of both the reduction in units and increased distance to the TowerJazz facility. Impacts to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality, and land use and planning would be similar to the proposed project. It would not eliminate any significant impacts of the proposed project, and impacts to population and housing would be considered greater than the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: With the introduction of 561 residential units and 11,500 square feet of commercial uses as part of a mixed -use residential village, this alternative would meet several of the project's objectives. It would be consistent with several of the goals and policies of the General Plan for the Airport Area, and it would be consistent with the minimum density of 30 du /acres prescribed by the ICDP. It would provide 11,500 square feet commercial use (or potentially more), and therefore achieve the objective to provide retail commercial to serve local residents, businesses, and visitors. Although fewer than the proposed project, this alternative would provide housing near jobs, supporting services, and pedestrian - oriented amenities and would provide the phased transition from the existing use to the office and residential uses. It would also provide several of the beneficial impacts of the proposed project, including implementing a WQMP. It is unlikely, however, that this alternative would be a viable project that could yield a reasonable return on investment. The project would only develop 260 dwelling units in the first phase and overall would include over eight acres in open space, which would not provide a direct return on investment. It is uncertain whether the return from Phase 1 could support the development costs for Phase 2 or that development returns could support the infrastructure and improvements costs required for the overall project. Feasibility: This alternative is considered physically and environmentally feasible but may not be economically feasible. The project would only develop 260 dwelling units in the first phase and overall would include over eight acres in open space, which would not provide a direct return on investment. It is uncertain whether the return from Phase 1 could support the development costs for Phase 2 or that development returns could support the infrastructure and improvements costs required for the overall project. Finding: While the Reduced Intensity Alternative would lessen some of the environmental effects of the proposed project, it would not eliminate any significant and unavoidable impacts. In addition, as with the proposed project, it is anticipated that it would be inconsistent with the AELUP, since it would be placing residential land uses within the AELUP planning area. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this alternative. SAM Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 59 of 59 B. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS INTRODUCTION The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA for preparation, review, and certification of the Final EIR for the Uptown Newport Project. As the Lead Agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and which of those impacts are significant, and which can be mitigated through imposition of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant. CEQA then requires the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve the proposed Project. In making this determination the City is guided by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 which provides as follows: CEQA requires the decision - making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal (sic) project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and /or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. In addition, Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) requires that where a public agency finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of the project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the proposed Project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. The City also has examined alternatives to the proposed Project, none of which both meet the Project Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 60 of 60 objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed Project for the reasons discussed in the Findings and Facts in Support of Findings. The Newport City of Beach City Council, the Lead Agency for this Project, and having reviewed the Final EIR for the Uptown Newport Project, and reviewed all written materials within the City's public record and heard all oral testimony presented at public hearings, adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations, which has balanced the benefits of the Project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in reaching its decision to approve the Project. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts Although most potential Project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated, as described in the Findings and Facts in Support of Findings, there remain some Project impacts for which complete mitigation is not feasible. For some impacts, mitigation measures were identified and adopted by the Lead Agency, however, even with implementation of the measures, the City finds that the impact cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant. The impacts and alternatives are described below and were also addressed in the Findings. The EIR identified the following unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed Project: Air Quality Phase 1 EIR Impact 5.2 -2: Short-term construction emissions generated by the Uptown Newport project would result in oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) regional significance thresholds during site preparation activities (year 2014 for Phase 1 and year 2017 and 2018 for Phase 2) and when construction activities of various phases overlap (year 2017 and 2018) and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). Of the eight years of construction, project - related construction activities would only exceed SCAQMD's threshold for three of those years because significant off -road equipment use and haul trucks are not necessary during vertical building construction. Mitigation Measure 2 -1 would reduce NOx generated by exhaust. Use of newer construction equipment would reduce construction emissions onsite. However, onsite emissions in addition to offsite emissions generated by haul trucks would generate substantial quantities of NOx and would continue to exceed SCAQMD's regional significance threshold. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Phase 2 Same significant and unavoidable impact for Phase 1 applies to Phase 2 Land Use Phase 1 %: Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 61 of 61 EIR Impact 5.9 -3: The Airport Land Use commission (ALUC) considered the Uptown Newport project at its hearing held on October 18, 2012 and voted to find the project inconsistent with the Commission's Airport Environs Land use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport (JWA) and AELUP for Heliports. Project approval would require a 2/3 vote by the City Council to override this finding and this impact constitutes a significant, unavoidable impact of the project. No mitigation measures are available that would reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Phase 2 Same significant and unavoidable impact for Phase 1 applies to Phase 2. MIMI Phase 1 EIR Impact 5.10 -6: During Phase 1 development, construction activity would have the potential to cause annoyance and interfere with activities of occupants at the nearby office buildings adjacent to the project site and at the TowerJazz facility facing the construction area. Because of the height of the office buildings adjacent to the project site, sound walls to block the line of sight between construction activities and nearby offices would be infeasible. Despite the application of mitigation measures, occupants at the offices adjacent to the project site would be temporarily exposed to elevated noise levels during construction activities, and this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Phase 2 EIR Impact 5.10 -6: The operation of heavy construction equipment during construction of Phase 2 would result in high noise levels at the residential buildings constructed under Phase 1 and at office buildings adjacent to the project site. Because of the height of these buildings, sound walls to block the line of sight between construction activities and nearby residents and office occupants would be infeasible. Despite the application of mitigation measures, nearby noise - sensitive uses would be temporarily exposed to elevated noise levels during construction activities, and this would remain significant and unavoidable. In addition, the EIR evaluated four alternatives to the Project and analyzed whether these alternatives could avoid or substantially lessen the unavoidable environmental impacts of the proposed Project. While some of the alternatives could lessen or avoid some of the unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project, some of the alternatives also resulted in different and in some cases, increased environmental impacts, consequently, for the reasons set forth in Section 6 of the Facts and Findings, none of the alternatives were determined to be feasible: • No Project Alternative (Continuation of Existing Land Uses). • Hotel /Office /Commercial Alternative • Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative • Reduced Density Alternative 5• Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 62 of 62 The City, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed Project, has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be considered acceptable due to the following specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project, in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guideline Section 15093. 1. Payment of a public benefit fee per residential dwelling unit developed as part of the Project, including an annual adjustment to the public benefit fee based on the Consumer Price Index ( "CPI "). 2. Park land dedication and improvements consistent with applicable State law and Municipal Code provisions, including the dedication and improvement of over two (2) acres of on -site public parkland. 3. Perpetual annual private maintenance of over two (2) acres of on -site public parks. 4. Improvement of private open space, including paseos and urban plazas that will be accessible to the public and connect the Project and surrounding properties to promote connectivity and pedestrian travel in the Airport Area. 5. Remediation of soil and groundwater contamination on the Property that has existed on- site since the mid- 1980's. 6. Reduction in greenhouse gases generated within the Airport Area 7. Reduction in electric, gas, water and sewer utility usage through the redevelopment of an existing industrial manufacturing site into a residential mixed use project. 8. Reduction of urban runoff volumes and implementation of stormwater runoff water quality facilities that will improve the quality of stormwater runoff entering the Newport Back Bay. 9. Construction of affordable housing units within the Project that will provide affordable housing opportunities to Newport Beach residents. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 63 of 63 EXHIBIT D PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. PD2011 -003 Consists of: • Revised Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Planned Community) showing the removal (in strike eat) of Industrial Site 1 (the Property) with all its references, allowable land uses, and general development regulations including all written text, maps and exhibits. • Inclusion of a footnote to indicate the removal of Industrial Site 1 and all reference to it by Ordinance No. of the City Council on • No other change to the Koll Center Planned Community are recommended and it shall remain in full force and effect. 91 PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS For Koll Center Newport Ordinance No. 1449, adopted by the City of Newport Beach August 14, 1972 (Amendment No. 313) Original draft May 5, 1972 Amendment (1) August 14, 1972 Amendment (2) August 14, 1972 Amendment (3) August 2, 1973 Amendment (4) February 7, 1974 Amendment (5) June 10, 1974 Amendment (6) May 15, 1975 Amendment (7) September 8, 1975 Amendment (8) June28, 1976 Amendment (9) January 10, 1977 Amendment (10) July 11, 1978 Amendment (11) August28, 1978 Amendment (12) October l9, 1978 Amendment (13) November 10, 1980 Amendment(14) March 23, 1981 Amendment (15) October24, 1984 Amendment (16) May l4, 1984 Amendment (17) December 9, 1985 Amendment (18) July 14, 1986 Amendment (19) March 23, 1987 Amendment (20) July 27, 1987 Amendment(21) June 12, 1989 Amendment (22) April 25, 1994 Amendment (23) October 9, 1995 Amendment (24) February 23, 1998 Amendment (25) August 10, 1998 Amendment (26) January 11, 2000 Amendment (27) January 25, 2000 Amendment (28) August 9, 2005 Ordinance No. 2006 -19 (29) July 25, 2006 Ordinance No. 2006 -21 (30) October 24, 2006 Ordinance No. 2011 -3 (3 1) January 25, 2011 Ordinance No. 2011 -8(32) March 8, 2011 Amendment (33) .2013 NOTE: See Footnotes beginning on Page 47 for description of amendments. 92 CONTENTS 9 -2� PAGE NO. PREFACE 1 DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS 2 GENERAL NOTES 7 DEFINITIONS 8 PART I. INDUSTRIAL ee,.. ewl StatistisalAaab -4s 4-0 Seetbona 14 Section 414 42 Seemm431L 12 PART IL COMMERCIAL Section I. 15 Site Area and Building Area Section II. 26 Permitted Uses Section III. 30 General Development Standards for Commercial Land PART III. GENERAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS Section I. 34 PART IV. GENERAL SIGN REQUIREMENTS Section I. 37 Sign Standards Section Il. 40 Sign Area 9 -2� PAGE NO. Section III. 41 Maintenance PART V. GENERAL LANDSCAPE STANDARDS Section I. 42 General Statement PART VI. FOOTNOTES 47 PART VB. Composite .............. ............................... For Information Only Exbibit A ................... ........................... Land Use Exhibit B ................ ............................... Grading and Roads Exhibit C ................ ............................... Storm Drain Exhibit D ............... ............................... Water & Sewer Exhibit E ................ ............................... Boundary and Topography 94 PREFACE It is the intent of this Planned Community Development to provide comprehensive zoning for what is now the Collins Radio property. Planned within this development are a hotel with banquet and convention facilities, a small retail and service center, service stations, restaurants, bars and theater /nightclubs, a site for the proposed Orange County Courthouse with the balance of the acreage developed as a business and professional office park emphasizing open space. 95 DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS (1) This Planned Community Development is a project of The Koll Company. This area is most appropriate for commercial and light industrial uses, and therefore we submit the enclosed air traffic analysis, vehicular analysis, land use analysis and market analysis to substantiate this document. Attached drawings indicate land use, grading and roads, storm drains, water and sewer, topography and traffic analysis. The site is comprised of approximately - 17119154.0 acres and is generally bounded on the northeast by Campus Drive, on the southeast by Jamboree Road and on the west by MacArthur Boulevard. (10)(33) In order to insure development consistent with the master plan concept, a review shall be required. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, a precise development plan shall be submitted by the developer to the Planning Director for review. This precise plan shall conform to the requirements of this Planned Community text and all other applicable codes and regulations and shall be approved prior to submission by The Kell Company. Included in the plan review material shall be: Building Criteria a. size b. location c. height d. materials 2. Parking Criteri a a. areas, including drives and accesses b. quantity c. size 3. Landscaped Areas a. setbacks b. walls c. plazas d. pools, fountains and/or other amenities 4. Signing Criteria a. location b. size c. quantity 5. All other site improvements as directed by the Planning Director and as recommended below. Items 5a through 5e inclusive. E Sewage System Criteri a The sewer system in the vicinity of the lake should be revised to conform to the following criteria: All sewer lines should be located such that they will not be under water even when the lake is at its maximum level. 2. Sewer lines shall be located in 15 -foot wide (minimum) easements and must be accessible to maintenance vehicles at all times. The depth of sewer lines should not exceed 15 feet, with the possible exception of joining the existing system at MacArthur Boulevard. b. Pedestrian Circulation A pedestrian sidewalk system along the public streets shall be constructed throughout the development. The adequacy of such system shall be analyzed independently of any on -site pedestrian walkway system proposed for a particular portion of the development. Bicycle Circulation A system of bicycle paths coordinated with the Citys Master Plan of Bicycle Trails and meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation shall be developed and maintained within the planned community. d. Erosion Control Landscaping plans shall incorporate provisions for Erosion Control on all graded sites which will remain vacant for a considerable period of time prior to commencement of building construction. Traffic Considerations Both MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road shall be widened to provide for 6 through lanes, double left turn lanes at all intersections, and free right turning lanes at all intersections. ii. Von Karman shall be widened at the intersection with MacArthur Boulevard to provide 6Imes. 97 iii. All streets on the site except for Von Karman shall be flared to provide at least 5 lanes at intersections with peripheral streets. iv. Birch Street shall be flared to 5 lanes at the intersection with Von Karman. V. Campus Drive shall be widened to provide dual left turn Imes at Von Karman. vi. Von Karman shall be improved for its full length from MacArthur Boulevard to Campus Drive in conjunction with initial development of areas which do not take primary access from Campus Drive or Jamboree Road. vii. Access rights to MacArthur Boulevard shall be dedicated to the City except for the Birch Street and Von Kmnan Avenue intersections. Consideration may be given to providing additional access points at a later date if more detailed traffic studies demonstrate the desirability of such additional access points. Consideration shall be limited to right turn egress and right and left turn ingress. (11) viii. Traffic signals shall be constructed at the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard with Birch Street and with Von Karman Avenue when the latter two streets are opened. The developer shall be responsible for 50% of the cost of the signal at Von Karman and 50% of the cost of the signal at Birch Street. ix. A traffic signal shall be constructed at the intersection of Campus Drive and Jamboree Road in conjunction with the initial stages of development. The developer shall be responsible for 25% of the cost of the signal. X. A traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Von Kalman and Birch Street, with the developer to be responsible for 100% of the cost. Construction shall be scheduled so that the signal will be completed not later than June 30, 1977. (8) xi. A traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Von Karman and Campus Drive, with the developer to be responsible for 50% of the cost. Construction shall be scheduled so that the signal will be completed not later than December 30, 1976. (8) A traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Jamboree Boulevard and Birch Street, with the developer to be responsible for 50% of the cost. Construction shall 4 be scheduled so that the signal will be completed not later than June 30, 197T (8) In order to accomplish the schedule for construction of these two signals, a cooperative agreement may be entered into between the developer and the City. The agreement shall provide for the developer to advance the nondeveloper share of the funding, if necessary; with provisions for reimbursement by the City. The agreement may also provide for a credit to the developer for funds advanced for the Citys share of construction costs for signals constructed elsewhere in the project. (8) xii. Provision for other traffic signals shall be investigated in conjunction with the process of development at a later date. xiii. Phasing of Development. 1,651,757 sq. ft. of develop- ment was existing or under construction as of October 1, 1978. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 1,058,863 sq.ft. Any further development subsequent to October 1, 1978, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable development, being 317,658 sq. R, shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. (12) Aimort (2) The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport shall be included in all leases or subleases for space in the Planned Community Development and shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions recorded against the property. Disclosure Statement (2) The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; ii. When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; iii. The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansion at the Orange County Airport; iv. Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the Orange County Airport. 100 GENERAL NOTES Water within the planned community area will be famished by the Irvine Ranch Water District Prior to or coincidental with the filing of any tentative map or use permit, the developer shall submit a master plan of drainage to the Director of Public Works. The height of all buildings and structures shall comply with Federal Aviation Authority criteria. Except as otherwise stated in this ordinance, the requirements of the zoning code, City of Newport Beach, shall apply. The contents of this supplemental text notwithstanding, no construction shall be proposed within the boundaries of this planned community district except that which shall comply with all provisions of the Building Code and the various mechanical and electrical codes related thereto. 101 DEFINITIONS Advertising Surface: The total area of the face of the structure, excluding supports. Area of Elevation: Total height and length of a building as projected to a vertical plane. Building Line: An imaginary line parallel to the street right -of -way line specifying the closest point from this street right -of -way that a building structure may be located (except for overhangs, stairs and sunscreens). Right- of-Wav Line: When reference is made to right -of -way line it shall mean the line which is then established on either the adopted Master Plan of Streets and Highways or the filed Tract Map for Minor Roads as the ultimate right -of -way line for roads or streets. Side and Front of Comer Lots: For the purpose of this ordinance, the narrowest frontage of a lot facing the street is the front, and the longest frontage facing the intersecting street is the side, irrespective of the direction in which the structures face. Sign: Any structure, device or contrivance, electric or non - electric and all parts thereof which are erected or used for advertising purposes upon or within which any poster, bill, bulletin, printing, lettering, painting, device or other advertising of any kind whatsoever is used, placed, posted, tacked, nailed, pasted or otherwise fastened or affixed. Commerce: All those permitted uses as specified in Section II, Group I through VII, inclusive, in this text. Commercial Land: The site area upon which any or all commercial permitted uses would exist. Site Area: (3) The total land area of the land described in the use or other permit, including footprint lots. Special Landscaped Street 102 Special landscaped streets are designated as MacArthur Boulevard, Jamboree Boulevard and Campus Drive. The landscaping requirements for special landscaped streets and for the remaining streets are described in the following text. Streets - Dedicated and Private: Reference to all streets or rigbts -of -way within this ordinance shall mean dedicated vehicular rights -of -way. In the case of private or non - dedicated streets, a minimum setback from the right - of -way line of said streets of ten (10) feet shall be required for all structures. Except for sidewalks or access drives, this area shall be landscaped according to the setback area standards from dedicated streets contained herein. Driveway: Vehicular access ways onto or within private property exclusive of streets, dedicated or private A minimum separation of five (5) feet shall be maintained between all driveways and buildings. Footprint Lot: (3) The area of land required for the building pad, encompassing the peripheral area of the building. Appurtenant and contiguous to the footprint lot shall be all parking, landscape, setbacks and other areas as described and required by this text. Landscape Area: (4) The landscape area shall include walks, plazas, water and all other areas not devoted to building footprints or vehicular parking and drive surfaces. In calculating area of required landscaping any off -site landscaping such as landscaped medians or parkways in street rights -of -way shall not be included. Zos PART I. INDUSTRIAL— Deleted (33) A. Buildin setbaeks, within prepeny lines. (4) (8)(21 Site Site 1046aem 10 104 11 105 100 13 2O7 14 /: PART II Section I. Group I COMMERCIAL Site Area and Building Area PROFESSIONAL & BUSINESS OFFICES Acreages shown are net buildable land area including landscape setbacks with property lines. (4) A. Building Sites (4) Total Acreage Site A 30.939 acres * (29) Site B 43.703 acres (11) Site C 18.806 acres (10) Site D 19.673 acres Site E 2.371 acres Site F 1.765 acres Site G 5.317 acres (8) 122.574 acres ®(1 0)(1 1) B. Allowable Building Area Office Acreage 30.939 acres *(29) 43.703 acres (11) 18.806 acres (10) 19.673 acres 2.371 acres 1.765 acres 5,317 acres (8) 122.574 acres(8)(10)(11) Site A 366,147 square feet (16)(26)(29)(30) Site B 977,720 square feet (13)(16)(28)(30)(32) Site C 674,800 square feet (I 0)(15) Site D 240,149 square feet (8)(13) Site E 32,500 square feet (4) Site F 42,646 square feet (4)(3 1) Site G 45.000 square feet (8) 2.378.962 square feef(15)( *)(31) C. Statistical Analysis (4) The following statistics are for information only. Development may include but shall not be limited to the following: Story heights shown are average heights for possible development. The buildings within each parcel may vary. Assumed Parking Criteria: One (1) space per 225 square feet of net building area @ 120 cars per acre for Sites C, D, E, F and G. *(3)(4) In addition to 19.399 acres of office use, there is 9.54 acres for hotel and motel and 2.0 acres of lake within Office Site A. Therefore, there are 30.939 acres net within Office Site A. (3)(4)(16) 15 :Lq9 b. One (I) space per 300 square feet of net building area @ 120 cars per acre for Sites A, B and C. (11) Site A Allowable Building Area ....... 366,147 square feet (16)(26)(29)(30) Site Area ...... 19.399 acres *(3)(4)(16) a. Building Height Land Coverage (16)(29)(30) Two story development ............... 4.20 acres Three story development ............... 2.80 acres Four story development ............... 2.10 acres Five story development ............... 1.68 acres Six story development ............... 1.40 acres Seven story development ............... 1.20 acres Eight story development ............... 1.05 acres Nine story development ............... 0.93 acres Ten story development ............... 0.84 acres Eleven story development ............... 0.76 acres Twelve story development ............... 0.70 acres b. Parking Land Coverage 1,221 cars .............. 10.18 acres (11, 16,29,30) Landscaped Open Space (4, 11,16) Land Coverage (29,30) Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development 2. Site Allowable Building Area Site Area 16 .. 5.02 acres .. 6.42 acres .. 7.12 acres .. 7.54 acres .. 7.80 acres .. 8.02 acres .. 8.17 acres .. 8.29 acres .. 8.38 acres .. 8.46 acres .. 8.52 acres ......... 977,720 square feet (13,16,28,30) ......... 43.703 acres (4) (11) ZZ0 a. Building Height Land Coverage (16,28,30,32)) Two story development ............... 11.22 acres Three story development ............... 7.48 acres Four story development ............... 5.61 acres Five story development ............... 4.49 acres Six story development ............... 3.74 acres Seven story development ............... 3.21 acres Eight story development ............... 2.81 acres Nine story development ............... 2.49 acres Ten story development ............... 2.24 acres Eleven story development ............... 2.04 acres Twelve story development ............... 1.87 acres b. Parking Land Coverage (11,13,16,28,30,32)) 3,259 cars ............... 27.16 acres C. Landscaped Open Space (11) Land Coverage (11,13,16,28,30,32)) Two story development ............... 5.32 acres Three story development ............... 9.06 acres Four story development ...... I........ 10.93 acres Five story development ............... 12.05 acres Six story development ............... 12.80 acres Seven story development ............... 13.33 acres Eight story development ............... 13.73 acres Nine story development ............... 14.05 acres Ten story development ............... 14.30 acres Eleven story development ............... 14.50 acres Twelve story development ............... 14.67 acres 3. Site C (10) Allowable Building Area Site Area Building Height Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development 17 ......... 674,800 square feet (15) (17)* ......... 18.806 acres (4) Land Coverage (15) ......... 7.75 acres ......... 5.16 acres ......... 3.87 acres ......... 3.10 acres ......... 2.58 acres ......... 2.21 acres ......... 194 acres ......... 1.72 acres ......... 1.55 acres ......... 141 acres ......... 1.29 acres Z21 b. Parking 2,249 cars Land Coverage (15) ......... 18.74 acres ' The square footage includes a maximum of 3,250 square feet for up to two (2) restaurants, bars, or theater /nightclubs. Any portion or all of the floor area not utilized for the purpose shall revert to professional and business office use. (17) Landscaped Open Space Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development 4. SiteD Allowable Building Area Site Area Building Height Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development b. Parking 1,067 cars 18 Land Coverage (4)(15) ............... -7.68 acres -5.09 acres -3.80 acres -3.03 acres -2.51 acres -2.14 acres -1.87 acres -1.65 acres -1.48 acres -1.34 acres -1.24 acres ......... 240,149 square feet (8)(13) ......... 19.673 acres (4) Land Coverage(8)(13) ......... 2.75 acres ......... 1.84 acres ......... 1.38 acres ......... 1.10 acres ......... 0.92 acres ......... 0.79 acres ......... 0.69 acres ......... 0.61 acres ......... 0.55 acres ......... 0.50 acres ......... 0.46 acres Land Coverage (8) (13) ......... 8.89 acres 112 Landscaped Open Space Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development 5. Site E Allowable Building Area Site Area Building Height Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development b. Parking 144 cars Landscaped Open Space (4) Two story development Three story development Four story development Five story development Six story development Seven story development Eight story development Nine story development Ten story development Eleven story development Twelve story development 19 Land Coverage (4) (8) (13) ............... 8.03 acres ............... 8.94 acres ............... 9.40 acres ............... 9.68 acres ............... 9.86 acres ............... 9.99 acres ............... 10.09 acres ............... 10.17 acres ............... 10.23 acres ............... 10.28 acres ............... 10.32 acres ......... 32,500 square feet (4) ......... 2.371 acres (4) Land Coverage (4) ......... 0.37 acres ......... 0.25 acres ......... 0.19 acres ......... 0.15 acres ......... 0.12 acres 0.11 acres ......... 0.10 acres ......... 0.09 acres ......... 0.08 acres ......... 0.07 acres ......... 0.06 acres Land Coverage (4) .......1. 1.20 acres Land Coverage .............1. 0.80 acres ............... 0.92 acres ............... 0.98 acres ............... 1.02 acres ............... 1.05 acres ............... 1.06 acres ............... 1.07 acres ............... 1.08 acres ............... 1.09 acres ............... 1.10 acres ............... 1.11 acres 12s 6. Site F(4)(31) Allowable Building Area ......... 42,646 square feet Site Area ......... 1.765 acres a. Building Height Land Coverage One story development ............... 0.98 acres Two story development ............... 0.49 acres Three story development ............... 0.33 acres Four story development ............... 0.24 acres Five story development ...........0.20 acres Six story development ............0.16 acres b. Parking Land Coverage 190 cars ............... 1.58 acres C. Landscaped Open Space Land Coverage One story development ............... <0.80> acres Two story development ............... <0.31> acres Three story development ............... <0.15> acres Four story development ............... <0.06> acres Five story development ... I ............. 0.02> acres Six story development .............1 <0.03> acres 7. Site G (8) Allowable Building Area ......... 45,000 square feet Site Area ......... 5.317 acres a. Building Height Land Coverage One story development ............... 1.03 acres Two story development ............... 0.52 acres Three story development ............... 0.34 acres Four story development ............... 0.26 acres b. Parking Land Coverage 200 cars ............... 1.67 acres C. Landscaped Open Space Land Coverage One story development ............... 2.62 acres Two story development ............... 3.13 acres Three story development ............... 3.31 acres Four story development ............... 3.39 acres Building g eight Maximum building height shall not exceed twelve (12) stories above ground level, and shall in no way exceed the height limits set by the Federal Aviation Authority for Orange County Airport. Conclusions 20 :L-T 4 The preceding figures indicate that within a fixed maximum density as the height of the building increases the resulting open landscaped area also increases. Group I1. HOTEL & MOTEL (1) A. Building Sites For the purposes of this statistical analysis, 9.54 acres have been allotted for hotel and motel development. This acreage is for statistical purposes only. It is necessary to allot a specific acreage within this analysis to secure office building densities within their specific parcels. Development may include but shall not be limited to this acreage. The hotel and motel site size shall be determined at the time a use permit is secured. B. Building Height Maximum building height shall not exceed height limits set by the Federal Aviation Authority for Orange County Airport. Group 111. COURTHOUSE A. Building Site Site 1: 7.80 acres ...... ............................... 7.80 acres B. Building Area Site 1: 90,000 square feet ........................ 90,000 square feet The following statistics are for information only. Development may include but shall not be limited to the following. C. Parking 400 Cars ................................ ............................... 3.33 acres D. Landscaped Onen Space Land Coverage Two story development ......... ............................... 3.44 acres Three story development ....... ............................... 3.78 acres Four story development ......... ............................... 3.95 acres Five story development .......... ............................... 4.06 acres Six story development ............ ............................... 4.13 acres E. Building Height Maximum building height shall not exceed height limits set by the Federal Aviation Authority for Orange County Airport. 21 115 Group IV. SERVICE STATIONS A. Building Sites (4) (5) (11) Site 3: 1.765 acres .... ............................... 1.765 acres Service station site 3 shall be located within Office Site F and shall not exceed 1.765 acres in size. Any portion or all of Site 3 not utilized for service station use shall revert to either professional and business office use or restaurant use. (4) Group V. RESTAURANTS (1) (4) A. Building Sites Maximum acreages for Site 2 shall not exceed 1.25 (18) acres. Maximum acreage for Site 3: 1.765 acres. Maximum acreages for Sites 4 and 5 shall not exceed 3.0 acres. Maximum acreage for Sites 6 and 7 shall not exceed 2.2 acres. (8) (The following acreages are for information only.) Site 1 Deleted see Group VII. .............. (18) Site 2 ..................... ............................... 1.25 acres Site 3 ..................... ............................... 1.765 acres Site Deleted ........................... ...........................(30) Site 5 Deleted ..................... ............................... (30) Site 6 ..................... ............................... 1.50 acres (8) Site 7 ..................... ............................... 0.70 acres (8) 5.215 acres ...........5.215 acres (301 Site 1 Deleted see Group VII Private Club (18) Site 2 (4101 Jamboree — Taco Bell) located within Office Site "B" (4)(16)(30) Site 3 located within Office Site "F ". (4) Site 4 (4300 Von Karman Avenue —Kota Restaurant) deleted and reverted to Site B Professional and Business Office Allowable Building Area. (30) Site 5 deleted from Office Site `B" and transferred to Office Site "A" as Professional and Business Office Allowable Building Area (30) Sites 6 and 7located within Office Site "G ". (8) Any portion or all of the restaurant, bar, theater /nightclub acreage for Sites 2, 4, 5, 6 or 7 not utilized for that purpose shall revert to professional and business office use. Any portion or all of the restaurant acreage for Site 3 not utilized for that purpose shall revert to either professional and business office use or service station use. (4) (8) (18) The following statistics are for information only. Development may include but shall not be limited to the following. OW 110 B. Building Area (4)(8) (30) Site 2 ................ 2,397sq. ft. ...... 0.06 acres (30) Site 3 ................ 10,000 sq. ft. ...... 0.22 acres Site 4 ................ Deleted Site 4 .......... Site 5 ................ Deleted Deleted Site 6 (8) .......... 7,000 sq. ft. ...... 0.16 acres Site 7 (8) .......... 3,000 sc. ft. ...... 0.07 acres 2397 sc. ft. ...... 0.51 acres .......0 51 acres (8, 18, 30) C. Parking. Criteria: 300 occupants /10,000 sq. ft I space /3 occupants and 120 cars per acre. Site 2 .......... 24 cars ............. 0.20 acres (30) Site 3 .......... 100 cars ............... 0.84 acres Site 4 .......... Deleted Site 5 .......... Deleted Site 6 (8) ... 70 cars ............... 0.58 acres Site 7 (8) ... 30 cars ............... 0.25 acres 224 cars ............... 187 acres ....... 1.87 acres (8) (18)(30) D. Landscaped Open Space (4) (30) Site 2 .......... 0.99 acres (30) Site 3 .......... 0.70 acres Site 4 .......... Deleted Site 5 .......... Deleted Site 6 (8) .... 0.76 acres Site 7 (8) .... 0.38 acres ........... ............................... 2.83 acres (8) (18)(30) E. Building Height Building height of structures shall be limited to a height of thirty -five (35) feet. 23 ZZ� Group VI. RETAIL & SERVICE CENTER A. Building Site (4) (5) Site 1 .......... 5.026 acres Site 2 Deleted (30) 5.026 acres .......... ............................... 5.026 acres (30) Site 2 shall be located within Office Site `B." Any portion or all of the retail and service Site 2 acreage not utilized for that purpose shall revert to professional and business office use. (4) (16) Site 2 deleted from Office Site `B" and transferred to Office Site "A" as Professional and Business Office Allowable Building Area. (30) B. Allowable Building Area (5) * Retail Site No. 1 .......... 120,000 sq. ft. (14)(27) Retail Site No. 2 Deleted (30) * Retail Site No. t (K. Ft.) Parcel Existing Total Parcel 1, R/S 588 (H) (H) 70,630 Parcel 3, R/S 506 (R) (R) 0 (0) (0) 22,000 Parcel 4, R/S 506 (R) 4,115 (R) 21,896 (0) 0 (0) 5,474 Subtotal (R) 12,315 (R) 21,896 (0) 0 (0) 27,474 (H) 70,630 Total 120.000 (14)Q7) (R) = Retail (0) = Office (H) = I lotel C. Landscape Area (5) Twenty -five (25) percent of the 5.026 acres constituting retail and service center Site No. 1 shall be developed as landscape area. If twenty -five (25) percent of the 5.026 acres constituting retail and service center Site No. 1 is not developed as landscape area, a specific site plan shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission for approval prior to the issuing of a building permit. D. Statistical Analysis (5) 24 118 E. The following statistics are for information only. Development may include but shall not be limited to the following. Assumed parking criteria: One (1) space per 200 square feet of net building area at 120 cars per acre. 1. Site 1 Allowable Building Area ..... ............................... 120,000 sq. ft. (14)(27) Site Area .............................................. ............................... 5.026 acres a. Building Height (14) Two story development ........... ............................... 1.17 acres Three story development ......... ............................... 0.78 acres Four story development ........... ............................... 0.59 acres Five story development ............ ............................... 0.47 acres b. Parking (14) 460 cars .................................... ............................... 3.83 acres C. Landscaped Open Space (14) Two story development ........... ............................... 0.03 acres Three story development ......... ............................... 0.87 acres Four story development .......... ............................... 0.61 acres Five story development ........... ............................... 0.73 acres 2. Site 2 Deleted (30) Building Height Building height of structures shall be limited to a height of thirty-five (35) feet above mean existing grade as shown on Exhibit `B." (5) Building height of structures for Service Site 1 shall be limited to a height of sixty feet (27) 25 119 Group VII. PRIVATE CLUB (18) A. Building Site Site I .......................... 2.0 acres ........ ............................... 2.0 acres Site 1 shall be located within Office Site "A." Any portion or all of the private club acreage not utilized for that purpose shall revert to professional and business office use. 1. Site I Allowable Building Area ............... .........................45,000 square feet (26) B. Building Height Building height of structures shall be limited to a height of fifty (50) feet. Section II. Permitted Uses Group I. PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS OFFICES To allow the location of commercial activities engaged in the sale of products or services relating to and supporting the Development Plan, provided that such activities are confined within a building or buildings. A. Professional Offices similar in nature to but not limited to the following: (6) 1. Accountants 2. Attorneys 3. Doctors, dentists, optometrists, oculists, chiropractors and others licensed by the State of California to practice the healing arts. 4. Engineers, architects, surveyors and planners. B. Business Offices similar in nature to but not limited to the following: (6) 1. Advertising agencies 2. Banks 3. Economic consultants 4. Employment agencies 5. Escrow offices 6. Insurance agencies 7. Laboratories a. Dental b. Medical c. X -Ray d. Bio- chemical e. Film, wholesale only f. Optometrical 8. Stockbrokers 26 120 9. Studios for interior decorators, photographers, artists and draftsmen. 10. Telephone answering services 11. Tourist information and travel agencies C. Hotel and Motel (l) To allow for the location within Office Site "A" of a hotel or motel development, subject to a use permit. D. Restaurants, bars and theater/nightclub s subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case. (1) (3) (4) (7) (25) 1. Deleted (18) *2. To allow within the 43.703 acres of Office Site "B" three (3) restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub. sites. (16) 3. To allow within the 18.806 acres of Office Site "C" up . to two (2) restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub sites with a total area not to exceed 3,250 square feet. Specific location of these restaurants, bars or theater /nightclubs to be determined at a later date. The permitted professional and business offices' allowable building area for the site will be reduced accordingly. (17) 4. To allow within the 1.765 acres of Office Site `T" two (2) restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub sites. Specific location of these sites to be determined at a later date. All other acreage shall be adjusted and shall not increase or decrease the professional and business offices allowable building area for the site. 5. To allow within the 5.317 acres of Office Site °G" three (3) restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub sites. Specific location of these sites to be determined at a later date. All other acreage shall not increase or decrease the professional and business offices' allowable building area for the site. (8) (25) * E. Private Club (4) (18) (26) To allow within Office Site "A" one (1) private club site at 4110 MacArthur Boulevard. F. Service Station (4) To allow within Office Site "F" one (1) service station site. Specific location to be determined at a later date. All other acreages shall be adjusted and shall not increase or decrease the professional and business office allowable building area for the site. 27 121 ' (4) If restaurant, but or theater /nightclub, or private club uses are developed, the allowable building area for Office Site `B" shall be restricted by one of the following conditions: 1. The 963,849 square feet of allowable building area shall not increase or decrease so long as twenty -five (25) percent of the 41.969 acres constituting Office Site `B" is developed as landscaped area. (16) 2. If twenty-five (25) percent of the 42.709 acres constituting Office Site `B" is not developed as landscape area, the 963,849 square feet of allowable building area shall be reduced by the gross building area of the restaurants, bars or theater /nightclubs and/or private club. The allowable building area shall be further reduced by the number of additional parking spaces required to support a restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub, or a private club beyond what would be required for an equivalent area of office use. The reduction shall be 225 square feet per additional space. (16) G. Support Commercial (20) The uses permitted under this section are of a convenience nature ancillary to the operation and use of office facilities. These uses shall be in addition to those sites permitted under Part E. Section B. Group V (Restaurants). These uses shall not increase the allowable building area for Professional and Business Office. Retail sales and services including tobacco stores, card shops, confectionery and newspaper stands, and other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Director, are of a similar nature. Retail uses shall be located in the basement or on the first floor of a building. Storage for such uses shall be within a building. 2. Restaurants, including outdoor restaurants and take -out restaurants, bars or theater /nightclubs shall be permitted subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case. (25) Group II. HOTEL &MOTEL (1) Subject to a use permit. Group III. COURT HOUSE State, County and/or City Facilities. Group IV. SERVICE STATIONS & MECHANICAL CAR WASH (4) A. Service stations subject to the City of Newport Beach service station standards. 28 122 B. Mechanical car wash, subject to a use permit. Mechanical car wash shall only be allowed in conjunction with or in lieu of a permitted service station use. Group V. RESTAURANTS (7) A. Restaurants, including outdoor, drive -in or take -out restaurants, bars and theater /nightclubs, shall be subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case. Facilities other than indoor dining establishments or those that qualify as outdoor, drive -in or take -out establishments shall be subject to the City of Newport Beach regulations covering drive -in and outdoor establishments. (25) Group VI. RETAIL & SERVICE CENTER (1) A. Permitted Uses 1. Restaurants, including outdoor, drive -in or take -out restaurants, bars and theater /nightclubs, shall be permitted subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case, except as noted under "a" and "b" below. (7) (25) a. Restaurants, other than outdoor, drive -in or take -out restaurants, shall be permitted subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case. (25) b. Outdoor, drive -in or take -out restaurants shall be subject to the procedures, regulations and guidelines set forth in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in each case. (25) 2. Barber shop and beauty parlor 3. Book and stationery store 4. Blueprinting and photostatics 5. Camera Shop 6. Delicatessen store 7. Florist 8. Shoe store or repair shop 9. Tailor 10. Tobacco store W 22-S 11. Office equipment rentable and repair 12. Pharmacies 13. Tourist information, travel agencies, and ticket reservation services, but not to include any airline terminal services or facilities for the transport of passengers, baggage, or freight. (1) 14. Athletic club or health clubs (5) * 15. Professional and Business Offices (5) 16. Other uses similar to the above listed 17. Hotel subject to approval of a Use Permit (27) Group VII. LODGE HALLS, PRIVATE CLUBS, ATHLETIC CLUBS, UNION HEADUARTERS (1) (4) (18) Subject to use permit. Group VIII. AUTO DETAILING (19) A. All drainage shall be into the sanitary sewer system. B. That all car wash and auto detailing operations shall be conducted within a covered area. C. This service shall be designed to serve building tenants and their patrons and guests, and shall be ancillary to the primary use. Section III. General Development Standards for Commercial Land A. Site Area Minimum site area shall not be less than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. Footprint lots shall have all required appurtenant areas contiguous thereto and the sum of these areas shall not be less than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. (3) * To allow, in addition to the 2,320,600 square feet of professional and business office use permitted elsewhere in the text, a maximum of 38,022 net square feet of professional and business office use within Retail and Service Center Site 1. (5) (14) Exception: (9) The Planning Commission may authorize an exception to the minimum site area. Application for any such exception shall be made at the time of the filing of a tentative map by the applicant. In order for an exception to be granted, the Planning Commission shall find the following facts with respect thereto: 30 124 1. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. 2. That the Development Considerations and intent of this planned Community Development Standards are substantially met. B. Building Area Maximum building area for professional and business offices shall be as noted in Site Area and Building Area, Part II, Section 1, Group I.B. Parking basements or parking structures shall not be calculated as building area; however, said structures shall be used only for the parking of company vehicles, employee vehicles, or vehicles belonging to persons visiting the subject firm. (4) C. Setbacks All setbacks shall be measured from the property line. For the purpose of this ordinance, a street side property line is that line created by the ultimate right -of -way of the frontage street. Front Yard Setback (10) Thirty (30) feet minimum; except that unsupported roofs or sunscreens may project six (6) feet into the setback area. The setback for Site C from MacArthur Boulevard would be at least thirty-six (36) feet except that unsupported roofs or sun - screens any project six (6) feet into the setback. 2. Side Yard Side yard setbacks will be required only when any one of the following conditions exist: a. Comer Lot: Thirty (30) feet (street side setback only), except that unsupported roofs and sunscreens may project three (3) feet into setback area. b. Where property abuts other than commercially zoned property, a ten (10) foot setback is required. Unsupported roofs and sunscreens may project three (3) feet into the setback area. Rear Yard None required except on a through -lot in which case the required front yard setback shall be observed. 31 125 4. Footprint Lots (6) Except as required by the Uniform Building Code, there shall be no additional setback requirements for buildings within footprint lots. Provided, however, that buildings within footprint lots shall be so located as to observe the setbacks from streets and existing lot lines required under Part It, Section 111, C.1, 2 and 3. D. Loading Areas 1. Street side loading on other than special landscaped streets shall be allowed providing the loading dock is set back a minimum of seventy (70) feet from the street right -of- way line, or one hundred ten (110) feet from the street center line, whichever is greater. Said loading area must be screened from view from adjacent streets. E. Storage Areas I. All outdoor storage shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen up to a point eight (8) feet in vertical height, but need not be opaque above that point. 2. Outdoor storage shall be meant to include all company owned and operated motor vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles. 3. No storage shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. Refuse Collection Areas 1. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen. 2. No refuse collection area shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. G. Telephone and Electrical Service All "on-site" electrical lines (excluding lines in excess of 12KV) and telephone lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties. H. Pedestrian Access (1) 32 120 It is required of all developments in the commercial areas to submit a plan of pedestrian access to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits. Said plan will detail consideration for pedestrian access to the subject property and to adjacent properties and shall be binding on subsequent development of the property. The plan shall show all interior walkways and all walkways in the public right -of- way, if such walkways are proposed or necessary. I. Parkine All parking shall be as specified in the General Parking Requirements, Part III. J. Signs All signing shall be as specified in the General Sign Requirements, Part IV. K. Landscape All landscaping shall be as specified in the General Landscape Requirements, Part V. 33 227 PART III. GENERAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS Section I A. Adequate off -street parking shall be provided to accommodate all parking needs for the site. The intent is to eliminate the need for any on -street parking. Required off -street parking shall be provided on the site of the use served, or on a contiguous site, or within three hundred (300) feet of the subject site. Where parking is provided on other than the site concerned, a recorded document shall be approved by the City Attorney and filed with the Building and Planning Departments and signed by the owners of the alternate site stipulating to the permanent reservation of use of the site for said parking. B. Parking requirements for specific sites shall be based upon the following parking criteria. All parking shall be determined based upon building type and the area within allotted to the following functions: Business & Professional Offices One (1) space for each 225 square feet of net floor area. The parking requirement may be lowered to one (1) space for each 250 square feet of net floor area upon review and approval of the modification committee. Company parking stalls shall not exceed twenty -five (25) percent of the total number of required parking spaces. The number and design of compact parking stalls shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. (11) Excemtion: (11) Parking Requirement for Business and Professional Office Buildings based on Parking Pool. The parking requirements for office buildings within a contiguous office site may be modified in accordance with the following schedule when the net building area or areas served exceeds 100,000 square feet. a. For the first 125,000 square feet, parking shall be provided at one space per 250 square feet of net floor area. b. For the next 300,000 square feet, parking shall be provided at one space per 300 square feet of net floor area. C. Any additional floor area, parking shall be provided at one space per 350 square feet of net floor area. d. For pools based on more than 425,000 square feet of net floor area, the Planning Commission may modify the parking formula by use permit, based on a demonstrated formula. 34 WN 2. Medical & Dental Offices Five (5) spaces for each doctor or one (1) space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. 3. s.... tAet.._., Resew eh a_a Asse....b, yDeleted. (33) 4. Wafeliewse Deleted. (33) 5. Lodee Halls, Private Clubs, Athletic Clubs, Union Headquarters (1) (4) (5) a. One (1) space for each 75 square feet of gross floor area plus one (1) space for each 250 square feet of gross office floor area. b. Specific parking requirements shall be developed for private clubs or athletic clubs based upon functions and occupancies within this use. Parking shall be in conformance to existing City of Newport Beach requirements for said occupancies or at a demonstrated formula agreeable to the Planning Director. (4) In the event that private clubs or athletic clubs are converted to another use, parking requirements for the new use shall be subject to review by the Planning Director. (5) 6. Restaurants. Bars or Theater/Niahtclubs. Outdoor. Drive -In and Take - Out Restaurants. (7) a. Restaurant, bar or theater /nightclub parking shall be in accordance with Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, except as noted under "b" and `b" below. 35 1�9 b. Restaurants, other than outdoor, drive -in or take -out restaurants, within retail and service centers shall provide one (1) space for each 200 square feet of net floor area and one (t) loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, to the extent that the net floor area of all restaurants does not exceed twenty (20) percent of the net floor area of the retail and service center. In the event that any restaurant causes the total of all restaurant uses in the retail and service center to exceed the twenty (20) percent limitation noted above, that entire restaurant and any subsequent restaurants shall provide parking as noted under "a" above. C. Parking for outdoor, drive -in and take -out restaurants shall be provided in accordance with Section 20.53.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 7. Commercial Retail and Service Center (5) One (1) space for each 200 square feet of net floor area. One (t) loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. Professional and business office parking shall be provided per Part III, Section I.B.1. Athletic or health club parking shall be provided per Part 111, Section I.B.5b. 8. Hotels and Motels One (1) space for each guest unit plus employees' parking on a demonstrated formula. Parking for restaurants, bars, banquet rooms, retail shops or service stores shall be as specified in the above applicable section or on a demonstrated formula acceptable to the Planning Director. Professional and business office net floor area shall be included in this provision. Athletic and health club net floor area shall be excluded from this provision. (5) 9. Court House Specific parking requirements shall be developed based upon functions and occupancies within this zone. Parking shall be in conformance to existing City of Newport Beach requirements for said occupancies, or at a demonstrated formula agreeable to the Planning Director. 36 130 PART IV. GENERAL SIGN REQUIREMENTS Section I. Sign Standards A. Signs visible from the exterior of any building may be lighted, but no signs or any other contrivance shall be devised or constructed so as to rotate, gyrate, blink or move in any animated fashion. B. Signs shall be restricted to advertising only the person, firm, company or corporation operating the use conducted on the site or the products sold thereon. C. A wall sign with the individual letters applied directly shall be measured by a rectangle around the outside of the lettering and/or the pictorial symbol and calculating the area enclosed by such line. D. All signs attached to the building shall be surface mounted. Group I. PERMANENT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS A. Ground Signs Ground signs shall not exceed four (4) feet above grade in vertical height. Also, ground signs in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) square feet in area (double face) shall not be erected in the fast twenty (20) feet, as measured from the property line, of any street side setback. Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of two hundred (200) square feet. B. Wall Signs In no event shall an identification sign placed on a wall comprise more than ten (10) percent of the area of the elevation upon which the sign is located. Said signs shall be fixture signs. Signs painted directly on the surface of the wall shall not be permitted. The following exceptions apply to industrial zoning only. In the instance of a multiple tenancy building, each individual industry may have a wall sign over the entrance to identify the tenant. Said sign shall give only the name of the company and shall be limited to six (6) inch high letters. Said signs must be oriented toward the parking or pedestrian area for that building and shall not exceed a maximum area of five (5) square feet. 2. Fascia mounted identification signs limited to two (2) facades for each building and structure. No sign shall exceed an area equal to one and one -half (I 1/2) square feet of sign for each one (1) foot of lineal 37 131 frontage of the building or store. However, no sign shall exceed two hundred (200) square feet in area per face. The following exceptions apply to Professional and Business Offices and Retail and Service Center uses only. In the instance of a multiple tenancy building, each individual ground floor business may have signing in addition to permitted Building Identification signs. (6) Each individual ground floor business shall be limited to one (1) sign per frontage not to exceed two (2) signs per business. Said signs shall not be located above the ground floor fascia. No sign shall exceed an area equal to ten (10) percent of the business face upon which it is located. However, no sign shall exceed thirty-five (35) square feet in area. (6). In no event shall there be more than three (3) permitted ground floor wall signs per building for Professional and Business Offices. (6) C. Pole Signs One (1) identification pole sign per site will be allowed for the following commercial businesses only; a. Restaurant b. Cocktail lounge and/or bar C. Hotel If a pole sign is utilized, it shall be in lieu of other identification signs allowed by ordinance. Pole signs shall be limited to a maximum height of twenty (20) feet and a maximum area of fifty (50) square feet per face, double faced. Group II. TEMPORARY IDENTIFICATION SIGNS A. The following signs shall conform to all requirements for "Ground Signs," Section I, Group I, Item A with General Sign standards above unless specifically limited below. 38 232 Sale or Lease Sim A sign, advertising the sale, lease or hire of the site shall be permitted in addition to the other signs listed in this section. Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of forty (40) square feet. 2. Construction Sim One (1) construction sign denoting the architects, engineers, contractor, and other related subjects, shall be permitted upon the commencement of construction. Said sign shall be permitted until such time as a final inspection of the building(s) designates said structure(s) fit for occupancy, or the tenant is occupying said building(s), whichever occurs first. Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of forty (40) square feet. Future Tenant Identification Sim A sign listing the name of future tenant, responsible agent or realtor, and identification of the industrial complex shall be permitted. Said sign will be permitted until such time as a final inspection of the building(s) designates said structure(s) fit for occupancy or tenant is occupying said building(s), whichever occurs first. Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of forty (40) square feet. 4. Directional Sims Signs used to give directions to traffic or pedestrians or give instructions as to special conditions shall not exceed a total of six (6) square feet (double face) in area and shall be permitted in addition to the other signs in this section. Exceptions Group ILA.I, 2 and 3: this information may be grouped on a single sign when the aggregate surface area does exceed the summation of the individual areas for each use. This area may be distributed on all surfaces of the sign. This sign may not exceed four (4) feet above grade. Group III. SPECIAL PURPOSE SIGNS A. The following permanent signs shall be permitted. Permanent Directional Sim Signs used to give directions to traffic or pedestrians as to special conditions shall not exceed a total of six (6) square 39 133 feet in area per face, double faced and shall be permitted in addition to other signs permitted in these standards. 2. Community Directional and/or Identification Sign Permanent directional and identification signs, not exceeding two hundred fifty (250) square feet (per face), shall be permitted but subject to use permit. Section II. Sign Area A. Deleted. (33)k+dast4al The following shall apply to Permitted Uses. Part 1, H. — Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", Han Tab slaps: 2.5 ", Left B. Business and Professional Offices (33) The following shall apply to Permitted Uses, Part 1, Section III. No sign shall exceed an area equal to one and one -half (1 1/2) square feet of sign for each one (1) foot of lineal frontage of the building. However, no sign shall exceed two hundred (200) square feet in area per face. C. Commercial The following shall apply to Permitted Uses, Part 11, Section I1, Groups II, III, V and VI. Building identification shall be limited to a single entity. Building identification signs shall have an area not to exceed one and one- half (1 1/2) square feet of surface for each one (1) foot of lineal frontage of building. However, no sign shall exceed two hundred (200) square feet per face. Building identification signs shall be limited to two (2) facades. D. Business and Professional Offices The following shall apply to Permitted Uses, Part 11, Section It, Group I. 40 I —P14 Building identification shall be limited to a single entity. Building identification signs shall have an area not to exceed one and one- half (1 1/2) square feet of surface for each one (1) foot of lineal frontage of building. However, no sign shall exceed two hundred (200) square feet per face. Building identification signs shall be limited to two (2) facades. Section 111. Maintenance All signs indicated in this section shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. Periodic inspection shall be made as directed by the Planning Director, City of Newport Beach or his designated agent. 41 Z�J� PART V. GENERAL LANDSCAPE STANDARDS Section 1. General Statement (1) Detailed landscape and irrigation plans, prepared by a registered Architect or under the direction of a Landscape Architect, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation prior to issuance of a building permit and installed prior to issuance of Certificate of Use and Occupancy. Landscape in the public right -of -way shall be installed per plans and specifications approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director and in accordance with Parks, Beaches and Recreation Standards. All landscaping in this section shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. Periodic inspections will be made as directed by the Planning Director and reports submitted with regard to the condition of maintenance. If suggestions of improvement are made, and are in the realm of the Maintenance Standards, the work shall be corrected within thirty (30) days of receipt of the report. A. Maintenance 1. All planting areas to be kept free of weeds and debris. 2. Lawn and ground covers to be kept trimmed and /or mowed regularly. 3. All plantings to be kept in a healthy and growing condition. Fertilization, cultivation and tree pruning are to be carried out as part of regular maintenance. 4. Irrigation systems are to be kept in working condition. Adjustment and cleaning of system should be a part of regular maintenance. 5. Stakes, guys and ties on trees should be checked regularly for correct function; ties to be adjusted to avoid creating abrasions or girdling to the stems. 6. Damage to plantings created by vandalism, automobile or acts of nature shall be corrected within thirty (30) days. 42 :L-so B. Front Yard Setback Area General Statement Landscaping in these areas shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover and shrubbery. All unpaved areas not utilized for parking shall be landscaped in a similar manner. Full coverage of ground cover to be expected in a minimum of three (3) months. 2. Special Landscaped Street The entire area between the curb and the building setback line shall be landscaped, except for any driveway in said area. Tree size to be no less than 24 -inch box. 3. Other Streets The entire area between the curb and a point ten (10) feet back in the front property line shall be landscaped except for any driveway in said area Tree size to be no less than 24 inch box. C. Side Yard and Rear Yard General Statement All unpaved areas not utilized for parking and storage, shall be landscaped utilizing ground cover and/or shrub and tree materials. 2. Undeveloped Areas Undeveloped areas proposed for future expansion shall be maintained in a weed free condition, but need not be landscaped. Screenine Areas used for parking shall be screened from view or have the view interrupted by landscaping and/or fencing from access streets, freeways and adjacent properties. Plant materials used for screening purposes shall consist of lineal or grouped masses of shrubs and/or trees of a sufficient size and height to meet this requirement when initially installed. 4. Boundary Areas 43 237 Boundary landscaping is required on all interior property lines. Said areas shall be placed along the entire length of these property lines or be of sufficient length to accommodate the number of required trees. Trees, equal in number to one (1) tree per twenty -five (25) lineal feet of each property line, shall be planted in the above defined areas in addition to required ground cover and shrub material. Minimum width of property line landscaping shall be three (3) feet. All landscaped areas shall be separated from adjacent vehicular areas by a wall or curb, at least six (6) inches higher than the adjacent vehicular area. D. Parking Areas Trees, equal in number to one (1) per each five (5) parking stalls, shall be provided in the parking area. Planting area around building shall not be included in narking area. Planting of trees may be in groups and need not necessarily be in regular spacing. E. Sloped Banks All sloped banks greater than 5 to 1, or six (6) feet in vertical height and adjacent to public right -of -way shall be stabilized, planted and irrigated with full coverage in accordance with plans submitted and approved by Planning Director. Loading Areas Street side loading on other than special landscaped streets, shall be allowed providing the loading dock is set back a minimum of seventy (70) feet from the street right - of -way line or one hundred ten (110) feet from the street center line, whichever is greater. Said loading area must be screened from view from adjacent streets. G. Storage Areas All outdoor storage shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen up to a point eight (8) feet in vertical height but need not be opaque above that point. 2. Outdoor storage shall be meant to include all company owned and operated motor vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles. No storage shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. 44 WN H. Refuse Collection Areas All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen. 2. No refuse collection area shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. Minimum width for landscaping shall be three (3) feet around refuse collection areas. Telephone and Electrical Service All `on- site" electrical lines (excluding lines in excess of 12 KV) and telephone lines shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties, or an approved method of display. Pedestrian Access (1) It is required of all developments in the commercial areas to submit a plan of pedestrian access to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits. Said plan will detail consideration for pedestrian access to the subject property and to adjacent properties, and shall be binding on subsequent development of the property. The plan shall show all interior walkways and all walkways in the public right -of -way, if such walkways are proposed or necessary. K. Landscape Plant Vocabulary (1) It is the intent of this standard to provide flexibility and diversity in plant selection yet maintain a limited variety to give greater unity to the development. At the direction of the Director of Community Development and the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation, material fists and a street tree master plan shall be developed to aid in this development. All trees occurring in the ten (10) foot setback shall be no less than 24 inch box. The parking lot trees shall be no less than fifteen (15) gallon size. Shrubs to be planted in containers shall not be less than one (1) gallon size. Ground covers will be planted from one (1) gallon containers or from root cuttings. 45 139 Every effort should be made to avoid using plants with invasive and shallow root systems with fiuit that would stain paving or automobiles. L. Earth berms shall be rounded and natural in character, designed to obscure automobiles and to add interest to the site. In cases where the ratio of width and height of berm creates a bank greater than 3 to 1, shrubs or walls can be used as shown in illustration (b) (c). Wheel stops shall be so placed that damage to trees, irrigation units and shrubs is avoided. A Trees in parking lots should be limited in variety. Selection should be repeated to give continuity. Regular spacing is not required and irregular groupings may add interest. Care should be exercised to allow plants to grow and maintain their ultimate size without restriction. N. Storage areas are to be provided with an opaque screen up to a point of eight (8) feet in vertical height. Combination of plantings can be used to further soften hard materials and give continuity to planting. 46 140 PART VI. FOOTNOTES (1) Planned Community text revision incorporating Planning Commission revisions and conditions of approval. (2) Planned Community Text revision incorporating City Council conditions of approval as adopted by the city of Newport Beach. (Amendment No. 313, adopted August 14, 1972). (3) Planned Community Text revision July 6, 1973 incorporating the addition of footprint lots and the addition of two (2) restaurant sites within Office Site "A ". (Amendment No. 381, adopted August 2, 1973). (4) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 420, adopted February 7, 1974) incorporating the following changes: a. Revised Planned Community Text site acreage figures to conform to the recorded tract map. b. Revised Exhibit "A" (land use map) to conform to recorded tract map. C. Changed the size of Office Site "E" and created one parcel of land comprised of Restaurant Site No. 3, Service Station Site No. 3 and the residual of Office Site "C ". This new site is designated as Office Site „F„ d. Revised Retail and Service Site No. 2 from a specific location to a floating location within Office Site "A ". e. Added mechanical car wash subject to a use permit as a permitted use on the service station sites. f Added private clubs or athletic clubs as a permitted use on Office Site "B„ g. Made provisions for three (3) additional restaurant sites, two sites within Office Site "B: and one site within Office Site "F ". (5) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 430, adopted June 10, 1974) incorporating the following changes: a. Eliminated Service Station Site No. 2. b. Added health or athletic club as a permitted use within the Retail and Service Center sites. C. Added Professional and Business Office as a permitted use within the Retail and Service Center sites. d. Added a minimum twenty-five (25) percent landscape requirements or site plan approval by the Planning commission to the development requirements of retail Site No. 1. (6) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 444, adopted May 15, 1975) incorporating the following changes: a. Clarified the setback requirements for buildings within footprint lots. b. Clarified Professional and Business Office permitted uses. C. Added signing provision for ground floor businesses in multi- tenant building. 47 141 (7) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 451, adopted September 8, 1975) incorporating the following changes: a. Added the requirement that all restaurants shall be subject to the securing of a use permit with the exception of certain restaurant uses within Retail and Service Centers. (8) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 466, adopted June 28, 1976) incorporating the following changes: a. Changed the size of Light Industrial Site No. 2. b. Created Professional and Business Office Site "G ". C. Made provisions for two (2) restaurant sites within Office Site "G ". d. Reduced the allowable building area of Office Site "D ". e. Amended the construction timetable for traffic signals. (9) Planned community Text revision (Amendment No. 475, adopted January 10, 1977) incorporating the following changes: a. Established guidelines for an exception to the minimum site area. (10) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 505, adopted July 11, 1978) incorporating the following changes: a. Increased the site area of Professional and Business Office Site "C„ b. Increased the allowable building area of Professional and Business Office Site "C ". (11) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 508, adopted August 28, 1978) incorporating the following changes: a. Made provision for consideration of additional left turn ingress from MacArthur Boulevard. b. Eliminated Service Station Site No. 1 and added the land area to Professional and Business Office Site `B ". C. Reviewed the parking requirement for office buildings within Professional and Business Office sites. (12) Planned Community Text revision (Amendment No. 514, adopted October 19, 1978) incorporating the following changes: a. Established existing and additional allowable development as of October 1, 1978. b. Established the requirement and criteria for phasing plan approval of development beyond thirty (30) percent of the additional (13) Planned Community text revision incorporating the transfer to allowable building area from Professional and business Office Site "D: to Professional and Business Office Site "B ". (Amendment No. 550, adopted November 10, 1980). 48 142 (14) Planned Community Text revision for Retail and Service Site No. 1, which allocates existing and permitted development. (Amendment No. 558 adopted March 23, 1981). (15) Planned community Text revision increasing the allowable building area in Site C (MacArthur Court). (Amendment No. 593, adopted October 24, 1983). (16) Planned Community Text revision incorporating the transfer of allowable office, restaurant and retail building area from Professional and Business Office Site "A" to Professional and Business Office Site `B ". (Amendment No. 606, adopted May 14, 1984). (17) Planned Community Text revision to allow up to two restaurants with a total floor area not to exceed 3,250 square feet within "Office Site C ". (Amendment No. 626, adopted December 9, 1985). (18) Planned Community Text revision deleting restaurant Site 1 and substituting a private club with a total floor area not to exceed 30,000 square feet within Office Site "A ". (Amendment No. 635, adopted July 14, 1986). (19) Planned Community Text revision to allow auto detailing as a permitted use. (Amendment No. 647, adopted March 23, 1987). (20) Planned Community Text revision adding support commercial uses to the permitted uses under Professional and Business Office permitted uses. (Amendment No. 649, adopted July 27, 1987). (21) Planned Community text revision combining Light Industrial Sites 1 and 2 into Light Industrial Site 1, increasing the allowable building area for the combined site by 39,000 square feet, and increasing the permitted building height from 35 feet to 55 feet. (Amendment No. 677, adopted June 12, 1989). (22) Planned Community Text revision increasing the permitted building height in Light Industrial Site 1 from 55 feet to 75 feet. (Amendment No. 799, adopted April 25, 1994). (23) Title 20 amendment to reinstate notice and appeal procedures for specialty food service applications. (Amendment No. 829, adopted September 11, 1995, Ordinance 95 -39) (24) Planned Community Text revision to increase the permitted height within "Light Industrial Site I" from 75 feet to 90 feet for a single vertical column. (Amendment No. 867, adopted February 23, 1998, Ordinance 98 -3). (25) Planned Community Text revisions (Amendment No. 876, adopted August 10, 1998, Ordinance 98 -20) to allow the following changes: a. Additional restaurant uses in Office Site "G" (the current limited of two restaurants will be increased to three restaurant sites), and; b. Permit eating and drinking establishments throughout the Koll Center Planned Community as per Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 49 14� (26) Planned Community Text revisions (Amendment No. 890, adopted 01/11/2000, Ordinance 99 -28) to allow the following changes: a. Increase the permitted level of development for Office Site A by 15,000 square feet (4110 MacArthur Boulevard) and; b. Establish the permitted level of development for Koll Center Newport Office Site A at 418,346 gross square feet. (27) Planned Community Text revisions (Amendment No. 897, adopted January 25, 2000, Ordinance 2000 -3) to allow the following changes: a. Designate Parcel 1 of Koll Center Newport Retail and Service Site 1 for Hotel Use, and; b. Establish the permitted Gross Floor Area for Koll Center Newport Retail and Service Site 1 at 120,000 square feet, and C. Establish the permitted height for the site at 60 feet. (28) Planned Community Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2005 -014, adopted August 9, 2005) to allow the following changes: Office expansion of 1,367 net square feet in the Koll Center Office Site B at 4200 Von Karman Avenue. (29) Planned Community Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2006 -19), adopted July 25, 2006 to allow the following changes: To increase the development allocation for Professional and Business Offices of Site A by 2,129 net square feet. (PA2005 -293) (30) Planned Community Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2006 -21), adopted October 24, 2006 to allow the following changes: a. To allow the transfer of 24,016 gross square feet of unused retail, restaurant and office square footage from Office Site B to Office Site A resulting in the elimination of the entire Retail Site #1, an undeveloped portion of Restaurant Site #2 and the entire Restaurant Site #5. (31) Planned Community Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2011 -3), adopted January 25, 2011 to allow the following changes: a. To allow building area for Professional & Business Site F to increase by 18, 346 net square feet. (32) Planned Community Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2011 -8), adopted March 8, 2011 to allow the following changes: a. To allow an increase to the Allowable Building Area for Professional & Business Site B by 9,917 net square feet 50 144 (33) Planned Comtllunity Text revisions (Ordinance No. 2013- ). adopted -- —(Formatted: Tab stops: 0.38 ^, Left . 2013 to allow the following changes: a. To delete Light Industrial Sites 1 and 2 from PC -11. Formatted: Numbered + Lerei: 1 + b. To delete Part 1. Industrial uses in its entirety as an allowed use. Numbering style: a, b, c, .. + start at: 1 + Alignment: Left+ Aligned at: 1" +indent at: c. To revise the total acreage within PC -11 to 154.0 acres to reflect the deletion 1.25', Tab stops: Not at -1" + -0.5' of Light Industrial Sites 1 and 2 from PC -1 L d. To update the Composite exhibit and Exhibits A through E to reflect the deletion of Light Industrial Sites I and 2 from PC -11. Lnsert exhibits: Composite .............. ............................... For Information Only-(331 Exhibit A ................... ........................... Land UseA33Z Exhibit B ................ ............................... Grading and Roads (33) Exhibit C ................ ............................... Storm Drain 3 Exhibit D ............... ............................... Water & Sewer -331 Exhibit E ................ ............................... Boundary and TopographyL1 51 145 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 64 of 64 EXHIBIT E PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION PC2012 -001 Consists of: • Draft Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan dated November 29, 2012, which consists of the followings: 1. Land Use Development Standards & Procedures 2. Design Guidelines 3. Phasing Plan Exhibit E is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at hftr): / /newi)ortbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2029 140 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 65 of 65 EXHIBIT F REQUIRED FINDINGS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2012 -002 In accordance with NBMC Section 19.12.070 (Required Findings for Action on Tentative Maps), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code. Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. The Tentative Tract Map provides lot configurations consistent with the land uses, densities and intensities of the proposed PCDP, the General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed -Use Horizontal -2 (MU -1­12) and the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan (ICDP). MU -1­12 provides for horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses. Additionally, the ICDP allocates up to 1,244 residential units and 11,500 square feet of retail to be developed on the Property. Under the proposed Project, 632 units would be developed as replacement units for redevelopment of the existing industrial uses, 290 additive units would be allocated to the proposed Project in accordance with the City's General Plan and the ICDP and 322 density bonus units would be authorized pursuant to NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus), for a total of 1,244 residential units. The proposed residential community also includes 11,500 square feet allocated for neighborhood commercial uses and is therefore consistent with the intent of General Plan and ICDP. A -2. General Plan goal LU 2.1 seeks to accommodate uses that support the needs of City residents including housing, retail, services, employment and recreation. The Tentative Tract Map allows the development of a residential community, containing a mix of housing types, supporting retail and active parklands, consistent with the proposed PCDP, General Plan designation and ICDP, which encourage the development of coordinated, cohesive mixed use projects in the Airport Area. A -3. The Tentative Tract Map provides for the development of a cohesive planned community with a pattern of streets and blocks that provide a pedestrian - friendly environment, with strong connectivity to adjacent commercial and office areas. A network of paseos, open space and pedestrian walkways would be introduced into the community to serve as connections between Project neighborhoods and provide linkages to surrounding areas. Two one acre parks, as well as recreational open space amenities, are proposed. -47 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 66 of 66 A -4. The streets on the proposed Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the roadway specifications of the Master Plan of Streets and Highways of the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Traffic control measures are also included with the Uptown Newport Planned Community to ensure proposed private roadways and City roadways function as intended. A -5. The Tentative Tract Map provides for the dedication of at least 8 percent of the gross land area (exclusive of existing rights -of -way), or 2.0 acres of neighborhood parks. Phase 1 would include the dedication (the general public would have access to the park during daytime hours) and improvement of a neighborhood park with a minimum area of 1.3 acre and a minimum dimension of 150 feet. Phase 2 would include the dedication and improvement of a neighborhood park with a minimum area of 1.02 acre and a minimum dimension of 150 feet. Finding: B. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development Facts in Support of Finding: B -1. Overall site topography can be characterized as relatively flat. B -2. There are no known faults on or immediately adjacent to the Property B -3. There are no geologic or physical constraints that would prevent the development of the site at the density proposed, or require variances or deviations from the applicable City development standards. Finding: C. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision making body may nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. No drainages traverse the Property and no potential jurisdictional waters or wetlands areas are present on or immediately adjacent to the site. C -2. No sensitive habitats, plant species or animal species were observed onsite during the preparation of the EIR for the Project. C -3. The DEIR prepared for the Project concluded that without mitigation one impact could be potentially significant: the Project would remove vegetation that could be used for 142 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 67 of 67 nesting by migratory birds. However, the DEIR concluded that the impact would be less than significant after mitigation. C -4. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures, with the exception of the following significant and unavoidable impacts: B. Air Quality — Short term construction - related emission for Phases 1 and 2 of the project C. Land Use - A determination of inconsistency with the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) D. Noise - Construction - related noise impacts for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project C -5. The mitigation measures identified in the DEIR are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level, with the exception of those impacts identified above. The mitigation measures would be applied to the Project through the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding: D. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts in Support of Finding: D -1. There are no known faults on or immediately adjacent to the Property. D -2. The Project is conditioned to comply with all Building, Public Works and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious public health problems. Public improvements will be required of the Applicant per Section 19.28.010 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act. D -3. The Project's Phase 1 would generate an increase in Green House Gas ( "GHG ") emissions onsite but would not exceed the proposed South Coast Air Quality Management District per capita significance thresholds. At full build -out the Project would result in a net decrease in GHG emissions. D -4. Mitigation measures identified in the DEIR reduce potential impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials to less than significant. No significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to hazards were identified in the DEIR. D -5. While the north and northwest portions of the Property have soil and groundwater impacted by volatile organic compounds, the areas have been the primary focus of historical and ongoing soil and groundwater investigation and remediation activities conducted under the oversight of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. i-� Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 68 of 68 D -6. No residential uses are allowed without first providing regulatory signoff from RWQB. Additionally residential uses will be setback a minimum of 200 feet from any hazardous materials as stated in Mitigation Measure 7 -2 of the DEIR. Finding: E. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision making body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within a subdivision. Facts in Support of Finding: E -1. The Property contains existing public utilities easements that serve existing development that will be removed over time. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements proposed present no conflict with these easements. Existing easements will remain in their current designated locations or will be modified to be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. Finding: F. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land. Facts in Support of Finding: F -1. The Property does not contain prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance and no portion of the Project site is covered by a Williamson Act contract. Finding: G. That, in the case of a "land project' as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code: (1) There is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included within the land project; and (2) the decision making body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. Facts in Support of Findin G -1. The Property is not located in a specific plan area 150 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 69 of 69 Finding: H. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act. Facts in Support of Finding: H -1. The proposed Tentative Tract Map and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Building Code that requires new construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location and climate. The Newport Beach Community Development Department enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process. Finding: 1. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. Facts in Support of Finding: 1 -1 Of the total 1,244 residential units in the Project, between 102 and up to 369 units would be set aside for affordable housing depending upon the target income group being served. Affordable housing obligations will be met through the construction of approved Affordable Housing on -site affordable housing consistent with an Implementation Plan (AHIP). Finding: J. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Facts in Support of Finding: J -1. There is adequate sewer system capacity to serve the requirements of the proposed Project. The Project's PCDP and phasing plan ensure adequate utility infrastructure is provided per phase. The proposed Project would be able to tie into the existing sewer system without adversely affecting the system or causing any water quality affects or violating existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Wastewater from the project will be generated by residential and retail commercial uses and at full buildout; there will be a significant reduction in wastewater with the elimination of the existing semi - conductor manufacturing plant. Finding: 151 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 70 of 70 K. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act. Facts in Support of Finding: K -1. The Project site is not located within the Coastal Zone. 152 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 71 of 71 EXHIBIT G CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2012 -002 Note: The following is a list of acronyms used in the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 17438: • DA— Development Agreement No.DA2012 -003. • EIR No. ER2012 -001- Uptown Newport Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse Number 2010051094. • MM— Mitigation Measure, project specific measures recommended by the DEIR and adopted as part of the approval of the project to reduce potentially significant environmental effects to a level considered less than significant and stated at the end of a condition as a reference between the condition and a mitigation measure recommended in the DEIR. • MMRP — Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the monitoring and reporting procedures for the Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR and adopted as part of project approval pursuant to Section 21081.6(x)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act. • NBMC— Newport Beach Municipal Code. General Conditions 1. City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 is in conjunction with its approval of Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003 for the same project (the "DA "). Pursuant to Sections 2.2 and 2.4 of the DA and the terms used therein that are defined in Section 1 of the DA, the "Term" of the DA becomes effective on the "Effective Date" of the DA. Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 and the DA comprise parts of a single integrated action and are not severable from one another. Accordingly, notwithstanding any other provision set forth in Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 to the contrary, in no event shall the owner, lessee, or other occupant or any person or entity holding any interest in the subject property acquire any right to develop or use the subject property as authorized or provided herein unless and until the Effective Date in the DA occurs and the Term of the DA commences. In the event the DA is terminated for any reason before the Effective Date of the DA occurs, including without limitation as a result of the mutual termination of the DA by the Parties thereto, the occurrence of an uncured material default under the DA by either Party and a termination of the DA by the non - defaulting Party, or the failure of the Effective Date of the DA to occur prior to the deadline set forth in the DA, as said deadline may be extended by mutual agreement of the Parties to the DA, then in such event Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 automatically shall become null and void and of no further force or effect, without any need or requirement for the City to schedule any public hearings or take any affirmative action or actions to revoke or rescind the same. 2. Notwithstanding any provision expressly or impliedly to the contrary, in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between any of the terms or conditions of Tentative Tract 153 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 72 of 72 Map No. 17438 and the DA, the terms and conditions of the DA shall control. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between or among the conditions of Tentative Tract Map No. 17438, the Director of Community Development shall determine the controlling condition. 3. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of NBMC Chapter 19.40, General Dedication Requirements. 4. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of NBMC Chapter 15.38, Fair Share Traffic Contribution Ordinance, and Chapter 15.42, Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program. Fair Share and Transportation Corridor Agency fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of NBMC Chapter 15.40, Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). 6. Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 shall expire 24 months from the date of approval pursuant to NBMC Chapter 19.16.010, unless an extension is otherwise granted by the City for the period of time provided for in the Development Agreement pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6(a). 7. The development of the project is subject to compliance with all applicable submittals approved by the City and all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, subject to modification by these Conditions of Approval. 8. Development of the project shall comply with the requirements of the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan and be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 dated November 28, 2012, except as modified by applicable conditions of approval and the DA. 9. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to the City's approval of the Uptown Newport project including, but not limited to, the approval of the Tentative Tract Map No. 17438, Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan No. PC 2012 -001, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001, Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003, and /or the City's related California Environmental Quality Act determinations, the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2010051094), and the adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and /or statement of overriding considerations adopted for the project. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other 154 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 73 of 73 expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand, from time to time, any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. The provisions herein shall not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is caused by the willful misconduct or sole active negligence of the City or the City's officers, officials, agents, employees, or representatives. 10. The applicant shall comply with all project design features, mitigation measures, and standard conditions contained within the approved MMRP of EIR SCH No. 2010051094 for the project. 11. The applicant shall have the sole obligation to fund or arrange funding for the planning, design, engineering, construction, supervision, inspection and all other costs associated with the site development, including construction of the two neighborhood parks, paseos, pedestrian sidewalks, Class 1 bike trail along the project frontage along Jamboree Road, and all public and private infrastructure, as further described in subsequent conditions of approval, including but not limited to; streets, landscaped parkways, water and sewer facilities, storm drains, and dry utilities to serve residential and commercial development as identified in the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan. 12. New development within the project site shall be subject to the state - mandated school fees and Santa Ana Unified School District Measure G and C general obligation taxes based upon assessed value of the residential and commercial uses. 13. The project shall provide parkland and in -lieu fees in an amount consistent with General Plan Policy LU6.15.13 and the Newport Beach Subdivision Code. a. In accordance with Subdivision Code, the total Parkland Dedication Requirement is 13.62 acres. This total acreage is based upon the parkland dedication standard of 5 acres per 1,000 people established by Section 19.52.040, a total of 1,244 units authorized, and a 2010 Census population standard of 2.19 persons per household. b. A total of 2.05 acres of parkland shall be dedicated to the City consistent with General Plan Policy LU6.15.13. The timing of dedication shall be consistent with Section 19.52.090 of the Subdivision Code. C. The proposed public park in Phase 1 shall be included in the first final map in Phase 1 and the proposed public park in Phase 2 shall be included in the first final map in Phase 2. 155 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 74 of 74 d. The residual parkland dedication requirement of 11.57 acres shall be satisfied by the payment of fees in -lieu of dedication in accordance with the Development Agreement. 14. The project shall provide parkland and in -lieu fees in an amount consistent with the General Plan Policy LU6.15.13 and Newport Beach Subdivision Code as identified in the DA. 15. Section 3.3 and Section 6.3 of the Phase Plan shall be amended to include the following provisions: The existing emergency vehicle access to and from the Koll Center property in Phase 1 as depicted in Figure 3 -5 and Figure 6 -5 shall be preserved in perpetuity. This connection through Koll Center Newport to Von Karman Avenue may be expanded to allow for public access for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles in the future. 16. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 2704.1.1 Amendment, no person shall use or store any amount of extremely hazardous substances equal to or greater that the disclosable amounts as listed in Appendix A, part 355, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulation in a residential zone or adjacent to property developed with residential uses. 17. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 903.2.8, an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with California Fire Code Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings. 18. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 907.2.9, a manual fire alarm system that activates the occupant notification system shall be provided when any dwelling unit or sleeping unit is located three or more stories above the lowest level of exit discharge, or the building contains more than 16 dwelling or sleeping units. 19. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 906.1, 2A 10BC type fire extinguishers shall be required and installed on each floor or level. Travel distance to an extinguisher shall not exceed 75 feet from any point in a building. Parking garages shall be required to have a 2A 20BC located every 50 feet. 20. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 907.2.11.2, smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained on the ceiling or wall outside of each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms, in each room used for sleeping purposes, and in each story within a dwelling unit. The smoke alarms shall be interconnected in such a manner that the activation of one alarm will activate all of the alarms in the individual unit. Smoke alarms shall receive their primary power from the building wiring and shall be equipped with a battery backup. 21. The applicant shall provide required fire flow in accordance with Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline B.01 "Determination of Required Fire Flow ". 150 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 75 of 75 22. Fire hydrants shall be provided, located and, installed as per California Fire Code and Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline F.04. 23. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided as per Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline C.01. The fire apparatus road shall extend to within 150 feet of all development, facilities, and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building. Minimum width of a fire access roadway shall be 20 feet, no vehicle parking allowed. The width shall be increased to 26 feet within 30 feet of a hydrant, no vehicle parking allowed. Parking on one side is permitted on 28 -foot wide streets. Parking on two sides permitted on 36 -foot wide streets. No parking is permitted on streets narrower than 28 feet in width. Access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 24. The inside turning radius for an access road shall be 20 feet or greater. The outside turning radius shall be a minimum of 40 feet (without parking.) Cul -de -sacs with center obstruction shall require a larger turning radius as approved by the Newport Beach Fire Department. 25. Fire lane signage shall be provided as per Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline C -02. 26. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 510.1 Amendment, emergency responder radio coverage shall be provided in buildings or structures that has more than three stories above grade plane or any building or structure, regardless of the number of stories, in which any single floor space exceeds 45,000 square feet, or any building or structure containing a subterranean space of 250 square feet or more, or any building or structure deemed likely to have diminished in- building communications. The emergency responder radio coverage shall comply with the Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline D.05 `Public Safety Radio System Coverage ". 27. In accordance with California Fire Code Section 905.3, standpipes shall be provided to all buildings where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet above the lowest level of Fire Department vehicle access, or buildings where the floor level of the lowest story is located more than 30 feet below the highest level of Fire Department vehicle access, or building that are two or more stories below the highest level of Fire Department vehicle access. 28. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right -of -way. 29. All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. See City Standard 110 -L. 30. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by the private construction, said damage shall be repaired and /or additional reconstruction within the public right -of -way could be required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector. 15j Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 76 of 76 31. All on -site drainage shall comply with the latest City Water Quality requirements. 32. All existing private, non - standard improvements within the public right -of -way and /or extensions of private, non - standard improvements into the public right -of -way fronting the development site shall be removed unless approved in conjunction with an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement. 33. Internal roadways shall comply with Council Policy L -4: a. 36 feet wide curb to curb with Parking on both sides b. 32 feet wide curb to curb without Parking or parking on one side 34. Lots E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, U and R shall include a pedestrian and bicycle easement. The existing meandering sidewalk within the easement area shall be reconstructed consistent with City standard designs to provide a minimum 12 -foot wide public sidewalk and bike path. 35. Any modifications to the easterly half of Jamboree Road, including but not limited to striping and median reconstruction requires approval from the City of Irvine. 36. Uptown Newport Sewer connections to private sewer located on Koll Site: a. If there are existing easements and rights established between the two properties, please note on the plans the easement recordation number for reference. b. Otherwise, Uptown Newport project is required to obtain a letter from Koll Site authorizing the new connections to the private sewer. 37. The applicant shall obtain a Private Sewer Easement from adjacent property for the proposed sewer main which discharges towards Birch Street. If water or other utilities are proposed to be routed through this same area, the applicant shall obtain a Private Utilities Easement, instead. 38. Two new City of Newport Beach manholes are required on Birch Street for the proposed sewer main if constructed: a. One manhole per STD -401 -L to be installed adjacent to the property line. b. One manhole per STD -401 -L to be installed on the main where it tie -in with the existing City sewer line in Birch Street. Prior to Final Mar) Approval Note: Multiple final Tract maps may be prepared by the applicant and submitted for approval by the City. WN Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 77 of 77 39. Prior to Final Map approval the applicant shall obtain written verification of the availability of sufficient water supply from the Irvine Ranch Water District consistent with the requirements of Section 66473.7 (b) of the Subdivision Map Act. 40. Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant shall submit for review by the Director of Community Development and shall obtain City Attorney approval of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &Rs) prepared by an authorized professional and which generally provide for the following: a. Creation of a Master Association, and /or Sub - associations, for the purpose of providing for control over and maintenance of the two neighborhood parks and common area improvements, which include, but are not limited, to the followings unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works: Jamboree Road parkway landscaping, internal project streets, sidewalks, neighborhood parks, common landscape areas and irrigation; paseos and parkways /greenbelts; community walls and fencing; slopes; sewer laterals, and water laterals. b. A statement that all internal streets, sidewalks, common landscape areas, paseos, parkways /greenbelts, walls and fencing within the the tract, sewer and water laterals, are private and shall be maintained by the Master Association, or Sub - Association(s) unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works. C. A statement that all homeowners and residents will be provided, upon purchase closing or signing of rental agreement, the information and requirements for water conservation pursuant to NBMC Chapter 14.16, Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations. d. A statement that the Master Association shall be required to advise residents that complaints about offensive odors may be reported to the City using online tools on the City web site and /or to the South Coast Air Quality Management District at 1- 800 - CUT -SMOG (1- 800 - 288 - 7664). e. A statement that all appropriate written notifications shall be provided to all initial and subsequent buyers, lessees, and renters within Uptown Newport project notifying them that the area is subject to noise from existing land uses, traffic on Jamboree Road, and construction of buildings within the project, and as a result residents and occupants of buildings may experience inconvenience, annoyance or discomfort arising from noise within the project. f. A statement that the neighborhood parks within Uptown Newport project shall have posted a notification to users regarding proximity to John Wayne Airport and related aircraft and noise. g. A statement that all appropriate written notifications shall be provided to all initial and subsequent buyers, lessees, and renters within Uptown Newport 1�9 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 78 of 78 project notifying them that the area is in the vicinity of John Wayne Airport and as a result residents and occupants of buildings may experience inconvenience, annoyance or discomfort arising from the noise resulting from aircraft operating at the airport. h. Information to be provided to future residents that uses and structures are subject to the requirements of the approved Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan. Lots O and M as shown on Tentative Tract Map 17438 shall be offered for dedication to the City of Newport Beach as a public park in perpetuity and maintained by a Master Association, a Sub - Association and /or other approved and appropriate agency, and that no structures, development or encroachment shall be permitted within the designated park area except as shown on the Final Map, approved Site Development Review, approved landscape and park improvement plans, or as otherwise approved by the City. Provisions that following recordation of each Final Map, each Association formed for the subdivision shall submit to the Community Development Director a list of all current Officers of the Association. k. A statement indicating that proposed amendments to the CC &Rs shall be submitted for review to the Community Development Director or designee, and shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to the amendments being valid. A statement that the City has the right, but not the obligation, to enforce any of the provisions of the CC &Rs. M. An agreement between the applicant and the Association that on an annual basis by June 1 of each year reports will be furnished to the Public Works Director in compliance with the reporting requirements of codes and ordinances adopted by the City with respect to the NPDES program. 41. Prior to any Final Map approval, the applicant shall reflect on the Final Map or prepare separate instruments to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director all public access easements, deed restrictions or other instruments including but not limited to those providing for permanent public access to the neighborhood parks, common open space areas, paseos, internal streets and walkways and those providing City access for maintenance of storm drains or any public infrastructure. 42. Prior to any Final Map approval, the applicant shall submit a park and open space management plan for approval by the Director of Community Development, for the long term funding and management of Lots E through BB on Tentative Tract Map 17438 that contain neighborhood parks, paseos, common open space areas, and streets within Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan. The park and open space management plan shall identify all entities responsible for ownership, management and maintenance of these areas and their credentials which qualify the 100 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 79 of 79 entity as capable of management and maintenance of these areas and able to implement all applicable mitigation measures identified in the MMRP. The park and open space management plan shall specify the timeline for commencement of implementation of the management plan by the management entity for these areas. Approval by the City of the long term management plan is a condition precedent to recordation of a final map. The park and open space management plan shall include but not be limited to identification of funding, management responsibilities, and maintenance activities in perpetuity for the neighborhood parks, paseos, common open space areas, and streets within Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan. 43. Prior to any Final Map approval, the applicant shall pay all applicable development and Final Map fees associated with but not limited to Community Development Department, Public Works Department, and City Attorney review of CC &Rs, map and plan check, hydrology review, geotechnical and soils reports review, park improvement plan review, grading plan review, traffic and transportation, and construction inspection. 44. Prior to any Final Map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director for review and shall obtain City Attorney approval of, a buyer's notification disclosure form, to be given to all buyers and residents upon purchase closing, which indicates the location, if applicable, notification of potential exposure to soil and groundwater contamination, nuisances, noise, risk of upset and hazards, and /or objectionable odors of continued TowerJazz operation. 45. Prior to any Final Map approval, the applicant shall provide separate labor and material improvement bonds or irrevocable letters of credit in a form and amount acceptable to the Director of Public Works for 100% of estimated improvement cost, as prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Director of Public Works, for each of the following, but not limited to, public and private improvements separately: Street improvements, monuments, sidewalks, striping and signage, neighborhood park improvements, street lights, sewer systems, water systems, storm drain and water quality management systems, erosion control, landscaping and irrigation in public rights of way, common open space areas accessible by the public, and off -site improvements required as part of the project. Prior to Recordation of Final Mai) Note: Multiple Final Maps may be prepared by the applicant and submitted for approval by the City. 46. All Tract Maps shall be recorded. All Maps shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). Prior to recordation of the Map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital - graphic file of said map in a manner described in Section 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 101 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 80 of 80 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. The Map to be submitted to the City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City's CADD Standards. Scanned images will not be accepted. 47. Prior to recordation of any Tract map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 48. Prior to recordation of any Final Map, the applicant shall submit for review and shall obtain the Public Works Director approval of applicable utility maintenance easements for water, electric, telephone as required for the Final Map to the benefits of utility companies. 49. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall show all easements proposed to be granted to the City of Newport Beach (ie. over roads for utilities, ingress and egress, pedestrian easements adjacent to internal streets) 50. Prior to recordation of the Final Map of any portion of the project site, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City for the following as identified on Tentative Tract Map No. 17438: a. Neighborhood parks b. Easements for public access to common open space areas, public paseos, walkways and internal streets. Prior to Issuance of Demolition or Grading Permits 51. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall pay any unpaid City administrative costs and unpaid costs incurred by City retained consultants associated with the processing of this application to the City. 52. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the applicant shall pay all applicable City fees which may include but are not limited to map and plan check, water connection, sewer connection, hydrology review, geotechnical and soils reports review, grading plan review, traffic and transportation, and construction inspection. 53. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works that all existing survey monuments are located in the field in compliance with AB 1414 for restoration by the Registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor in accordance with Section 8771 of the Business and Professions Code. 102 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 81 of 81 54. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the limits of grading shown on Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 must be verified by a Geotechnical Engineer. Grading shall not be permitted to extend beyond the limits as indicated on Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 without approval of the Community Development Director. 55. Prior to issuance of grading permits a list of "good housekeeping" practices, consistent with the approved Water Quality Management Plan, shall be submitted by the contractor for incorporation into the long -term post- construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants would be used, stored, or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. The WQMP shall list and describe all structural and non- structural BMPs. In addition the WQMP must also identify the entity responsible for the long term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if applicable treatment - control) BMPs. 56. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit documentation in a form and of a content determined by the Community Development Director that any hazardous contaminated soils or other hazardous materials removed from the project site shall be transported only by a Licensed Hazardous Waste Hauler to approved hazardous materials disposal site, who shall be in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including the U.S. Department of Transportation regulations under 49 CFR (Hazardous Materials Transportation Act), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards, and under 40 CFR 263 (Subtitle C of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act). The Director of Community Development shall verify that only Licensed Haulers who are operating in compliance with regulatory requirements are used to haul hazardous materials. 57. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Community Development Director shall review the grading plan for conformance with the grading shown on the approved tentative map. The grading plans shall be accompanied by geological and soils engineering reports and shall incorporate all information as required by the City. Grading plans shall indicate all areas of grading, including remedial grading, and shall extend to the limits outside of the boundaries of an immediate area of development as required by the City. Grading shall be permitted within and outside of an area of immediate development, as approved by the City, for the grading of public roads, highways, park facilities, infrastructure, and other development - related improvements. Remedial grading for development shall be permitted within and outside of an immediate development area, as approved by the City, to adequately address geotechnical or soils conditions. Grading plans shall provide for temporary erosion control on all graded sites scheduled to remain unimproved for more than 30 days. 58. If the applicant submits a grading plan that deviates from the grading shown on the approved tentative map (specifically with regard to slope heights, slope ratios, pad elevations or configurations), as determined by the Community Development Director, the Community Development Director shall review the plan for a finding of substantial conformance. If the Community Development Director finds the plan not to be in substantial conformance, the applicant shall process a revised tentative map or, if a 103 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 82 of 82 final map has been recorded, the applicant shall process a new tentative map. A determination of CEQA compliance shall also be required. 59. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit and /or action that would permit project site disturbance, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City of Newport Beach Police Department that a construction security service or equivalent service shall be established at the construction site along with other measures, as identified by the Police and the Public Works Departments, to be instituted during the grading and construction phase of the project. 60. Prior to issuance of applicable grading permits the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Municipal Operations Department Director, a 1" =200' Utilities Master Plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer consistent with the Uptown Newport Master Development Plans showing all existing and proposed public and private sewer pump stations, force mains, laterals, mains and manholes, domestic water service facilities including gate and butterfly valves, pressure reducing stations, pressure zones, fire hydrants, meters, storm drain facilities to include storm drain mains, laterals, manholes, catch basins, inlets, detention and retention basins, water quality basins and energy dissipaters, outlets, pipe sizes, pipe types fiber optics, electricity, gas and telephone /telecommunications and any other related facilities as identified by the Municipal Operations Department Director. The Master Utilities Plan shall provide for the following: a. All public utilities shall be constructed within dedicated public rights of way and /or easements or as approved by the Public Works Director. b. The water quality infiltration basins within the neighborhood parks on Lots O and M shall be constructed, offered for dedication to the City as part of the neighborhood parks, and upon acceptance by the City, and shall be privately maintained by the entity identified in the open space management plan. 61. Prior to issuance of applicable grading permits, the applicant shall submit a construction management and delivery plan for each phase of construction to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director. Upon approval of the plan, the applicant shall be responsible for implementing and complying with the stipulations set forth in the approved plan. The construction management plan shall include, at a minimum, the following: a. Construction phasing plan. b. Parking plan for construction vehicles and plan for equipment storage. C. Construction area traffic management plan for the project for the issuance of a haul route permit. The traffic management plan shall be designed by a registered Traffic Engineer. The traffic management plan shall identify construction phasing and address traffic control for any temporary street closures, detours, or other disruptions to traffic circulation and public transit routes. The traffic management 104 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 83 of 83 plan shall identify the routes that construction vehicles shall use to access the site, the hours of construction traffic, traffic controls and detours, vehicle staging areas, and parking areas for the project. Advanced written notice of temporary traffic disruptions shall be provided to emergency service providers and the affected area's businesses and the general public. This notice shall be provided at least two weeks prior to disruptions. Haul operations shall be monitored by the Department of Public Works, and additional restrictions may be applied if traffic congestion problems arise. A staging area shall be designated on -site for construction equipment and supplies to be stored during construction. d. A construction and equipment staging area shall be identified within the project and shall be properly maintained and /or screened to minimize potential unsightly conditions. e. A construction fencing plan to include installation of a six - foot -high screen and security fence to be placed around the construction site during construction. f. A 24 hour hotline number shall be provided and conspicuously posted at all construction sites for complaints or questions regarding construction activities. g. Construction mitigation measures as required by the MMRP. h. A statement that all grading and construction shall comply with NBMC Section 10.28.040 (Noise Ordinance). A statement requiring construction contractors to sweep paved roads within and adjacent to the project site if visible soil materials are carried to the streets. Street sweepers or roadway washing trucks shall comply with SCAQMD Rule 1186 and shall use reclaimed water if available. A statement to be provided to all construction contractors that requires all construction contractors to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) Rules 402 and 403 in order to minimize short-term emissions of dust and particulates. SCAQMD Rule 402 requires that air pollutant emissions not be a nuisance off site. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with Best Available Control Measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. This requirement shall be included as notes on the contractor specifications. Table 1 of Rule 403 lists the Best Available Control Measures that are applicable to all construction projects. The measures include, but are not limited to, the following: Clearing and grubbing: Apply water in sufficient quantity to prevent generation of dust plumes. ii. Cut and fill: Pre -water soils prior to cut and fill activities and stabilize soil during and after cut and fill activities. loo Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 84 of 84 iii. Earth- moving activities: Pre -apply water to depth of proposed cuts; re- apply water as necessary to maintain soils in a damp condition and to ensure that visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction; and stabilize soils once earth- moving activities are complete. iv. Importing /exporting of bulk materials: Stabilize material while loading to reduce fugitive dust emissions; maintain at least six inches of freeboard on haul vehicles; and stabilize material while transporting to reduce fugitive dust emissions. V. Stockpiles /bulk material handling: Stabilize stockpiled materials; stockpiles within 100 yards of off -site occupied buildings must not be greater than 8 feet in height, must have a road bladed to the top of the pile to allow water truck access, or must have an operational water irrigation system that is capable of complete stockpile coverage. 62. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NO[) to comply with the Construction General Permit and submit the above to the State Water Quality Control Board for approval and made part of the construction program. The applicant shall provide the City with a copy of the NOI and their application check as proof of filing with the State Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall detail measures and practices that will be in effect during construction to minimize the project's impact on water quality. 63. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development and Director of Public Works. The WQMP shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that no violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements occur. The WQMP must also identify the entity responsible for the long -term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs. Prior to Issuance of Demolition and Building Permits 64. Prior to the issuance of building permits within each development phase of the project, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued a "No Further Action" (NFA) declaration or a Letter of Allowance for residential construction for the portion of the site being developed. 65. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of residential and commercial uses, the applicant shall pay the required Property Excise Tax to the City of Newport Beach, as set forth in its Municipal Code ( §3.12 et seq.) for public improvements and facilities associated with the City of Newport Beach Fire 100 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 85 of 85 Department, the City of Newport Beach Public Library, and City of Newport Beach public parks. 66. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall obtain approval of a plan stating that water for firefighting purposes and an all weather fire access road shall be in place before any combustible materials are placed on site. Fire access roads shall be designed to support the 75,000 pound load of fire apparatus for year round weather conditions. 67. Prior to the issuance of any residential building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and shall obtain the approval of the Community Development Director, plans indicating the location and type of unit address lighting to be installed. 68. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay applicable fees to the Santa Ana Unified School District Pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code Payment of the adopted fees would provide full and complete mitigation of school impacts. 69. Prior to issuance of any demolition permit, testing for all structures for presence of lead -based paint (LBP) and /or asbestos - containing materials (AGMs) shall be completed. The Asbestos - Abatement Contractor shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos - related air quality health risks. SCAQMD Rule 1403 applies to any demolition or renovation activity and the associated disturbance of ACMs. This requirement shall be included on the contractors' specifications and verified by the Director of Community Development. All demolition activities that may expose construction workers and /or the public to ACMs and /or LBP shall be conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, including, but not limited to Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Subchapter R (Toxic Substances Control Act); CalOSHA regulations (Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations §1529 [Asbestos] and §1532.1 [Lead]); and SCAQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from Demolition /Renovation Activities). The requirement to adhere to all applicable regulations shall be included in the contractor specifications, and such inclusion shall be verified by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a demolition permit. 70. Prior to issuance of applicable building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval, architectural plans and an accompanying noise study that demonstrates that interior noise levels in the habitable rooms of residential units due to exterior transportation noise sources would be 45 dBA CNEL or less. Where closed windows are required to achieve the 45 dBA CNEL limit, project plans and specifications shall include ventilation as required by the California Building Code. 71. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and :LO7 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 86 of 86 submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. The study shall demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard for all patios, balconies, and common outdoor living areas (playgrounds, parks, and swimming pools). The necessary noise reduction may be achieved by implementing noise control measures at the TowerJazz facility and at the receiver locations, as described in detail in the Technical Memorandum provided by Wilson Ihrig and Associates (Appendix J of the FEIR). 72. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 2, a detailed acoustical study based on architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. The study shall demonstrate that all residential units would meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard for all patios, balconies, and common outdoor living areas (playgrounds, parks, and swimming pools). The necessary noise reduction may be achieved by implementing noise control measures at the receiver locations. The final grading and building plans shall incorporate the require noise barriers (patio enclosure, wall, berm, or combination wall /berm), and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers and enclosures. 73. Prior to issuance of applicable building permits, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City of Newport Beach Police Department, development plans for the incorporation of defensible space concepts to reduce demands on police services. Public safety planning recommendations shall be incorporated into the project plans. The applicant shall prepare a list of project features and design components that demonstrate responsiveness to defensible space design concepts. 74. Prior to the issuance of building permits plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director to include requirements that all contractor specifications include a note that architectural coatings shall be selected so that the VOC content of the coatings is compliant with SCAQMD Rule 1113. 75. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Community Development Director building plans designed to meet or exceed all State Energy Insulation Standards and City of Newport Beach codes in effect at the time of application for building permits. Commonly referred to as Title 24, these standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. Title 24 covers the use of energy- efficient building standards, including ventilation; insulation; construction; and the use of energy- saving appliances, conditioning systems, water heating, and lighting. Plans submitted for building permits shall include written notes or calculations demonstrating compliance with energy standards. 76. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any residential, commercial, or park and recreation use, the applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Fire Department that adequate permanent or temporary fire protection facilities are in place on the job site and are tested prior to placing any combustible material on the job site. "M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 87 of 87 Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Use and Occupancy 77. Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for any residential unit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach Fire Department that the following disclosures and emergency notification procedures /programs are in place: a. Disclosure to potential Uptown Newport residences that hazardous chemicals are used and stored at the adjacent TowerJazz facility. b. Inclusion of property manager or authorized representative of the Uptown Newport residential community to the emergency notification list of the TowerJazz Business Emergency Plan. C. Program to inform /train the property manager or authorized representative of the Uptown Newport residential community in emergency response and evacuation procedures and to incorporate ongoing coordination between the Uptown Newport representative and TowerJazz to assure proper action in the event of an accident at the facility (shelter in place and /or evacuation routes). d. Update TowerJazz emergency alarm system to include concurrent notification to Uptown residents of chemical release. Provisions of the alarm system and emergency notification procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach Fire Department. 78. Prior to issuance of certificate of use and occupancy for any residential or commercial use within each phase, the applicant shall complete construction of all applicable roadways, parkways, median and median landscaping, sidewalks, intersection street lights, signage and utilities including but not limited to water, water quality management, sewer, storm drain, fiber optics, gas, electricity, telephone and telecommunications necessary to serve the use and the above facilities shall be operational to serve the use, the extent of which shall be determined by the Public Works and Municipal Operations Departments. 79. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy for residential dwelling units within Lots 1 and 15 of Phase 1, i) the improvements to the neighborhood park in Phase 1 (Lot O) shall be completed by the applicant, and ii) the CC &Rs, irrevocable offer of dedication, access easements, or other instruments providing for public access and use of the park facilities in perpetuity, and including the timing for opening of the park facilities for public use, shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 80. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy for residential dwelling units within Lots 12 and 14 of Phase 2, i) the improvements to the neighborhood park in Phase 2 (Lot M) shall be completed by the applicant, and ii) CC &Rs, irrevocable offer of dedication, access easements, or other instruments providing for public access and log Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 88 of 88 use of the park facilities in perpetuity, and including the timing for opening of the park facilities for public use, shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. 81. Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director that applicable street name signs have been installed. 82. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy for any sales center or model home complex, the applicant shall complete construction of roadway improvements adequate to serve the sales center or model home complex to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development. 83. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of use and occupancy for any residential, commercial, or retail use in the project all applicable master infrastructure improvements identified in the Final SWPPP and WQMP including debris basins, bio- swales, energy dissipaters, drainage pipes, water quality basins and other improvements shall be constructed and the applicant shall provide all necessary dedications, deed restrictions, covenants or other instruments for the long term maintenance of the facilities in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. 84. Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy for any residential, commercial, or park and recreation use, fire hydrants shall be installed and tested. Subdivision Improvement Plans 85. All subdivision improvement plans shall identify the use of best management practices (BMPs) for erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, storm water and non -storm water management, and waste management/pollution control. The BMP's identified for implementation shall demonstrate that potential effects on local site hydrology, runoff, and water quality remain in compliance with all required permits, City policies, and the Project's Water Quality Management Plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. 86. The applicant shall design and /or construct all required onsite and offsite improvements within each development phase to permanent line and grade in accordance with NBMC Chapter 19.24 (Subdivision Design), with the exception of the deviations from this Chapter as described on TTM No. 17438 and approved by the Public Works Director. 87. The applicant shall design and /or construct all required onsite and offsite improvements within each development phase to permanent line and grade in accordance with NBMC Chapter 19.28 (Subdivision Improvement Requirements), with the exception of the deviations from this Chapter as described on TTM No. 17438 and approved by the Public Works Director. 170 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 89 of 89 88. The applicant shall design and /or construct all required onsite and offsite improvements witin each development phase to permanent line and grade in accordance with Chapter 19.32(Improvement Plans). 89. Approval of improvement plans shall in no way relieve the applicant or the applicant's engineer of responsibility for the design of the improvements or from any deficiencies resulting from the design, nor from compliance with any tentative map condition of approval. 90. The applicant shall design and /or construct all required onsite and offsite improvements witin each development phase to permanent line and grade in accordance with NBMC Chapter 19.36 (Completion of Improvements). 91. All new utility lines to serve the project shall be installed in underground trenches. 92. Intersection design shall be approved by the Director of Public Works and comply with City's sight distance standards. 93. All subdivision improvement plans shall include the use of light emitting diode (LED) lights for street lights. 94. All subdivision improvement plans shall conform to the following Fire Department requirements: a. Detailed plans of underground fire service mains shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. These plans shall be a separate submittal to the Fire Department. b. Blue hydrant identification markers shall be placed with new hydrants. C. All weather access roads designed to support the 75,000 pound imposed load of fire apparatus for year round weather conditions shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during time of construction for emergency personnel. d. Fire apparatus access roads designed to support the 75,000 pound imposed load of fire apparatus for year round weather conditions shall be maintained and identified as per Newport Beach Guideline C.01 Emergency Fire Access and C.02 Fire Lane Identification. e. All security gates shall have knox locks for after hours emergency personnel access to the construction site. 92. Prior to the release of financial security, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development that the Project CC &Rs have been approved by the City Attorney and the appropriate Association(s) has been formed. 171- Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 90 of 90 93. Prior to the release of financial security, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works that all permanent survey monuments damaged or destroyed during construction are restored. 94. Prior to the release of financial security, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works that all street improvements damaged during construction have been repaired or replaced. 95. Prior to the release of financial security, the applicant shall submit as -built plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer depicting all street, traffic signal, sewer, water, and storm drain improvements and street signage and signage placements, traffic markings and painted curbing, and all other required improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 96. Prior to the release of financial security, all domestic water and sewer systems shall be fully tested in the presence of a City staff representative, to verify system performance in accordance with design specifications. 97. Prior to the release of financial security the applicant shall execute an agreement to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development which designates the maintenance responsibilities for all landscaping and irrigation systems in the Project. 98. Prior to the release of financial security the applicant shall submit as -built plans at an appropriate scale to the Recreation and Senior Services Director showing as -built neighborhood park improvements and paseos. 99. Prior to the release of financial security the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Municipal Operations Department Director that all underground public utilities necessary for the construction of residential, park, retail or commercial uses within each development phase to proceed as indicated on Tentative Tract Map No. 17438 have been completed in accordance with the approved Utilities Master Plan and that the as -built plans for said improvements, prepared by a Registered Civic Engineer have been submitted and approved by the Director of the Municipal Operations Department. 100. Consistent with General Plan Policy LU6.15.16, the amount of any credit against in- lieu of parkland dedication fees for recreational facilities within Public Recreational Open Space Areas (e.g. paseos) shall be based on the degree to which recreational facilities complement existing or proposed public park facilities serving the subdivision, and the degree to which recreational facilities within the proposed paseos reduce the burden on existing or proposed public park facilities serving the subdivision. In no case shall the total credit exceed 30% of the Parkland Dedication Requirement. 172 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 91 of 91 EXHIBIT H TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2012 -002 172; NOTES - EXISTING EASEMENTS O9 A GRANT OF EASEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1972 EXECUTED BY AND BETWEEN COLLINS RADIO COMPANY, DON KOLL COMPANY, INC AND KOLL CENTER NEWPORT AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 1.04, 1.05 (A PORTION THEREOF), 1.06, 1.08, 1.10 AND 1.11 RECORDED NOVEMBER 6, 1972 IN BOOK 10413, PAGE 573 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 12 AN EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RECORDED AS BOOK 11074, PAGE 182 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 15 AN EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RECORDED AS BOOK 11077, PAGE 1117 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 16 A NON- EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR PURPOSES OF INGRESS AND EGRESS AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED MAY 7, 1974 IN BOOK 11137, PAGE 1008 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OVER A PORTION OF SAID PARCEL B -1. 18 AN EASEMENT FOR STORM DRAIN AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF KOLL CENTER NEWPORT, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, RECORDED AS BOOK 11137, PAGE 1020 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 23 AN EASEMENT FOR ELECTRICAL SUPPLY AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RECORDED MARCH 7, 1990 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 90- 120897 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 24 AN EASEMENT FOR COMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF PACIFIC BELL RECORDED JULY 3, 1991 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 91-346219 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 25 AN EASEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF AN ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RECORDED SEPTEMBER 3, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92- 594041 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 29 AN EASEMENT FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF COXCOM INC., D /B /A COX COMMUNICATIONS ORANGE COUNTY, RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005000916240 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 30 GRANT AND QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENTS FOR PASSAGE INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO MAINTAIN DRIVEWAYS, ROADWAYS, SIDEWALKS AND PASSAGEWAYS RECORDED MAY 26 1978 IN BOOK 12690 PAGE 854 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. ACREAGES LOT AREA LOT AREA LAND USE: ACCESS, NO. AC UTILITY, AC & BICYCLE 1 0.96 A 0.11 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT 2 0.67 B 0.04 LANDSCAPE & UTILITY EASEMENT UTILITY, 3 1.29 C 0.03 LANDSCAPE & UTILITY EASEMENT 10 4 1.03 D 0.03 LANDSCAPE & UTILITY EASEMENT SIGNAGE, 5 1.34 E 0.03 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 6 0.97 F 0.04 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 7 0.74 G 0.04 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 8 0.82 H 0.12 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT / 9 1.58 1 0.14 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 10 0.30 J 0.18 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 11 1.18 K 0.10 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT / 12 1.91 L 0.03 PUBLIC ACCESS, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT 13 14 15 0.94 1.06 1.54 M N 0 1.02 0.15 1.03 PARK PUBLIC PARK ACCESS, LANDSCAPE & UTILITY EASEMENT / TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0.17438 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES 20' r - - - -� 3 _ 22•_ h N 4 23 ° 24 1� 29 -- - - -- - ----- r -- -r - t31- L_ I I x_22' - - - -- 23 6' 1 q� DETAIL "E" JAMBOREE ROAD SCALE: 1" -20' LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 OF TRACT NO. 7953, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 310 PAGES 7 TO 11, INCLUSIVE, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. GENERAL NOTES 1. GROSS AREA: 25.05 ACRES OWNER /SUBDIVIDER 2. THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY'S UPTOWN NEWPORT LP CLEAR ZONE Z, AREA OF 500 -YEAR FLOOD ON THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE C/O SHOPOFF MANAGEMENT, INC. MAP (FIRM), COMMUNITY PANELMAP NO. 0286, EFFECTIVE DATE: FEBRUARY 2 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 700 18, 2004. IRVINE, CA 92614 (949) 231 -5068 3. THIS TENTATIVE MAP MAY HAVE MULTIPLE FINAL MAPS. (949) 417 -1399 FAX 4. THOSE EXISTING EASEMENTS OR PORTIONS OF EXISTING EASEMENTS o�� AFFECTING THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THIS MAP WILL BE QUITCLAIMED TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE THE FUTURE / 4� LAND USE. 5. ON SITE SEWER AND STORM DRAIN WILL BE PRIVATE. 6. PUBLIC ANGLED PARKING AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS RIGHTS ALONG INTERNAL / �L PRIVATE ROADWAYS WILL BE DOCUMENTED WITH THE CC &R'S. A 7. ALL SIDEWALKS, ANGLED PARKING AND PARKWAY WILL BE PRIVATE WITH / PRIVATE MAINTENANCE. 8. STREETS TO BE PRIVATE AND PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. _r r so. _L­942.42� R�00.00' 16 0.78 P 0.10 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT /��r• 17 0.67 Q 1.76 ROAD WAY & UTILITY EASEMENT / R 0.04 ROAD WAY, UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT / / 1s S 0.25 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT / / T 0.48 ROAD WAY & UTILITY EASEMENT r / U 0.04 ROAD WAY, UTILITY, LANDSCAPE, PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE EASEMENT r ]j, 2 V 0.62 ROAD WAY & UTILITY EASEMENT � �� W 0.03 OPEN SPACE & PUBLIC ACCESS / X 0.04 OPEN SPACE & PUBLIC ACCESS Y 0.10 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT / I ETAIL___� Z 0.36 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT / 9 / i a" 9 AA 0.11 OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT / i6 TO REMAIN BB 0.23 PRIVATE ACCESS FOR LOT 11 & 12 / E U� TO REMAIN J � ____ -- L------ j - - - -L 1032' - 9 II 1� r, GROSS AREA: 25.05 AC �LQ rr r ri r 9 17 6 T LESS ROADWAY, PARKWAY, SIDEWALK: 4.54 AC \\ rr rjr A f8 LESS PARK: 2.05 AC V� N NET DEVELOPABLE AREA: 18.46AC a r� / / r /r r B Z 00 III I ��FS TII 1~10' 1 P C / IIII IIII o I IIII / GP IIII PARCEL 4 _p� p NvP 1 1 RUB. H4/2 W / IIII IIII m / IIII IIII IIII 1 I sue, I I III I / IIII SEE I 25 IIII DETAIL o" yr 15 SEE DETAIL "A" - - 13 14 PARCEL C NS) � \\ , TO REMAIN TO REMAIN LEGEND �00•p0 0 05 R v i DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE FLOW FF = FINISHED FLOOR PE = PAD ELEVATION PE1 = PAD ELEVATION WITH 1 LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE PE2 = PAD ELEVATION WITH 2 LEVELS OF PARKING BELOW GRADE TENTATIVE TRACT BOUNDARY PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED BUILDING PAD -56- PROPOSED GRADE CONTOUR ROADWAY CENTERLINE _ 145 N 4039'32 "E I ]FARCIEIL 4 N RULE. 114/22 an \ \ z TO REMAIN 9 o TO REMAIN 9 Q \\ z 9 -- 11 = - - -T - 11----=-- - ---11 ----- - --11- 12 -'I I 1 o� ­1 I--1 o' W--I 1--10' 10' �I I--� 579' S4038'21 "W TO REMAIN BB 11 10 X W 4 M z PARCEL 9 RULE. 808/27 7 8 1--10' 1s D t. m o 3 SEE 4 S 5 m o 6 SEE - j 10' L 16 0 Co m o DETAIL E" 0 m °mn p / DETAIL C" III 111 cmi) � 0 29 23 15 M � o Cn 9 111 -I - -- NmZro rn 24 ro u mZN / IIII I - W `° oo W o0 J / s 1366' 9A 9 376' PROPOSED f 94' 15' SW ESMT. 1791 9 13 DETAIL ",q " 12 � SCALE. 1"--50' H- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JAMBORIEEN4ROAD N40'38'21 "E - 960' - - 3184' 42' I I Ld Ld VI b 0 U" �_ I3 m� v N m a z 577' N40'38'21 "E 1 0. PARCEL A PARCEL I nj lPr �1a�C° EL 3 42' Y z P °MB. 108/27 RULP° Il08/27 162/6 I - - - 857' - -� - r r 85• F - - - - -- -1 1 1 b° al 1 "' I 9 L 23' �10' 16.5' - T0� T�+T� L FWFCEL 4 P.M.B. 114/22 I I y - - - - -- -781' 72' I 9 I 17 111 DETA /L "B" 16 1 1 SCALE: 1"_50' i 1 1 0.1 1110,1 9 PARCEL 4 I I I I 1'.M.B. H4 /22 Iv 30' I �I 30' JAMBOREE ROAD DETAIL "C" SCALE: 1 " =30' I I I I I I I I I I I I III I I I 4' II 2 43_ -� 7 8 I 1. 4�1 ° 25 aI I ,F 111 I V, 50' 15 III 25 o 0 I% �� I 20' 1 -- 4� 16 -LE - -2 F - JAMBOREE ROAD DETAIL "D" SCALE: 1 " =40' 7; 7 `,O• 120 0 120 240 scale 1"= 120' feet 174 S PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ACCESS 15 ST. "A" ENTRY DRIVE S 92 N 42' 15' 20' 22' 16' PUBLIC t PUBLIC 1 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS "151 �q PARKING 7' ST. "A" WITH DIAGONAL PARKING STALL 17" PEDESTRIAN ACCESS W 66' E TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17438 36 15' 18' 18' 15' PUBLIC PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN \� �q� PEN ACCESS ACCESS IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 11' FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES ST. -13" W 101' E S 60' N 32' 36' 12' 20' 16' 16' 20' 17, 12' 18' PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC f PUBLIC F PUBLIC PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN `I PEDESTRIAN PEACCESS N �q PEACCESS N W 60' E ACCESS PARKING \v PARKING ACCESS S 76' N �jy `r0 36" \� 7 36' 25' 7 12' 18" 18" 12' 8' 10" il' 15' 18" 18" PUBLIC 8 11 PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN ST. "B" WITH DIAGONAL PARKING STALL PEACCESS DESTRIAN �q ACCESS ST. "C" ACCESS so LID ACCESS 7' B' ST. "C" ENTRY DRIVE ST. "D" JAMBOREE ROAD LEGEND DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE FLOW FF = FINISHED FLOOR PE = PAD ELEVATION PE1 = PAD ELEVATION WITH 1 LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE PE2 = PAD ELEVATION WITH 2 LEVELS OF PARKING BELOW GRADE TENTATIVE TRACT BOUNDARY PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED BUILDING PAD —56— PROPOSED GRADE CONTOUR ROADWAY CENTERLINE N40'38'21 "E S 54' N 32" 10" 16" i 16' 12' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN �9I ACCESS 9' --1 117" ST. "E" FRONTING ALONG LOT 4 S 5s' N 32' 15' 16" 16' 12' PUBLIC PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ACCESS 7' s' ST. 'E' ALONG PARK MI I' 1 -: L I -7 I'Ell NOI W 103' CL 6' 23' WIDE 74' ACCESS 6' 68' I 12' WIDE MEANDERING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY JAMBOREE ROAD I1't_� lZ E�Ilit! z P.M.B. W M/27 1'• R �EL CURVE TABLE S 60' N Cl 30.00' 27.53' 36' 30.00' 27.72' C3 12' 27.40' 18" 18" 67.00' 62.98' 12' PUBLIC 45.06' C6 182.00' 29.01' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS s, �q O C8 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS 127.95' C9 218.00' 7' C10 218.00' 40.37' C11 12.5' 11' C12 212.00' 22.01' C13 ST. "F" 7.52' C14 I'Ell NOI W 103' CL 6' 23' WIDE 74' ACCESS 6' 68' I 12' WIDE MEANDERING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY JAMBOREE ROAD I1't_� lZ E�Ilit! z P.M.B. W M/27 1'• R �EL CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH Cl 30.00' 27.53' C2 30.00' 27.72' C3 30.00' 27.40' C4 67.00' 62.98' C5 132.00' 45.06' C6 182.00' 29.01' C7 182.00' 94.41' C8 175.00' 127.95' C9 218.00' 89.77' C10 218.00' 40.37' C11 218.00' 49.40' C12 212.00' 22.01' C13 10.00' 7.52' C14 10.01' 8.06' C15 40.00' 12.77' 275 a v o z ui E-6 o � z� a c0 '3 w 0 0 D J Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 92 of 92 EXHIBIT I REQUIRED FINDINGS TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -005 In accordance with NBMC Section 15.40.030 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance), 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 [NBMC Chapter 15.30], Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. A traffic study, entitled Uptown Newport Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc., May 2012 and revised in November 2012, were prepared for the Project in compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Appendix A). 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 (B) [NBMC Section 15.40.030.B.2] can be made. Section 15.40.030.6.2 states: The project is a Comprehensive Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improvement Plan with construction of all phases not anticipated to be complete within sixty (60) months of project approval, • and a. The project is subject to a development agreement which requires the construction of or contributions to, circulation improvements early in the development phasing program, and b. The traffic study contains sufficient data and analysis to determine if that portion of the project reasonably expected to be constructed and ready for occupancy within sixty (60) months of project approval satisfies the provisions of subsections (B)(1)(a) or (B)(1)(b), and C. The Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan are not made inconsistent by the impact of project trips (including circulation improvements designed to mitigate the impacts of project trips) when added to the trips resulting from development anticipated to occur within the City based on the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and d. The project is required, during the sixty (60) month period immediately after approval, to construct circulation improvement(s) such that. 17% Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 93 of 93 (1) Project trips will not cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection for which there is a feasible improvement, (2) The benefits resulting from circulation improvements constructed or funded by, or contributions to the preparation or implementation of a traffic mitigation study made by, the project proponent outweigh the adverse impact of project trips at any impacted primary intersection for which there is (are) no feasible improvement(s) that would, if implemented, fully satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030 (8)(1)(b). In balancing the adverse impacts and benefits, only the following improvements and /or contributions shall be considered with the greatest weight accorded to the improvements and /or contributions described in subparagraphs (a) or (b): a. Contributions to the preparation of, and /or implementation of some or all of the recommendations in, a traffic mitigation study related to an impacted primary intersection that is initiated or approved by the City Council, b. Improvements, if any, that mitigate the impact of project trips at any impacted primary intersection for which there is (are) no feasible improvement(s) that, if implemented, would fully satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030 (8)(1)(b), C. Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection in the vicinity of the project, d. Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection operating, or projected to operate, at or above 0.80 ICU, and (3) The Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal finds, by the affirmative vote of five - sevenths (517) of the members eligible to vote, that this chapter is inapplicable to the project because the project will result in benefits that outweigh the project's anticipated negative impact on the circulation system. Facts in Support of Finding: B -1. Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the Traffic Study, mitigation measures, and the conditions of approval, all of the findings for approval in Section 15.40.030.B.2 can be made. B -2. Phase 1 is projected to generate an additional 5,012 daily trips, 317 during the AM peak hour and 443 during the PM peak hour. At the project's build -out (Phase 2), the Project generates 8,286 daily trips, 542 during the AM peak hour and 727 during the PM peak hour. The Project would shift traffic patterns to and from the site as the 177 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 94 of 94 Project involves a shift from office and industrial development to residential uses. The Project will consist of primarily residential uses, which will have reverse traffic patterns from existing uses at the site. As the result, while the proposed project results in an overall increase in daily trips, there would be a reduction of trips on some intersection movements and an increase on others in each of the morning and evening peak hours. The net new trips to be added (or subtracted due to the shift from employment to residential) to the street system does not result in any significant impacts to the studied intersections and segments. B -3. The Project design provides for primary and secondary ingress and egress from Jamboree Road, but also includes a third access drive to and from Birch Street, utilizing a non - exclusive access easement established by an express grant of easement recorded in 1978. B -4. The proposed Project meets the requirements for a Comprehensive Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improvement Plan as the Project is subject to a Development Agreement and conditions of approval that require the construction of, or contributions to, circulation improvements early in the development phasing program. B -5. The complete Project is not anticipated to be completed within five years approval. The Traffic Study analyzed Phase 1, which is expected to be completed by 2018. Phase 2 of the Project is anticipated to commence in 2017 and be completed in 2021 or later, and therefore requires a separate traffic analysis at a later date prior to recordation of final maps or building permits for Phase 2. The Traffic Study found the Project would not result in a significant impact with the addition of Phase 1 Project trips at the study intersections. B -6. The Traffic Study and FEIR analyzed intersections projected to exceed the Level of Service ( "LOS'), which is a "D" standard except certain designated intersections within the airport area shared with the City of Irvine that permit LOS "E." B -7. Intersection peak hour traffic conditions were evaluated for Year 2018 (existing plus growth plus committed projects) both without and with Phase 1 traffic. The Traffic Study found that the following intersections would operate at an unacceptable level of service both without and with Project Phase 1: Jamboree Road at 1 -405 SB Ramps (AM: LOS F) Jamboree Road at Michelson Drive (PM: LOS F) Harvard Avenue at Michelson Drive (PM: LOS E) All other study intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS in both peak hours. The Project related impact of Phase 1 at Harvard Avenue and Michelson Drive would be negative because the reduction in existing office trips would more than offset the addition of the proposed residential trips. 172 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 95 of 95 B -8. The DEIR and Traffic Study found the addition of Project traffic would not cause additional intersections to operate at an unacceptable LOS, and the Project would not result in a significant impact at any study intersection. B -9. The proposed Project does not result in an inconsistency between the Land Use Element and the Circulation Element of the General Plan by the impact of project trips (including circulation improvements designed to mitigate the impacts of project trips) when added to the trips resulting from development anticipated to occur within the City based on the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Zoning Code. The development included in the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan. B -10. Transportation and traffic impacts would be mitigated to less than significant and no mitigation is required. 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. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. Concept plans depicting the recommended street improvements are included in the resolution of approval and conditions of approval for the Tentative Tract Map for the proposed Project. The Project also will be responsible for the payment of Fair Share fees in accordance with Chapter 15.32 that will be used to fund future planned improvements to the circulation system. Additionally, the Project will be required to pay any applicable fees for the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program. i�q Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 96 of 96 EXHIBIT J TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -005 Exhibit J is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http: / /newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2029 120 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 97 of 97 EXHIBIT K AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN NO. AH2012 -001 Exhibit K is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at htto:H newaortbeachca .gov /index.asr)x ?oaoe =2029 121 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 98 of 98 EXHIBIT L DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2012 -003 Exhibit L is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http : / /newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2029 1�2 Attachment No. PC 2 Draft Resolution of Denial 1g3 IR4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. PD2011 -003, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION NO. PC2012- 001, TENATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2012 -002, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN NO. AH2012 -001, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012- 005, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2012 -003 FOR THE 25.05 ACRE PLANNED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS UPTOWN NEWPORT LOCATED AT 4311 -4321 JAMBOREE ROAD (PA2011 -134) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Uptown Newport LP ( "Uptown Newport" or "Applicant ") with respect to a 25.05 -acre property generally located on the north side of Jamboree Road between Birch Street and the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard, legally described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, (the "Property ") requesting approval for the development of up to 1,244 residential dwelling units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial uses and 2 acres of parklands (the "Project "). The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: a. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003. An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Planned Community) to remove the subject property from the Koll Center Planned Community, pursuant to Chapter 20.66 (Amendments) of the Municipal Code. b. Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001. A Planned Community Development Plan adoption to establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as the zoning document for the construction of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial, and 2.05 acres of park space to be built in two separate phases on a 25.05 -acre site, pursuant to Chapter 20.56 of the Municipal Code. C. Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002. A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. d. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001. A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, 125 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 pursuant to Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Municipal Code. f. Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003. A Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits, pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.a of the Municipal Code and General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12. 2. The Property is currently located within the City of Newport Beach ( "City ") Koll Center Newport Planned Community and is designated as Industrial Site 1. 3. The Property has a General Plan designation of Mixed -Use District Horizontal -2 (MU- 1­12), and the Property is located within the Airport Business Area, for which the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan ( "ICDP ") has been adopted. The ICDP allocates a maximum of 1,244 residential units and up to 11,500 square feet of retail to be developed on the Property. 4. On October 4, 2012, the Planning Commission held a study session for the proposed project in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. 5. A public hearing was held on December 6, 2012 in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code ( "NBMC "). The staff report and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the hearing. SECTION 2. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby deny without prejudice Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003, Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001, Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2012 -001, and Development Agreement No. DA2012- 003. 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. W M Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6T" DAY OF DECEMBER, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN ABSENT: BY: go Michael Toerge, Chairman Fred Ameri, Secretary 2g7 122 Attachment No. PC 3 List of Responses to Commissioner Tucker's Comments 1g9 z90 Larry Tucker Uptown Newport Study Session List of Issues October 4, 2012 PECEIVEO 9y COMMUNITY NOV 16 2012 0, DEVELOPMENT .r P hOR NEWPOR4 9� Below are my comments to the Uptown Newport project documents received to date, other than the DER. My apologies in advance for duplicative or off base comments of which there will surely be a few. Responses are noted in italics. Responses are dated November 14, 2012. I. OVERVIEW 1. Will the Commission be asked to approve a Parcel Map when the matter formally comes before the Planning Commission? If so, perhaps some (many ?) of my questions /comments will be addressed when we see the proposed conditions of approval. A tentative tract map (TTM No. 17438) is included in the proposed entitlements for Uptown Newport that are to be considered for approval by the Planning Commission. Staff and the applicant are currently finalizing draft conditions of approval forthe tentative tract map, and will be providing 2. Note 3 of the TIM contemplates that there may be multiple final maps based upon the TIM. The tentative tract rnap sets forth the overall site layout of the proposed parcels, streets, parks, paseos, and common area lots. As required by the Subdivision Map Act, the TTM must note the intent to file multiple final maps if multiple maps are to be /fled Uptown Newport will be developed in two phases, and two final maps are contemplated, one for each phase. 3. Presumably, the Applicant intends to have the right to record one or more Final Maps and deed out parcels to buyers. Upon recordation of a final map, multiple parcels will be created that can be sold and conveyed to merchant builders. At this time, we anticipate 1 to 4 individual merchant builders to participate in the first phase. 4. If some parcels may be deeded out, is there a risk to the City that a parcel will not have access or utilities without the cooperation of another owner? See comments on Phasing Plan. The tentative map is required to maintain legal access to parcels pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act. Legal access to the parcels will also need to be shown on the final rnap, which will preclude parcels being conveyed without legal access. The conditions of approval specify that utilities will beconstnrctedit) public rights -of -way or easements as shown on the final map prior to approval of the final map. In addition, the masterimprovements for Phase 1 are proposed to be constructer) in whole to avoid individual building parcels horn preventing the completion of master improvements. 5. Does the Applicant intend to act as Master Developer of the site work? That is, grading and underground public services. The Applicant will be the Master Developer for the project. Tlie conditions of approval require the Master Developer to complete the Master Site Improvements and also require material and labor 1 �91- bonds for masterimprovements. In addition, the regulatory documents have been revised to clarify that the applicant will be the Master Developerforthe project, and that the site grading and master infrastructure including streets, wet utilities, city utilities, parks, paseos and other common area improvements will be completed by the master developer. 6. If so, will the master grading plan contemplate subterranean parking on some, most, all or none of the parcels since there will be no surface parking lots allowed for residential uses (Design Guidelines Page 16)? Parking within Uptown Newport must be structured subterranean or encapsulated (e.g., wrap architecture orlined with residential units). The preliminary master grading plan included in the Phasing Plan contemplates subterranean parking. The ultimate configuration of buildings and design of structured parking will be incorporated into the final grading plans for each phase to minimize the need for import or export of soil. 7. The Design Guidelines indicate that certain design master plans are to be accomplished later, such as: Landscape Plan, Fencing and Wall Plan, Common Area Lighting Plan; and a Comprehensive Sign Program. Some of what is in the documents indicates that plans are "For Illustrative Purposes Only ". If parcels are deeded out before these plans are finalized, how is the completion of those plans managed so that a Master Plan is created that is binding on all future owners? Should that be done before parcels can be deeded out? The regulatory documents have been revised to clarify that Master Site Improvements for the project will be constructed by the Master Developer, and that a Master Site Development Plan shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission (see page 19 of the Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures regulatory document). The Master Site Development Plan review is proposed as an interim review process that will be initiated after the Planned Community zoning and entitlements are in place. The Master Site Development Plan will provide design development plans and specification for Master Site Improvements, including: 1. Demolition, site preparation and rough grading; 2. Backbone stonn drain system; 3. Sanitary sewer system; 4. Water distribution system; 5. Reclaimed water distribution system; 6. Public street improvements, including street paving; curb and gutter, sidewalk, parkway improvements to the back of sidewalk, 7. Common area fencing and walls; 8. Neighborhood Park improvements for the two (2) public parks; 9. Landscape improvements within common areas, including: public street parkways to the back of sidewalk; project entries,, Jamboree Road parkway and Class 1 and multi -use trail; Neighborhood Park landscape improvements; paseo landscape improvements; 10. Master street light and common area lighting improvements; 11. Dry utilities; 12. Master community signage. II. PARCEL MAP Who will own the lettered lots? Notes 7 & 8 indicate that streets, sidewalks, angled parking and parkways will be privately owned and maintained. What about the Paseos? The PC Text refers to the parks as "Public" (at Page 17). Presumably that means the land will be dedicated to the City, which will own and maintain the parks, correct? The two neighborhood parks will be improved by the Master Developer and will be dedicated to the City. However, the Master Association will maintain the park. The lettered lots, including common area lots and passes will be improved by the Master Developer and conveyed to the Master Association for ownership and maintenance. The conditions of approval require a master association for maintenance of common improvements. 74 29 2. Will lettered lots other than the public parks be privately owned and maintained and if so by whom? See response to itern 1 above. 3. If the tentative map is not recorded all at one time, will all of the lettered lots in a phase be included in the first map recorded in that phase? Yes. All lettered lots in Phase 1 will be recorded with the Final Map for Phase 1, and likewise for Phase 2. No "sub phasing" is proposed. d. If not, then how will the contemplated improvements of those lettered lots be secured? The conditions of approval require material and labor bonds for master improvements. 5. Does the Applicant contemplate conveying the lettered lots to an owners association? Yes. The lettered lots, including common area lots and paseos will be improved by the Master Developer and subsequently conveyed to the Master Association for ownership and maintenance. In addition, the conditions of approval require the CC &R's to be prepared and submitted for approval by the Community Development Director. III. SITE PLAN I. The site plan should identify the number of angled and on- street parking spaces are part of the plan and each space should be numbered. The Site Plan has been revised to show the number of spaces as requested. 2. Patrons of the retail space who enter at Fairchild Intersection and use the angled parking and who desire to exit the project and go north on Jamboree will need to make an awkward turning movement at Street E, or have to pull off a mid -block turn around in Street A, or wend their way to Birch Street. Are there any better alternatives? Under the current site plan, visitors would be able to turn around in the cul -de -sac on Street `F ", or turn right out of the secondary Jamboree entry and make a u -turn at Jamboree and Fairchild to go north on Jamboree. We have also evaluated incorporating a roundabout circle within the project to provide an alternative for consideration by the Planning Commission. A copy of the alternative will be provided for your review under separate cover. IV. PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures) I . Page 6, is there a limit as to how long industrial uses may remain on the property? It looks to me like there is no limit. The Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) has been revised to reflect a sunset date of March 12, 2027 for the existing industrial uses, which is consistent with the maxinunn option terns of the lease with the current tenant (TowerJazz). See Section 2. 1.1 (page 7) of the revised PCDP. 2. Page 6, are there any allowable uses that should be prohibited once residents move in nearby? The existing uses will be allowed to continue, subject to current Code requirements. The existing ammonia tank used by TowerJazz will be relocated such that there is a minimum of 200 feet of separation frorn the ammonia tank and residential buildings. This is a mitigation measure, a condition of approval, and is also incorporated into 9 4_°-7, the Phasing Plan on Page 5. 3. Page 7, Accessory Uses are referred to but not defined. What are they? A definition for Accessory Uses has been added on Page 22, 4. Page 8, are the following uses appropriate given the density of nearby residential in the project and seemingly small scale of the retail element: The uses listed under "Commercial Recreation and Entertainment', Animal Sales and Services, Animal Grooming /Veterinary Services, Fast Food (not sure what that is -- does that mean with a drive- lhrri ?) and fitness facilities over 2,000 s.f. The permitted land uses table has been updated and revised to allow forflexibility in future uses that are consistent with the Mixed Use - Horizontal (MU -1-12) land uses designation, but to omit uses that are not consistent with the intent of the Uptown Newport Planned Community. See revised land use table on Page 9. 5. Page 9, Wireless Telecommunication Facilities should only require a Minor Use Permit as it will be easy to plan for them rip front. Wireless Telecommunication Facilities has been changed to Minor Use Permit. See revised land use table on Page 9. G. Page 11, there should be some very specific language on the interface between commercial and residential. Noisy uses and uses requiring food exhaust venting should not be located below or next to residential without mitigating features. Page 8, Section 2.1.2 has been revised to include the following: Interface between retail and residential uses will incorporate mitigation features as outlined in the Design Guidelines document to limit nuisances such as odors and noise generated by the retail uses. 7. Page 17, 1 question the wisdom of crediting all street parking against required retail parking. Some credit may be appropriate, but to the extent there is a significant amount of restaurant space, I would be very concerned about giving any credit. Further, it is not clear to me where guests and service staff /personnel of homeowners would park (some, or all, of the project could be "for sale" housing which usually generates a greater need for parking). On- street parking for visitors is provided adjacent to the retail uses and throughout the project. Additional parking for retail uses, visitors, employees, and service staff is provided in structured parking that is integrated into the building structure. It is intended that the structured parking provide for the majority of the required parking within the project. Credit for on- street parking is only provided for the spaces that are adjacent to the retail or residential uses. See Section 3.4, page 17. 8. Page 17, 1 am not sure there should be a right to deviate from parking requirements with a parking management plan. I would delete the word "number" in 4.1.2 d and delete 4.1.4 Para. 4. This is a new 51 294 development and there does not seem to be a justification to deviate from code parking requirements. Having said that, doesn't the code already allow for a deviation process? If so, why add one here? The reference to deviating from parking requirerhells with a parking management plan has been omitted. 8. Page 19, 4.1.4 Para. 3 a, should be revised to react: "All exterior materials and their manner of application ". Page 18, 4.1.4 Para. 6 a, should be revised to read: "General location of all plant material, by common and botanical names with photographs." The revisions have been incorporated Refer to Page 21, Section 4.2.4 of the revised document. 9. Page 19, won't some type of review be necessary for the master landscape plan (at least along streets and paseos) or the comprehensive sign plan or the master fencing plan? If the Applicant desires to deed out property prior to plan approval for site work/signage then it would seem that the overall plan, other than building plans, would have to be agreed to before parcels are deeded Out. Once those plans have been approved, then I'd feel more comfortable with review of building plans and landscaping to be located on numbered parcels being left to the Director. The implementation of the Planned Community Development Plan (refer to Section 4) has been revised to clarify the process for approval of implementing projects. The Master Site Development Plan review is proposed as an interim review process that will be initiated after the Planned Community zoning and entitlements are in place. A Master Site Development Plan will be prepared for review by the Planning Commission. 10. Page 22, add a definition of Streets and then refer the reader to Section 3.2.7. Section 3.3 - "On -Site Circulation" has been added to provide definition to the streets within Uptown Newport and reference the corresponding street section figures. 1r5111111 ]2[C3111- 51AW2IW 1. Page 4, Vision Statement implies that connections with Koll property will be coordinated. How will this be ensured since there is no common ownership? The vehicular and pedestrian connections between Uptown Newport and the Koll Center Newport are based on the approved Koll- Conexant ICDP, of which, Koll was an applicant. The ultimate build out of the ICDP will include future improvements by Koll within the Koll Center Newport to finalize the pedestrian connections. The Uptown Newport property has an access easement through the Koll Center Newport from the westelfy access road to Von Kamran Avenue, and this will provide the planned emergency vehicular access. Uptown Newport will also improve the pedestrian connections up to the Koll Center Newport property, and will seek to complete the pedestrian connections within the Koll Center Newport property, but such improvements on the Koll property can only be completed with the consent of the Koll property ownership. The following condition of approval is being recommender) for this purpose: "Require that the applicant make best efforts to negotiate in good faith and arrive at fair and reasonable arrangements with neighboring property owners to facilitate pedestrian connections from the property to Vol? Karrnan, including pedestrian ingress, egress and sidewalk constmction and maintenance." 2. Page 8, the Master Concept Plan (Figure 2 -5) purports to incorporate the "framework principles" yet it does not actually depict several framework principles (e.g. #'s 3, 5, 7 & 8). The Framework Principles section of the Design Guidelines has been revised substantially to clarify the intent of the framework principles. 3. Page 12, can traffic calming devices be designed at the front end of project. Otherwise, when w 95 they be designed? Traffic calming devices including chokers and enhance paving are included in the revised site plan. 3. Page 16, should paid parking be prohibited? Is there enough on- street parking to accommodate visitors and customers of retailers. If there is not, where would visitors and customers of retailers park and when would that be figured out? We do not believe that paid parking should be prohibited, and the decision should be at the discretion of the Master Association. Uptown Newport has public improvements that will be available to the public, but is a privately owned community and should be allowed to include paid parking. Paid parking is integral to managing parking in communities and Cities like the many villages within Newport Beach. Paid parking is abundant in public areas throughout the City, including the majority of the properties in the Airport Area, and it may be beneficial to the ultimate management of Uptown Newport to have flexibility in whether to designate paid parking areas or not. On- street parking for visitors is provided adjacent to the retail uses and throughout the project. Additional parking for retail uses, visitors, employees, and service staff is provided in structured parking that is integrated into the building structure. It is intended that the structured parking provide for the rnajonty of the required parking within the project. Credit for on- street parking is only provided for the spaces that are adjacent to the retail or residential uses. See Section 3.4, page 17. 4. Page 23, windows with articulated frames should be required for windows facing Jamboree Road The revised document expands on the concept of this comment and requires enhanced fagade treatments in visually prominent areas of Uptown Newport, including Jamboree Road. Refer to Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 in the revised Design Guidelines. 5. Page 25, not sure I understand how Plexiglas will be mounted on hinges so it opens and closes. Plexiglas enclosures are a common way of providing additional noise reduction for residential units along Jamboree Road or other areas that may be subject to elevated noise. The Plexiglas enclosures can be mounted on hinges to allow the residential owners to open the Plexiglas enclosure if desired. Refer to Figure 3 -34 on Page 40 of the revised Design Guidelines. 6. Page 27, what does it mean to 'optimize" grading? The language has been revised to clarify that the intent of the grading plan is to limit the amount of import or export frorn the site. Refer to Page 43 or the revised Design Guidelines, 7. Page 36, Figure caption refers to Phase 2 entry drive, but it looks like Phase 1 from the diagram. This correction has been made. 8. Page 38, synthetic turf? Really? Commercially available synthetic turf is extremely realistic in appearance, and is widely used in high -end residential communities. Synthetic turf is a preferred method of providing for ground cover in areas of high pedestrian traffic or dog walking such as parkways adjacent to building lobbies. 9. Page 40, some of the list of improvements look like they may have been carried over from park description and may not fit in Paseos: lawn bowling, horseshoes, bocce ball, picnic areas and exercise stations. The listed improvements are potential amenities or are of the character of the amenities that can be incorporated into the paseos of associated common open space areas. The paseos are intended to provide for pedestrian connectivity as well as to provide for opportunities forgathering spaces and passive 19 0 recreation. 11. Page 40, any requirement that Paseo landscape plans be consistent throughout the development? Paseo landscaping will be part of the Master Site Improvements by the Master Developer, and will be designer/ to he consistent throughout the development. Refer to Section 5.3 (Page 47) of the revised Design Guidelines. 11. Page 42, when do the public parks get built? Will they be consistent in design with each other? The Phase 1 park will be developed by the Master Developer as part of the Master Site improvements for Phase 1, and likewise for Phase 2. The Conditions of Approval will include the specific milestones for each park. 12. Page 46, says "The project should have one fence design used throughout all parcel areas." When is that design determined and by whom? The design of community walls and fences will be part of the Master Site Development Plan Review prior to site development, and will be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 13. Page 48, says "This community is encouraged to embrace a unified lighting theme in fixtures of common area streets. How would that "encouragement" be manifested and implemented? The design of community lighting will be part of the Master Site Development Plan Review prior to site development, and will be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 14. Page 51, who will develop the Comprehensive Sign Program and when will it be done? Also see footnote at Page 54. The Comprehensive Sign Program fences will be part of the Master Site Development Plan Review prior to site development, and will be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 15. Page 54, delete references to Pylon Signs. They should not be allowed. References to pylon signs have been deleted. 16. Page 56, limits sign copy to 3 tenant signs yet diagram shows 4 tenant signs. Section 6.7 has been revised to clarify that up to 4 tenant signs are allowed. 17. Page 58, clarify that a tenant may only pick one of the three sign types. Section 6.9 has been revised to clarify that up to 2 tenant signs are allowed, with a third sign for corner retail spaces. V1. PHASING PLAN 1. Page 2, the land will be phased, but where the units fall is totally subject to change. Should there by a limit on the upper end and lower end of the unit count in Phase 1? The minimum and maximum units by phase is specified on page 3 of the revised plan. 2. Page 4, note that the Applicant proposes to introduce residents to an area with a 2,200 gallon 1J7 liquid ammonia tank. A detailed of the analysis of the use of an ammonia tank by the TowerJazz facility is included in the Uptown Newport DEIR. The analysis concluded that the ammonia tank should be located a minimum of 200 feet from residential buildings to provide a safe separation distance in the event of a release of ammonia from the tank. It should be noted that ammonia is not a carcinogen nor fatal in the event of exposure to ammonia in the air, but it is an irritant that can cause substantial discomfort if exposed to at high concentrations. 3. Page 4, which water Board is SRWQCB? The Phasing Plan has been revised to clarify that this is the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 3. Page 6, looks like erroneous reference to Figure 2 -1 should be to 3 -1. This has been corrected. 4. Page 12, will all Phase 1 streets be bonded with recordation of first map in Phase 1. If not, when. Same comment with respect to pedestrian circulation facilities. The following is included in the draft conditions of approval. Prior to Final Map recordation forresidential and /orcommercial development the applicant shall provide separate labor and material improvement bonds or irrevocable letters of credit in a form and amount acceptable to the Director of Public Works for 100% of estimated improvement cost, as prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Director of Public Works, for each, but not limited to, the public and private improvements: a. Street improvements, monuments, sidewalks, striping and signage, park improvements, Class 1 bike trail improvements along the Jamboree street frontage, street lights, sewer systems, water systems, storm drain and water quality management systems, erosion control landscaping and irrigation in public rights of way or common areas, private s lopes and common area recreational areas, and off -site improvements required as part of the project. 5. Page 13, indicates a Master Landscape Plan will be done, but doesn't indicate when. The design of the Master Landscape Plan will be part of the Master Site Development Plan Review prior to site development, and will be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 7. Page 17, indicates the project would have one fence design and that the locations will be done in "future design ". When and by whom? The design of community walls and fences will be part of the Master Site Development Plan Review prior to site development, and will be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 8. Page 30 refers to an outline of the Phase 2 landscape framework, hardscape and streetscape character, but Figure 6 -6 indicates it is for "illustrative purposes" only. The multiple references to "for illustrative purposes only" has been removed from) the Phasing Plan. 10. Page 31, retailers won't appreciate emphasis on shade trees that could block their signage. While this point is duly noted, the landscape design concept for the Uptown Newport project is a high priority for the project as a whole, and retail users will have sufficient opportunities for signage with both monument signage and on- building signage. 11. There is no diagram of neighborhood streets, which is ok, except the road in from Birch is reallong Q just a neighborhood street. Perhaps there should be more detail on the design of this street segment. The streets within Uptown Newport are depicted on Figure 6 -5 for each phase. Section 6.5. t of the revised Phasing Plan provides a narrative, plat) view and cross - section view of the Birch Street entry drive. 12. Page 33, the word 'could" is used which means "could not' as well. Is that intended? The regulatordocuments for Uptown Newport, including the Planner) Community Development Plan, Design Guidelines, and the Phasing Plan have been revised to affinn the intent of the Applicant to develop a quality high density residential village that is consistent with the vision of City of Newport Beach. 1�9 200 Attachment No. PC 4 Site Plan 201 202 VON KARMAN AVE. JFFFF ' '/ ' o o a ii - - - - -- 0� 'II II/ I I ❑ ,�I ,' 11 II II ❑ n � l l�l l�l l� ED E -1 �l bl l�l lMl Li CD �l4� l� I I I II II I I I� �' YC�p�p��P - - -- III I I 4 ! ! kP // ! I- _ -I -Il — — — — - -- -- I _ -- -- _— -- -- -- -- — — - -- — -- -- - -- — -- � -- -- - -- — — r I -- - -- — — — -- J - - -_— -- - - -- w 17' - - -_ -- — - - - -- III 0 0 24' A L - - -------- 30' - - - -- - - - - - - -- \ �- w I L - - - - -- 10' Ps. �t kL F \ 15' 15' P ASE 1 6 12 T- 0 9.12' 6 0 / / q / INTERIM PHASE 1 / CUL -DE -SAC BULB PHA( PHASE 2 N 9.07' I o 1 0! OPEN HSPA CE I e CS DF 6' UPTOWN NEWPORT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN \ ti S / \ a w / Lti�G �� 8.92' 4 r mom �i - -��• -ice- O PATH TO BE 12' WIDE TO ACCOMMODATE 0 Cn n W M --� r w m cn D z� -- - - ---= --- - - - -- Lo p (A z4 � SE r = D p 7 C) rlj rn70m I to z m PATH TO BE 12' WIDD TO ACCOMMODATE C = 1 I I I 1 II 1 �T M I I I I ST "D" w m — -V — _ 1. ing Zone le 24' 1 0l cn i g LI i o l II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II .0 r ® NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS = 93 STALLS LEGEND- CONCEPTUAL BUILDING PAD FOOTPRINT -- SITE BOUNDARY L - - - -- -- PROPOSED LOT LINES RETAIL ENHANCED PAVERS PHASE LINE cn 10 ' / A sca PI� III III I- lll 5C,) ® II -- - - - - -- --- - 42' 42' I I _ 6 III 32' 32' N w AGC ES-S-� N H ;3 11 Ff l w I U - - M�MIII ui ❑ W L o o � o C PREPARED ON. NOVEMBER 28, 2012 Engineering • Planning • Surveying 17782 17TH ST, SUITE 200 TUSTIN, CA 92780 -1947 • 714 - 665 -4500 20.3 204 Attachment No. PC 5 Correspondence 205 200 JOHN S. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5100 81R.CH STREET, NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (949) 833 -1972 FAX (9491 8.51 -2055 November 26, 2012 Ms. Rosalmh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Re: Uptown Newport Project Newport Beach, California Dear NIS. Ung: q &C,Vl SD Q), COh4MLINTtY NOV 26 'M? 0, DEVELOPMENT GZ' T' 0/1- M1lIEWPO��j �� 1 am submitting these comments as President of Courthouse Plaza Association. This association includes 5100, 5120, 5140 and 5160 Birch Sweet (Courthouse Plaza), a four building office complex located innmediately adjacent to the proposed Uptown Newport Project. We are submitting this letter and comments for consideration by the Planning Couwllssion as it reviews the Uptown Newport project. The following is a summary of some of the major issues we have with the project. 1. The project exceeds the maximum density allowed by the General Plan. 2. The project does not conform to the General Plan guidelines in terms of connectivity and building massing. 3. The project is not compatible with the adjacent Koll Center business park. 4. The project will create a twelve fold increase in traffic. 5. The project does not provide adequate parking or adequate distribution of spaces. 6. The project imposes shadows on adjacent buildings. 7. The project imposes a significant noise and vibration impact on adjacent buildings. 8. Construction traffic will significantly impact the Birch Street Easement. 9. The project proposes modification and construction on the Birch Street Easement that it does not have the right to construct. 10. The project attempts to convert a private driveway easement for public traffic use. 11. The project proposes the ability to transfer additional development rights to the project site. v1s. Rosalinh Ung City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 2 Lastly, the citizens of Newport Beach approved a General Plan that envisioned a mixed -use urban village for the Airport Area based on the ROMA designs. These designs provided for an attractive, integrated, urban village that would be an asset to the Airport Area and the city. The project as proposed is a massive, unimaginative project that turns its back on the adjacent business park neighborhood and appears to be designed with the intent of maximizing density. The project does not follow the leads suggested by the ROMA design and will result in an isolated high density apartment complex that fails to take advantage of a once in a generation opportunity to provide an asset to the City of Newport Beach. Regardless of the numerous teclwieal faults, which are discussed on the following pages, the Planning Commission currently has an opportunity to help shape the proposed project so that it meets the intent of the General Plan. The majority of the issues and impacts created by the proposed project, both technical and aesthetic, can be mitigated significantly by reducing the density of the proposed project to 30 units per acre. At this lower density, which is consistent with General Plan guidelines, the proposed project will be more likely to provide the benefits to the City of Newport Beach that were envisioned by the General Plan. A detailed description of each of the issues referenced above and suggested solutions is included on the following pages. Sincerely, JOHN S. ADAIMS & ASSOCIATES, INC. i P� John S. Adams Attached: Descriptions of Issues and Suggested Solutions Letter from Cadden & Fuller 202 Ms. Rosalinh Ung City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 3 DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES AND SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS 1. Niaxinnun Density Exceeds General Plan Guidelines The General Plan allows for building density of a minimum of 30 units per net acre and a maximum of 50 units per net acre. The Tentative Tract Map indicates a total net acreage of 17.68 acres. Therefore, minimum and maximum densities are as follows. Maximum Density tilininmm Density Net Acres 17.68 17.68 Density x 50 /acre x 30 /acre Maximum Units (before density bonus) 884 units 530 units Maximum Density Bonus (35 %) x 1.35 x 1.35 i\laxinnum Units (after density bonus) 1,193 twits 715 units The project proposes a total of 1,244 units. This exceeds the maximum allowed. Solution: Reduce project density to conform witli General Plan requirements. 2. General Plan — Connectivity and Buildurg Massing Connectivity: The General Plan approved for the Uptown Newport and the adjacent Koll Center area envisioned (see Figure LU23) a total of five ingress and egress points for the development (two to Jamboree, one to MacArthur, one to Von Karman and one to Birch). The project as proposed only has the two Jamboree Road access points and the Birch Street Easement access. The Birch Street access is a private driveway easement, not a street as shown on General Plan Figure LU23. The Von Karman and MacArthur access points are subject to Koll Center owner's approval. So in reality, only the two Jamboree Road access points are not subject to legal and other issues. There also are proposed pedestrian access points between Uptown Newport and Koll Center. These pedestrian access points also are subject to Koll Center owner's approval. Because Uptown's access points, both vehicular and pedestrian, are reduced from what the General Plan envisioned, the project should be considered only on the basis of the access that exists. The reduced access points place additional traffic burden on the remaining three access points. Solution: Because of this reduced access, the project density should be reduced to lessen the burden on the remaining access points. 209 Ms. Rosalinh Ung City of Nei�,port Beach November 26, 2012 Page 4 Building Massing_ The project as proposed has 150 foot tower zones setback only 15 feet from adjacent property lines. This results in a massive unbroken property fagade. The design is not compatible with the ROMA designs contained in the General Plan. Moreover, the design is not compatible with adjacent the Kell Center business park. Solution: Building structures should have significant setbacks from adjacent properties. Low -rise structures should be situated along the perimeter of the project and high -rise structures should be located in the interim of the project. 3. Koll Center New Pori t PC The existing Kell Center PC resulted in a project with mixed low -rise and high -rise buildings with significant setbacks and open space between buildings. Building owners within Kell Center purchased their buildings on the basis of this plan and the appealing environment it created. The proposed project with its high density and limited building setbacks is not compatible with the existing neighborhood. Based on the assumption of 1,244 units at an average of 1,100 square feet per unit, this project will insert approximately 1,368,000 square feet of buildings into the business park. The size and scale is not compatible with the surrounding business park development. Solution: Reduce project density, increase setbacks and increase open space so that the project is compatible with the existing business park environment created by the Koll Center PC. 4. Traffic The EIR indicates daily trip generation for this project is as follows: Existing Use: 747 Proposed Total: 9,047 Net New Trips: 8,286 The proposed project results in an increase of 8,286 trips, which is a twelve -fold increase. The Birch Street Easement will experience AM Peak Hour trip increases of 124% (82 existing vs. 184 as proposed) and PM Peak HOLH' increases of 95% (148 existing vs. 289 as proposed). This increase in traffic will significantly impact the ability of Courthouse Plaza tenants to access the Birch Street driveway from the Courthouse Plaza parking lots. This will result in a decrease in rent levels and damage to property value. Solution: Reduce trip generation on the Birch Street Casement to the existing levels. This should be accomplished by reducing project density to approximately 632 units, which is the density indicated to be traffic neutral by the [CDP. 210 Ms. Rosalinh Uirg City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 5 5. Parking The project contemplates "parking management plans" which would allow the project to deviate from code parking requirements. If not adequately parked, the surrounding properties will be negatively affected by overflow parking from the project. The project has 25 acres on which to provide adequate parking. The project should not be allowed to deviate from the code parking requirements. Parking for the retail component should be provided per code requirements and be located in close proximity to the retail component. Lastly, adequate parking for visitors to the parks should be located adjacent to the parks. The Master Site Plan shows no parking spaces adjacent to the Phase 2 park. Solution: Require the Project to provide parlwrg per code for all uses (residential, retail and park). Parking should be properly dispersed throughout the project to insure no overflow impact on adjacent properties. 6. Shadows & Setbacks Shadows: The proposed plan indicates buildings up to 150 feet in height with a 15 foot setback from the property line with Courthouse Plaza. The EiR (Figures IC, 2B, and 2C) indicates the Courthouse Plaza office buildings will be subject to significant shadow impacts. Solution: Any proposed buildings that will cast shadows on adjacent properties should be relocated to the interior of the Uptown Village parcel so that all shadows are contained on- site. Setbacks: The majority of adjacent buildings in Koll Center Newport are setback approximately 100 to 150 feet from the property lines shared with the project. The project buildings should be required to have similar setbacks. This will minimize the impacts from shading and be more aesthetically compatible with the surrounding business park. Solution: Increase the 15 foot set back from the Courthouse Plaza property line and Koll Center Newport property line to approximately 100 to 150 feet. Also, require reduced building heights and project density to eliminate shadow impact. 221 Ms. Rosalinb Ung City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 6 7. NoiseNibration The E1R states that vibration levels during Phase 2 will exceed thresholds at the adjacent office buildings to the northeast, which is our Courthouse Plaza project. The EIR states the vibration levels will cause annoyance to the occupants. The impact will be significant on Courthouse Plaza. The loud noise and vibration caused during construction will restdt in lost tenants and reduced rental rates during construction. This will have significant economic impact on the Courthouse Plaza buildings. Solution: Mitigation of this issue should be solved by the developer. Noise and vibration should be reduced to acceptable levels with sound walls or other methods during construction. 8. Construction Traffic The construction of each phase of the project could last several years. This will create significant noise, dust and other issues related to construction traffic. This will have significant economic impact on the Courthouse Plaza buildings. Solution: Require all construction traffic during both phases to be directed to and from Jamboree Road and not allowed to utilize the Birch Sheet Easement. 9. Sidewalks, Utilities and Landscaoing — Birch Street Easement The project proposes the modification and installation of various improvements across the Birch Street Easement and Birch Street frontage. The project developer does not have the right to construct of modify improvements in the easement area. Please refer to the attached letter from our attorney regarding this issue. Solution: The project should be considered absent any of these proposed improvements. �)1 Nls. Rosalinh Ung City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 7 10. Birch Street Easement — Public Access This is a private driveway easement. The developer (toes not have the right to increase traffic or burden the easement beyond traffic neutral. The proposed project fiumels a street system with unlimited public access to a narrow private driveway easement. The result is an attempt to convert a private driveway for public traffic use. Solution: The Birch Street Easement should not be considered a primary access point for the project. The project should be designed to utilize the two Jamboree Road access points as primary access for the project. This could be accomplished by controlled access at Birch Street. During Phase 1 traffic flow should be designed to insure equal traffic access by Jazz employees to Jamboree Road. 11. Transfer of Development Rights The project proposes the ability to transfer additional development rights to the project site. Solution: The project should not be allowed to accept any additional development rights that would increase project density. 213 CADDEN & FULLER LLP 1 1 4 PACIFICA, SUITE 450 . IRVINE. CALIFORIIIA 9261 8 TEL (949) 788-0827 s FAX (949) 450-0650 a N1WW.CADDENFIIL1-ER.00I4 November 19, 2012 VIA U.S. IVIAIL Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 FILE NUMBER COUO2 -02 Re: Unauthorized Improvements of Easement by Uptown Newport L.P. Dear Ms. Ung We represent Courthouse Plaza Association ( "Plaza "). On its behalf, we provide the following analysis pertaining to Uptown Newport L.P.'s ( "Uptown ") Planed Development Plan. By way of background, Plaza owns the common areas of the properties located at 5100, 5120, 5140 and 5160 Birch Street (the "Plaza Parcel ") in the City of Newport Beach (the "City"). Uptown is the beneficiary of a private easement (the "Easement ") over the Plaza Parcel. The Easement provides Uptown "a non- exclusive easement for passage in, over and along the following real property..., including the right to maintain driveways, roadways, sidewalks and passageways on said property." Plaza has recently received copies of Uptown's plans to develop and make unauthorized improvements to the Easement, including but not limited to, the installation of underground sewer and water lines. This is beyond the scope of Uptown's Easement. Moreover, to the extent Uptown intends to improve the roadway, it may only do so without increasing the burden on, or unreasonably interfering with, Plaza's use of the servient tenement. A. WHILE UPTOWN MAY MAINTAIN THE SURFACE ROADWAY, IT MAY NOT UNDULY BURDEN PLAZA WITH ITS REPAIRS AND /OR IMPROVEMENTS. The law pertaining to easements is quite clear. In determining the extent of the servitude, the easement will be determined by the terms of the grant. "If the language is clear and explicit in the conveyance, there is no occasion for the use of parol evidence to show the nature and extent of the rights acquired." Van Klompenburb v. Berghold (2005) 126 Cal.App.4'h 345, 349; see Gray v. McCormick (2008) 167 Cal.AppAth 1019, 1024; Cal. Civ. Code § 806. 214 Ms. Rosalinh Ung November 19, 2012 Page 2 Moreover, an "easement is a restricted right to specific, limited, definable use or activity upon another's property." Scruby v. Vintage Grapevine, lac. (1995) 37 Ca1.App.4 "' 697, 702. "The owner of a dominant tenement must use his or her easements and rights in such a way as to impose as slight a burden as possible on the servient tenement." Id. Here, the purpose of the Easement is to provide Uptown a surface passage to and from its property. The Easement also provides that Uptown may maintain the driveway, roadways and sidewalks and passageways on said property. Uptown, however, may only do so to the extent that it does not create an undue burden on the servient tenement. In S'cruliy, the dominant tenement had an easement for ingress and egress on an unpaved roadway. Without consent of the servient tenement, the dominant tenement paved a section of the roadway. The court found that while the dominant tenement could make the necessary repairs to maintain the unpaved road, the dominant tenement could not, however, substantially alter the roadway without the consent of the servient tenement. Scruby, 37 Cal.App.4"' at 707. The court held that the paving of the roadway was not incident to the reasonable repair or maintenance of the easement but that it was an undue burden on the servient tenement. Id. The paving of the roadway violated the servient tenement's wine permit, which would be lost if the pavement was not removed, thereby unreasonably burdening the servient tenement. Likewise, to the extent Uptown's improvements to the Easement create an undue burden on Plaza, Uptown should be enjoined from making such improvements. Uptown's development plan includes the construction of sidewalks on the Easement which do not currently exist, Consequently; the construction of new sidewalks constitutes an undue burden on Plaza's property. The Easement only provides for the maintenance of the surface roadway, not any sort of construction which would unilaterally expand Uptown's Easement. Moreover, Uptown's development plans will cause Plaza further undue burden fi•om the loss of use of the Easement. B. UPTOWN MAY NOT ALTER OR USE THE EASEMENT FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE OTHER THAN INGRESS AND EGRESS TO AND FROM ITS PARCEL, SUCH AS LAYING SEWER AND /OR WATER LINES The conveyance of a roadway easement "does not include the right to use the easement for any other purpose." Scruby, 37 Cal.App.4"' at 703. Here, Uptown only has the right to use the surface of the Easement for ingress and egress to and from its parcel. It cannot, however, dig below the surface to construct sewer and /or water lines. Not only would that violate the intended purpose of the Easement, it would also unilaterally expand Uptown's usage of the Easement. Uptown may not use the Easement for any other purpose than to travel on the roadway to get to and from its parcel. San Rafael Ranch Co. v. Ralph Rogers Co. (1908) 154 Cal. 76, 76 -77 is illustrative of this point. In San Rafael Ranch, the dominant tenement had a "reasonable right of way along and across said lot." The dominant tenement mistakenly believed that it had a right to the water on the servient tenement's land as well and attempted to dig up the soil for the purpose of laying pipeline to conduct water over the servient tenement's property. The Court restrained the 215 Ms. Rosalinh Ung November 19, 2012 Page 3 dominant tenement from constructing such a pipeline stating that "the ,,pluase right of way,' as thus used, has a well - defined meaning. It contemplates a right of ingress and egress to and from the grantee's lands. It does not contemplate the right to dig trenches and lay pipe -lines for the conduct of water." Similarly, the only right that Uptown has is the right to a surface passageway. It cannot dig below the surface to construct any water or sewer lines. See also Allen V. Sari Jose Land & Water Co. (1891) 92 Cal. 138 (finding that an easement for an above ground open ditch to conduct water would be substantially altered if the dominant tenement than laid an underground pipeline). Li light of the above, Uptown's proposed use and alterations to the Easement go beyond the scope and rights conveyed by the Easement and should be enjoined from moving forward with its proposed plans. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the above, please call me. Very truil ours, Ina . Kim DYK:dyk cc: Thomas H. Caddell, Esq. Ignacio J. Lazo, Esq. John Adams 210 MEYER PJI OP ERTff ES 4320 VON KARMAN AVENUE • NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (949) 862 -0500 . FAx (949)862 -0515 November 26, 2012 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Re: Uptown Newport Project Newport Beach, California Dear Ms. Ung: 'g"Q IVGry 4?1' Oop,JM6 INITY �IOV 6 2071 �. DEVELOPMENT Ci O,c ivzwPoO Our company is the owner of 4320 Von Karman in Koll Center Newport and as such we have the following concerns regarding the captioned project: We are submitting this letter for review by the Planning Commission in the hope they will be given the serious consideration they deserve. The following is a smranary of some of the major issues we have with the project. The project is not compatible with the adjacent Koll Center Koll Center Newport development. 2. The projes. ct does not provide building setbacks consistent with Koll Center Newport guideline The project exceeds the maximum density allowed by the General Plan. 4. The project does not conform to the General Plan guidelines in terms of connectivity and building massing. The project seeks to provide pedestrian access where none currently exists and is not likely to. 6. The project will create a twelve fold increase in traffic without adequate mitigation. The project assumes vehicular access onto Von Karman and Birch by ostensibly. converting emergency and private driveway easements for public use. The project does not provide adequate parking or adequate distribution of spaces. 217 City of Newport Beach November 26, 2012 Page 2. 9. The project imposes shadows on many adjacent buildings. 10. The project imposes a significant noise and vibration impact on adjacent buildings without adequate mitigation. 11. The draft EIR concludes that no other type of project and no modification to the proposed project is feasible, but does not provide any of the criteria and assumptions utilized to determine feasibility. The citizens of Newport Beach approved a General Plan that envisioned a mixed -use urban village for the Airport Area not one that ignores (lie adjacent property owners for the sole purpose of maximizing density /profit. The Planning Commission currently has an opportunity to help shape the proposed project so that it meets the intent of the General Plan and will preclude possible litigation from nearby property owners who own buildings that will be severely and negatively impacted by die development, as proposed. Thank you in advance for your consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, Meyer Properties .% W.A106 James B. Hasty Senior Vice President 212 LAA \� �\ \ I t . U. 50 7. , y , §) 79 4 N :9 D C) 11) L6* c� -C; o 0 0 zz P4 E E Ji \ ƒ\ 2ƒ/ CORNERSTONE RV PARNTERS9 ILILcC 100 W rstn ae no OLEVA RU, SU I'I'E 700 - SANTA ANION ICA, CA LIrORNIA 90403 (310)234 -2525 November 27, 2012 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Re: Uptown Newport Project Nen'•I3ort Beach, California Dear Ms. Ung: ��G�IVf_U gy CQp a 1lINIT'� 1v!() V 2 "1 2017. C/1 URVf L01'MLNT PUZ op Our company is the owner of 5000 Birch in Kell Center Newport. We have reviewed the development plans for the Uptown Newport project and the associated draft enviromnental impact report (EIR) and have the following continents and concerns. The project is not compatible with the adjacent Koll Center Newport development. The scale of the proposed building in terms of height, proximity to its property line and adjacency to the neighboring properties changes the character of the traditional business park setting where our property is situated. 2. The project does not provide building setbacks consistent with Koll Center Newport guidelines, There is too much building mass Next to the eastern property line, which limits the amount of natural light reaching the Koll Center Newport properties including 5000 Birch. It will also have the effect of eliminating west facing views from the 5000 Birch office building that are highly sought after by tenants in our building. The blockage of west facing views from office suites in our building would have a direct negative economic effect on 5000 Birch. 3. The project exceeds the maximum density allowed by the General Plan. By doing so, the proposed high density presents a conflicting land use arrangement for the adjoining properties in the Koll Center Newport business park. The original buildings were purposely arranged with substantial physical separation from one another to create the quintessential "Orange County" business park design. The proposed development will seriously damage the current low density design and character of the immediately adjacent properties. 4. We object to the proposed pedestrian connection between the proposed Uptown Newport project and the existing Koll Center North business park. Introducing non- business activities in this traditional business park is intrusive and detrimental to the existing businesses in the area. 220 The project will create a twelve fold increase in traffic without adequate mitigation. Our building tenants will not appreciate such a significant increase in traffic, and may choose to relocate to other office properties with less traffic on surrounding streets. Obviously, we are concerned about the direct economic effects of such an increase in traffic due to the proposed development. The project introduces vehicular access onto Von Karman and Birch by converting emergency and private driveway easements for public use. This will interfere with existing traffic flows and contribute to a detrimental changing of the character of the Koll Center Newport business center. 7. The project would impose a significant noise and vibration impact on 5000 Birch without adequate mitigation. During construction, many of our building tenants will be negatively impacted, which may lead them to choose to relocate to other office buildings. 3. The draft EIR concludes that no other type of project and no modification to the proposed project is feasible, but does not provide any of the criteria and assumptions utilized to determine feasibility. We disagree with this conclusion. There are numerous alternative development proposals involving less intensive uses (e.g., lower density, more in scale with surrounding development) which could provide a positive economic return to the property owner but have fewer deleterious effects on the adjacent owners. We do not oppose development of any property in the area that is consistent with the uses and design parameters specified in the Koll Center guidelines and the General Plan. Unfortunately, we do not agree that the current design is consistent with the City's design guidelines. We urge you to work with the project proponent to redesign the Uptown Newport project to conform to the applicable design requirements for Koll Center North and to respect the property rights of the neighboring properties. Thank you in advance for your consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, Cornerstone Partners IV, LLC Sandy Throop Vice President 221 Sn -Ait a, Linden & Basso, ILILP Accounting, Tax Si Business Consulting Services Allen L. Basso Scott H. Harada Gordon L. Nlichie November 27, 2012 SENT VIA EMAIL AND US MAIL Nis. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 Re: Uptown Newport Project, Newport Beach Dear Ms. Ung: `i�C,EIVI3D ,S I, i;Olv,nAUNrrY Nov 2 17 1017 o011-:1-OPMEN"r �z y Q�P OP NIcWPOV6 I am writing regarding the aforementioned project and the related planning commission hearing scheduled for December 6, 2012. As a property owner at 5120 Birch Street, Newport Beach, I strongly oppose the proposed project. It is the stance of myself and the association to which I belong, Courthouse Plaza Association, that the proposed project will have a negative impact on our property values. In addition, issues involving shadows, construction noise, the proposed project's density and resulting traffic are a major cause for concern. A detailed letter illustrating all points of opposition has been submitted by John Adams, President of the Courthouse Plaza Association, with which I am in sound agreement. I ask that you please take these points into consideration when reviewing the Uptown Newport project and reject their current plan accordingly. ALB: hh Sincerely, (A4l•n .Basso 5120 Birch Street, Suite 200, Newport Beach, California 92660 -2101 (949)752 -06,60 ^ FAX (949) 752 -5140 email n slb- cpaxom 222 November 26, 2012 SENT VIA FACSIMILE & U.S. MAIL Ms. Roasalinh Ung Associate Planner City Of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 RE: Uptown Newport Project Dear Ms. Ung: LEDGER ASSOCIATES � �'(;EIvED 0l' COMMUNITY NOV 2 g 2012 p DEVELOPMIcNT 6� OP NEVJF OR( I am writing as a Newport Beach property owner in opposition to the Uptown Project scheduled for a planning commission hearing December 6, 2012. My building sits directly in the proposed project's shadow at 5160 Birch Street, Newport Beach. The President of our Association, John Adams, has submitted a very detailed letter opposing the project on behalf of the neighboring owners as it adversely impacts density, noise, traffic and casts shadows on our parcel. I am in agreement with Mr. Adams' sound reasoning on all points and would only further that any attempt to expand the scope of the limited easement previously granted over our private driveway would constitute a taking. We have made good faith efforts to negotiate a resolution that would lessen the tremendous adverse impact over our private driveway but to no avail. To that end, it is my hope that The City of Newport Beach respects our property interests in our private driveway and rejects the project accordingly. Since At Law Experience • Inletpily • RCSURS 5160 Bilch SUM. Suite 100 P;ry ;;port Oerh, CA 92650 Tel 300.:100.0001 Fax 800.442.2502 mal- edgertaw.cam 223 November 28, 2012 VIA U.S. D111lII AND EilIMIL (t-iii?g @Iietivpoi•tbeachca.go�) Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, California 92663 `'g'GCIVED &t, cOMMUNITY NOV 2 8 M2 DEVELOPMENT G� Ar OAP "f' nicwPOC',� RE: Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) - Draft Enviromneltal hupact Report SCH No. 201005194. Dear Ms. Ung: As you know, OCRC Capital Corporation ( "OCRC" ), owns a building, located at 4910 Birch St. within the Koll Center office park. We wanted to take this opportunity to reiterate our concerns regarding the above mentioned project with the expectation that they will continue to be recognized and considered by the City of Newport Beach Planting Commission. The following is a summary of some of the major issues we have with the project. 1. The project is not compatible with the adjacent Koll Center Koll Center Newport development. 2. The project does not provide building setbacks consistent with Koll Center Newport guidelines. 3. The project exceeds the maximum density allowed by the General Plan. 4. The project does not conform to the General Plan guidelines in terms of connectivity and building massing. 5. The project seeks to provide pedestrian access where none currently exists and is not likely to. 6. The project will create a twelve fold increase in traffic without adequate mitigation. Seven Corporate Plaza o NIewport Beach, CA 92660 (9491 644 -OLEN o Fax (949) 719 -7200 www.olenproperties.com 22 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner November 28, 2012 Page - 2 - The project assumes vehicular access onto Vat Karman and Birch by ostensibly converting emergency and private driveway easements for public use. The project does not provide adequate parking or adequate distribution of spaces. 9. The project imposes shadows on many adjacent buildings. 10. The project fails to provide feasible options for where Uptown Newport's future residents will be able to attend primary and secondary school. 11. The project imposes a significant noise and vibration impact on adjacent buildings without adequate mitigation. 12. The draft EIR concludes that no other type of project and no modification to the proposed project is feasible, but does not provide any of the criteria and assumptions utilized to determine feasibility. The citizens of Newport Beach approved a General Plan that envisioned a mixed -use urban village for the Airport Area not one that ignores the adjacent property owners for the, sole purpose of maximizing density /profit. The Planning Conunission currently has an opportunity to help shape the proposed project so that it meets the intent of the General Plan and will preclude possible litigation from nearby property owners who own buildings that will be severely and negatively impacted by the development, as proposed. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Marisa D. Poulos Associate Counsel Cc: Igor Olenicoff 215 ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED 1� 0 Will I FNo 2 1 Wsumm, uploWl 11119b M, a ~ n U per, S A. �P ,C9I /F(J i1N 9161116111110 Redevelopment of a25.05-acre office /industrial site with a mixed use residential project consisting of: Up to 1,244 residential units; 922 base units (replacement + additive) 322 density bonus units requested 11,500 square feet of retail use; 2 one -acre public parks; and Proposed streets open to public but privately owned and maintained Photograp Residential IRV ©T JW Commercial Office 3000 �. The Plaza Commercial Office UC Irvine North Came UC Irvine Child Devt. Commercial Office Upper BNewport San Diego Creek Channel Legend Airport Area --- - -ICDP - ---- Project Site 3 Residential IRV ©T JW Commercial Office 3000 �. The Plaza Commercial Office UC Irvine North Came UC Irvine Child Devt. Commercial Office Upper BNewport San Diego Creek Channel Legend Airport Area --- - -ICDP - ---- Project Site 3 .J �Jr y N e E AF• I Subject I�p°R\ o` e D n ,�C /FUHM\J 4 Previous Stucly Session October 4th Study Session: Project summarized and public input received Planning Commission comments: Zoning documents and tentative tract map; Site Development Plan Review of master plans by Planning Commission; and Vehicular /pedestrian connectivity between project and Koll Center to Von Karman Revisions Zoning Documents ■ PC Text • Phasing Plan • Design Guidelines ■ Master Site Plan & Tentative Tract Map -Improvements Entryway at Fairchild intersection A traffic roundabout 2 access drives reached the project's northern property lines to provide future connectivity to Koll property DeLiiire 7! T. F o urrn� � Grrirrrrr� Ir «iiRnnrnrn3nml L_ 'm\�c� Gnl _ _ III 111111 II II II I Illl II II nil I n�nln _ o UNrrR�1N1 I I I I I r 0 Il Illllll Summary Phaw1 Phase2 Total Numherol OnNS: 690 561 1,241 Park Area (ac): 103 1.02 2M Retail (a): 11,500 0 11,500 On -Street Parking Stalls: 59 34 93 Total Area lazy: 13.01 12.04 25.05 • o-i grtmmrrtr ru u � I I 0 -ffMTFffO 1? LJ I I I =o L ,[W 0 i� \ �.. Iliil Ii IIIIIS � i i I i I 7 A \!11! k- Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Consistent with City and State density bonus law Affordable Housing Obligation: Minimum Very Low Income (11 %): 102 rental units; or Minimum Low Income (20 %): 185 rental units; or Minimum Moderate Income (40%):369 for -sale units Affordable units in each phase 8 DeVelc Draft Development Agreement Consistent with General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12 and ICDP Identifies public benefits provided and development rights granted The proposed term of the agreement is 15 years, with two 5 -year extensions. Minor changes to draft document r 0101 9=1 M] Ho [a S IKZ 8 letters from property owners in Koll Center Newport Concerns: ■ Building shadows • Construction noise • Excessive density Increased traffic Land Use compatibility 30 C 0 F kr: Ah Presented by JoAnn Hadfield -The Planning Center Recommendations Conduct a public hearing; and Adopt draft Resolution recommending City Council Certification of Environmental Impact Report; and Approval of the Uptown Newport Planned Community P Schedule City Council public hearings Notice of Intent to override ALUC's determination - December 11, 2012 Consideration of Project —to be determined New City Hall: loo Civic Center Drive 1 For more information contact: Rosalinh Ung 949 -644 -3208 Rung@newportbeachca.gov www.newportbeachca.gov -tow �. 1 I 1 r J jLjt�,t 0.1` ' } /' 11IP�s7lJ�p�" The iJP REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CAPITAL \ D K A • ADVISORS LLC APPLICANT PRESENTATION ��•-� -- :��1ui � ICI LI %, , VIM iffivp , GENERAL'k"' PLAN .a'i ! 'r•' � — ���r��:..+�...a r��� i�:oy�,� � r 9.ia1 .° L °.�� , f_� ❖ In 2006 the Newport Beach residents adopted a General Plan providing a mixed use residential community for the airport area. ❖ The community recognized the Airport Area had an urban character different from other Newport Beach neighborhoods. ❖ L U 3.3: "John Wayne Airport Area: re -use of underperforming industrial and office properties and development of cohesive residential neighborhoods in proximity to jobs and services G PIA N ENERALREJO The General plan allocated 2,200 residential units within the Airport Area: ❖ 550 newladditive units ❖ 19 650 replacement units from conversion of commercial and industrial uses •'• Traffic neutral ❖ 1,244 units and 11,500 square feet of neighborhood - serving retail are allocated to the Uptown Newport site. Uptown FVF "A t .as dd . =q• w KOLL CENTER dr $ ot s r p. A_ �w+� w••eKr (n TI'! PTOWN NEWPORT (wBJECTPROPERTO ! m � P3 F3 JI 0 14 ' 1 f/I 0 I I PON 'as '. R 4A.� I, , t I/ Ij , P PARK RL SIDI NI IAI 1 1 RL SIUEN IIAL RESIDENTIAL a J J J J. a, J J a. J J..J si �f .qv ... ro ..... , ._._..._._....... m u a V J i Entry Drive Focal Point Spine Street Entry Monument EMNeighborhood Street NN Pedestrian Path .*. Park Future Class 1 �� Bike Path BRED Inn On BIRCH ST ACCESS The Birch Street access easement is a perpetual access easement that has been in place since the site was developed in the early 1970's. ❖ Provides for a: "non- exclusive easement for passage in, over and along the real property ... including the right to maintain driveways, roadways, sidewalks and passageways on said property. " ❖ There is nothing in the Grant of Easement that limits the intensity of use of the non - exclusive Easement; in fact, the Grant of Easement is very broad and contains no restrictions as to the use of the Easement BRED • �• • ' ,•.•� ,... • .. - •r 'y of r, r , r • •• •N• ,y ,a. '6. ,. ,1 T,9 t'!Q �Oti�,�i_ii C.�'.'+�w 5'•g7 .f'n tS �E-P, n�r •-�i:,� •�'�i1{e {.x'\13 : •?���ti'nii :. "heTc; 5 �fd'o :1 t: .GE': i�t7Q }ih(2� r. r�"1^ V' {G`l:.t41 i s ♦ i .: ' } ;� l' r 'e. a±�ti.r.,t,�F �`caY •. ja'�i,ay'��e :i n n�a :.��►d_ _. iCsn,; •tJjp • €t�l],nwit�grrf�al ": ixa ?arty :$i qua �ci �Ti t ?. ' • COUat • : nce j• , r tit ,. I�'�t'E3' O,L.l p l,2`t�,n4?'r. �IiCi,i:dilYd •the ic�hL..tO•,- matIJ.ritai'R''dr5yei�ays� xc5,�tiw��;�:,�,,sVdet�iaiks a,-i.paNs�drf�?�ys ,eta S�•iti,� :. •p.�'t? }74rris,�Y:: s '..'r.. r. , i.�(. �t4 •',1 -�' .•• : ♦.1•' - '.,z r• ' rt 1 r►�l;i, � i ❑ i ® r._._._._._._._._._._._.J EE ROAD w W U) U Qf ,ell Figure 2 -29: Existing Jamboree Road sidewalk 2.6 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ORCULATION 2.6.1 Jamboree Road Class I Bike and Muki- UseTrall Uptown Newport will include a 12 foot wide Class I bike and multi -use trail adjacent to the site along Jamboree Road. The trail will implement the General Plan master trail along the projcect frontage and will allow for improved access to Uptown Newport from the surrounding region. 2.6.2 Internal Sidewalks Uptown Newport streets will feature curb - separated sidewalks for an enhanced pedestrian experience These sidewalks will connect to the on -site network of paseos as well as the existing sidewalks and trails adjacent to the site 2.63 Pasws The Uptown Newport master plan includes a network of paseos that serve as pedestrian - friendly greenbelts, providing connectivity tosuriounding properties aswell as providing pedestrian circulation within the village. The primary paseo runs perpendicular to Jamboree Road and connects Koll Center Newportto theJamboree Road Gass I bikelmulh -use trail, and provides central Desgn Guidelines 2. SITE PLANNING GUIDELINESAND STANDARDS access to the neighborhood parks and mixed use node. Public gathering spaces must be provided in this paseo. A secondary paseo running parallel to Jamboree Road provides connectivity between the parcels served by the two Neighborhood Street cul -de -sacs. Additional paseo connections from the parks and neighborhoods to the Koll Center Newport are provided to enhance connectivity and welcome visitors from surrounding properties. The paseos are designed to promote pedestrian and bicycle circulation, provide for reaea6onal opportunities such as walking andjogging, and provide such amenities as benches, fountains, plazas and other pedestrian- oriented facilities. 2.6.4 Pedestrian Circulation within Parcels Individual residential projects within Uptown Newport should develop a comprehensive pedestrian network that connects private plazas, defined courtyards and other open space elements through clearly defined building circulation to project streets and greenbelts. Project -wide open space elements within Uptown Newporthave been clearly linked to adjacent parcels. Figure 2 -30: Pedestrian circulation on internal sidewalks Figure 2 -31: Pu bli c gath eri n g s pace withi n paseo Figure 2 -32: Pedestrian connections between buildings Uptown Newpon Planned Community Deadopmem Plan 11 -3o -12 24 r­qw,!Iq I I 1 ' Phase LJ 1 2 1 �I 1 Phase 1 JA -AD I Trw,' 1 -7mm7mq ' i, iioumumu r u Ea �o 1,244 18.46 2.05 11,500 4.54 25.05 _._._.. Phase 1 Phas4 Number of Units: 680 564 Developable Area (ac): 8.74 9.72 Park Area (ac): 1.03 1.02 Retail (sf): 11,500 0 Right of Way Area (ac): 3.24 1.30 Total Area (ac): 13.01 12.04 u Ea �o 1,244 18.46 2.05 11,500 4.54 25.05 PHASE 1 ., C�:i.,i °a r� �� ■[I r�..e '3 ; . Rc Q`!-� MASTER PLAN Phase I Master Site Improvements will include: ❖ Phase 1 streets and Jamboree Road Improvements, including landscaping ❖ 1 -acre public park •'• Phase 1 paseos and pedestrian connections ❖ Class 1 bike trail along Jamboree frontage ❖ All infrastructure to serve Phase 1 development 1 I e. a pyaleSa.e .. •PE) ;KO_ .T , ,. BUILDING PAD/ 1111111111#7 (BUILDING PAD/ (BUILDING PAD/ ENVE m ENVELOPE) JAMBOREE ROAD .............i lJ 1i C _._._._._._._._._._._.J Koll OF o o' a ( Emergency com Vehi&Access/ f &, to AMBCYREE ROAD f to IoWOWL7211 �j II Legend Uptown Newport Vehicular Circulation Existing MMTowebaa Vehicular Circulation Uptown Newport Pedestrian Circulation Jamboree Road Trail (Future Class I Bike Trail) Gates f� 0 RL SIDI N 1 I At PARK RLSIDLN HAL RESIDENTIAL i RESIDENTIAL w NOW PAR PHASE S l a fjPy.j� w NOW c RESID RESIDENTIAL R' ieA:��e" � IV•�'s: a�.9e'- v "e�rli'ro -sea. / � . -yro "rll� - <�+P•�"ie era9�'ro'. l � � , `� "� t.� i► 0 0=0• iF 9k��m • R � #'� - � •�!t # #'# ,� is #" PARK PHASE S t �t � r 4' E ; 'r 1 I� _y -v » 0 ,C PARKING" yy � sa Parking within the Uptown Newport PC shall be provided along internal streets and within structured parking that is integrated with residential and retail buildings. ❖ On- street parallel and diagonal parking for visitors, public parks and short -term resident parking shall be provided along internal streets. ❖ Structured parking shall be provided for residential and retail uses, and may consist of subterranean or above grade parking structures. ❖ Above grade parking structures shall be encapsulated or lined with residential units or retail space. RETAIL iAGI RETAIL PAI I . PERSTRIAN ACCESS IR IAII I � I I I It TO RETAIL FROM GARAGE RETAIL I I I I I I I I I RETAIL RESIDENTIAL 4 Vkh - o �j HIGH -RISE ZONE (NOT TO EXCEED 1 HIGH-R[ E STRUCTURE) (PAW HIGH -RISE ZONE 'iT TO EXCEED 1 HIGH-RISE STRUCTURE) Legend: 'High -Rise Zone' (High- riseportions of buildings have 150'heightlimit) 55'HeightLimit 75' Height Limit HIGH -RISE ZONE (NOT TO EXCE E C' . ----------- ° HIGH- RISEZONE ° a (NOTT -RISE STRUCTDUR SIGH - o �j HIGH -RISE ZONE (NOT TO EXCEED 1 HIGH-R[ E STRUCTURE) (PAW HIGH -RISE ZONE 'iT TO EXCEED 1 HIGH-RISE STRUCTURE) Legend: 'High -Rise Zone' (High- riseportions of buildings have 150'heightlimit) 55'HeightLimit 75' Height Limit HIGH -RISE ZONE (NOT TO EXCE E C' MASTER �r IPI I� ��� � � °y�" .�v��►sii. � ,ter e` .d, �!��� y� d � �, , DEVELOPER � ' :'�� ����� •y:r, The regulatory documents and conditions of approval have been revised to clarify the roles of the Master Developer and Master Association: ❖ Master Site Improvements for the project will be constructed by the Master Developer ❖ A Master Site Development Plan shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission ❖ A Master Association will be formed to maintain the common areas within Uptown Newport, including the public parks, paseos, streets, parkways, common area landscaping, and other common amenities within the project. MASTER SITI: IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1 MASTER SITI: IMPROVEMENTS W.WhIMMI5T1e7 0 w vP aJ £Wgj as Mw 4ws w- JAMBOREE ROAD ee ee 00 ee e 4. Planned Community Development Master Site Irprovements include the following: Plan Implementation 4.1 MASTER SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW 3. 4. A Master Developerwill developthe Master Site Improvements 5. depicted on Figure 4 -1. The Master Site Improvements will be developed in two pri maryphwesto coincide withthe Uptown 6 Newport Phasing Plan, and will provide for the cohesive development within the Uptown Newport PC Individual building parcelswill be developed by mer chant builders, with Z development of individual building sites subject to the Site $ Development Review process outlined in Section 4.2 herein. &cept as otherwise maintained by a public utility or agency, a Master Association for Uptown Newport shall be created and responsible for maintaining the Master Site Improvements upon acceptance of the completed improvements from the Master Developer. Standards & Proaduies 4, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Demolition, site preparation and rough grading; Backbone storm drain systemwithinthe public streets Sanitary sewer system within the public streets Water distribution system within the public streets; Reclaimed water distribution systemwithin the public streets; Public street improvements, including street paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, parkway improvements to the back of sidewalk; Common area fencing andwall$ Neighborhood Pak improvements for the two R7 publ is parks Landscape improvements within common areas, including: public street parkways to the back of sidewalk project entri es Jamboree Road parkway and Class 1 and multiuse trail; Neighborhood Park landscape improvements paseo landscape improvements Figure 41: Master Site Improvements 10. Master street light and common area lighting improvements 11. Dry utilities; 12. Master community, si gnage A Master Site Development flan shall be prepared to implement the Master Site Improvements within the Uptown Newport PC The purpose of the Master Site Development Plan review is to ensure that the Uptown Newport site is developed consistent with the Uptown Newport PC Design Guidelines, Phasing Plan DevdopmentAgreemert, applicable environmental mitigation measures, and applicable City Codes and standards, aswell as to ensure that the Master Site Irprovements are constructed and completed in a manner that provides for acomplete and cohesive master plan Approval of the Master Site Development Plan application shall be by the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures for a Major Site Review application outlined in NBMC with the exception of proposed buildings Proposed buildings within the Uptown Newport PC shall be implemented in accordance with the Site Development Review process outlined in Section4.2 herein. Plans shall be prepared for the public and common area elements within the Uptown Newport PC including sheets, The Master Site Development Plan application shall include the following plans for the Uptown Newport project, with separate Master Site Plans prepared for both Phase 1 and Phase 2: Preliminary grading plans; Preliminary street improvement plans Preliminary master landscape plans and plant palette; Preliminary public parks and paseo$ Preliminary masterwalbfence; Preliminary master lighting plan (street lights and common area lightingl; Preliminary master sign plan. IJW.n Nea nPlanned Communky DemIaMem Plan 11 -30 -12 19 MASTER SITI: PI.AV Emergency access and potential vehicular connection with the future re- development of Koll Center Newport Pas" connection to Koll Center Newport Fountain to serve as landmark feature to project entry Neighborhoodserving mall to include such uses as market/deli, restaurants, and services Enhanredbuilding setbacks to promote pedestrian activity and provide space for outdoor seating and gathering Entry corner to receive enhanced architectural elements, such as a tower Project entry with enhanced landscaping and monumentation Paseo network to provide neighborhood connectivitiy and linkage to park 1 acrepubkrpark featuring an activity lawn, plaza, and various gathering places Enhancedpaving with crosswalks to allow for improved pedestrian connectivity and traffic calming Diagona/parking to serve visitors to the retail and park Vehicularaccessta structuredparkdng for residents, guests, retail, and park visitors (see Figure 2 -25) Pedestrian normal retail from structured parking Massing break to reduce scale of facade fronting Jamboree Road Class /bIM/muld -use troilto be provided along Jamboree Road Posen connections to Koll Center Newport Q r Provide stoops, lobbies Q andportals to activate (BUILDING PAD/ Neighborhood Street and ENVELOPE) a �- provide ground Floor access '?-=� (BLDG. PAD/ Park to serve as hoalpaintl (BUILDING PADI ENV.) Way - finding element from ENVELOPE) Birch Street entry Pedestrian connection to adjacent residential _ EIGHBORHOOD STREET (BUILDING PAD/ I acre publicpark featuring IIi E N V E L O P E) an activity lawn, plaza, and OA RK B active recreational spaces (BUILDING PAD/ Fountain to serve as ENVELOPE) landmark hatare� Park to serve as fowl paint/ way - finding element from Jamboree Road entry "Chokers" and crosswalks Enhancedpaving with m provided as a traffic calming device crosswalks to allow for (BUILDING PAD/ Improved pedestrian ENVELOPE) Pedestrian connection to connectivity and traffic t Birch Street calming Enhanced setback to reinforce [lass I bike /multi -use pedestrian connectivity trail to be provided along Jamboree Road Projectentry with enhanced 1 A 80 R EE RDA D landscaping and monumentation Gi Neighborhood street terminating at the edge of the property allows for potential vehicular connection with the future re- development of Boll Center Newport Interim cul -de -sac in Phase I to be converted to open space in Phase 2 "Chairan' and crof swaiks provided as a traffic calming device On- street pants/ parking to serve as visitor parking Gathering spans with enhanced features such as benches and fountains will break up the paseo and reduce the scale of the buildings Pawn connection to Jamboree Road provides for passive recreation, pedestrian connectivity, and significant massing break (BUILDING PAD! ENVELOPE) (BUILDING PAD/ ENVELOPE) 5 (BUILDING PAD/ ENVELOPE) I (BUILDING PAD/ ENVELOPE) r i Posen connection to Boll Center Newport Vehicularaccess to residentialparking structures to be located away from the Spine Street and parks Pedestrian scale parkway andbuildingsetback Provide stoops, lobbies and resident serving uses to activate streets and provide ground floor access with special emphasis adjacent to roundabout Increaseciparkway andbuildingsetback to enhance the public realm and improve the connection between the 2 neighborhood parks Providepedestrian connections to adjoining buildings/parcels from paseo SITE PLAN REVIEW 1�el .;�� „_�� �MA � MMMM Approval of a Site Development Review application by the Community Development Director shall be required prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for the following: •'• New buildings ❖ Neighborhood parks and paseos •'• On -site recreational amenities I / i P G JAMBOREE ROAD Anchiteaunal Enhancement Zone Nh Architectural Feature A. Nor, n oil jl rl 1' r 1\ r.: IM E 1! aid G1 - Or- 14 70- ENHANCED DETAILS sa PUBLIC BENEFITti Public benefits include: ❖ Payment of a public benefit fee in the sum of $32,500 per residential dwelling unit. ❖ Park land dedication and improvements including the dedication and improvement of over two acres of on -site public parkland. ❖ Perpetual private maintenance of over two acres of on -site public parks. ❖ Improvement of private open space, including paseos and urban plazas that will be accessible to the public and connect the Project and surrounding properties to promote connectivity and pedestrian travel in the Airport Area. PUBLIC rH 4 ! Cu BENEFITS � ►��.� � ��� ��., � � � .��� �, __. , Public benefits include: ❖ Remediation of soil and groundwater contamination on the Property that has existed on -site since the mid- 1980's. ❖ Construction of affordable housing units within the Project that will provide affordable housing opportunities within Newport Beach. ❖ Reduction in greenhouse gases generated within the Airport Area. ❖ Reduction in electric, gas, water and sewer utility usage through the redevelopment of an existing industrial manufacturing site into a residential mixed use project. ❖ Reduction of urban runoff volumes and implementation of stormwater runoff water quality facilities that will improve the quality of stormwater runoff entering the Newport Back Bay. 11 '� 1 1 y:r- ���f smrtc; up REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CAPITAL D K A • ADVISORS LLC F rc; F U wc1` \LIF0V.. � n Location' City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 December 6, 2012 Overview ■ Final EIR ■ Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Progran ■ Findings / Overriding Considerations r'R Certification Final EIR I Findings /Overrides Draft EIR 45 -day public review period: ■ 9/10/12 — 10/24/12 Total of 25 Comment Letters Received on Draft EIR: ■ 10 Agencies ■ 9 Organizations room r1reMraffM- � Final EIR I Findings /Overrides The Uptown Newport Final EIR consists of: ■ Response to Comments ■ Revisions to Draft EIR: 1. Revisions to Respond to Comments 2. Updates to the Project Description 3. Updates to the Traffic Analysis 4. Revised & Updated Figures Overview I JJM� I Findings /Overrides 10 Agency Letters: • Newport -Mesa Unified School District (N -MUSD) • Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) • Native American Heritage Commission • Airport Land Use Commission of Orange County • Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board • City of Irvine • Caltrans • Irvine Ranch Water District • UC Irvine • South Coast Air Quality Management District Overview I JAM� I Findings /Overrides 9 Commenting Organizations and 6 Individuals, including: ■ 7 organizations and 3 individuals representing Koll Center property owners proximate to the site ■ UC Irvine Child Development Center representative ■ The Kennedy Commission Overview I JJM� I Findings /Overrides U:101H011 11 ■ Traffic ■ Birch Street Easement ■ Shade /Shadow ■ Noise /Vibration J:lflJaNW&O • Economic Impact Koll Center Properties • Development Dependency on Koll Development Overview i JJM� I Findings /Overrides ■ Revisions Per Comments: o Updated text, tables and figures Updated Water Quality Management Plan Li Updates since DER distribution (ALUC determination, etc) ■ Updates to Project Description ■ Updated Traffic Analysis: Li Add new related projects — ITC building and Scholle Project o Project description update Overview I JAM� I Findings /Overrides ■ There are no project updates or study results that trigger a need to recirculate the Draft EIR o No substantial increase in severity of new significant traffic impacts Li Project description modification does not result in new significant impacts o No issues raised in comments on Draft EIR identified new significant impacts Overview I JJM� I Findings /Overrides One of the following "Findings" required for each significant project impact : 1. Changes to project have been made to avoid or substantially lessen the impact 2. Such changes are outside the jurisdiction of the City (the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency) 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other consideration make mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR infeasible Overview I Final EIR Impacts to the following impacts for Phase 1, Phase 2, or Phases 1 &2 have been mitigated to less than significant (Finding 1): • Biological Resources • Geology /Soils • Noise — except construction - related • Vibration ■ Hazards Overview I Final EIR Feasible mitigation is not available to fully mitigate the following project impacts (Significant and Unavoidable) (Finding 3): ■ Air Quality Construction - related impacts (NOx exceedance) ■ Land Use Li Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) inconsiste =► INSM D Construction noise levels Overview I Final EIR Findings substantiate the City's reasons (specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations) for rejecting Draft EIR Alternatives: ■ Considers ability to achieve project objectives ■ Ability to reduce environmental impacts Overview I Final EIR ■ City must state in writing reasons to approve project with significant, unavoidable impacts ■ Balance project benefits against its environmental effects ■ Statement of Overriding Considerations lists project benefits ncluded in Resolution approving project Overview I Final EIR TOWN NEWPOR Item 5a: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission 12/06/2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) ydFl•�VJ ✓'��;l �L`"`�rll.��'�J��i;ii;i r1lf 111 f ffTr�.rti November 30, 2012 A property management corporation VaCVVBp 4 Chairman Toerge o®MMUNITy & Newport Beach Planning Commission 33oo Newport Center Drive DEC 0 3 2011, Newport Beach, CA 92663 n�`r � =�QFrdeNr RE. SUPPORT Uptosvn Nev<port — PA 2011 -134 Nay poRl e� 4311-4321 Jamboree Road Dear Chairman Toerge & the Newport Beach Planning Commission: Our company owns the property and office building located at 4425 Jamboree Road, Newport Beach. Our office building directly abuts the Uptown project on both our northerly and westerly property edges. We have reviewed the plans for Uptown Newport and have discussed the project with the applicant, The Shopoff Group. We are writing this letter in support of the proposed project. We believe the project will be very beneficial to the area in general and more specifically as our neighbor. We support this project as we believe that: -A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property. -A new high density residential community will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will a] low its residents to experience a live /work environment. -The current industrial uses, while being a good neighbor for many years, are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of renovation and redevelopment. - Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance our property values and bring a new vitality to the area. We respectfully request your approval of this project as we believe it conforms to the City's General Plan goals for the area and provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. We believe it is compatible with our office building and look forward to seeing this project come to fruition. Sincerely, Bill Cottle Signature Services 4425 Jamboree Road 0 Suite 250 4 Newport Beach, CA 92660 6 Phone: (949) 2507400 or (714) 953 -8606 ♦ Fax: (949) 851 -0450 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Item 5b: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission November 8, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 Attn: Citv 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 UPTOWN NEWPORT LP CONCERNING UPTOWN NEWPORT PROPERTY 1 I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 , 2012 (the "Agreement Date'), and is being entered into by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ( "City"), and UPTOWN NEWPORT LP, a Delaware limited partnership ( "Landowner'). City and Landowner are sometimes collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party." RECITALS A. Landowner 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 Uptown Newport, located at 4311 -4321 Jamboree Road (APN # 445- 131 -02, 445- 131 -03), and generally located on the west side of Jamboree Road, between Birch Street and Fairchild Road (the "Pro e "). The Property is more particularly described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit A and is depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit B. B. In order 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. As detailed in Section 4 of this Agreement and the Development Plans (as defined herein), Landowner has agreed to provide the following significant public benefits as consideration for this Agreement; Payment of a public benefit fee in the sum of thirty -two thousand five hundred dollars ($ $3( 2.500.00) per residential dwelling unit developed as part of the Project (as defined herein), including an annual adjustment to the public benefit fee based on the Consumer Price Index ( "CPI "). • Park land dedication and improvements consistent with applicable State law and Municipal Code provisions, including the dedication and improvement of over two (2) acres of on -site public parkland. • Perpetual private maintenance of over two (2) acres of on -site public parks. I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 -I- Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT • Improvement of private open space, including paseos and urban plazas that will be accessible to the public and connect the Project and surrounding properties to promote connectivity and pedestrian travel in the Airport Area. • Remediation of soil and groundwater contamination on the Property that has existed on -site since the mid - 1980'x. • Reduction in greenhouse gases generated within the Airport Area. • Reduction in electric, gas, water and sewer utility usage through the redevelopment of an existing industrial manufacturing site into a residential mixed use project. • Reduction of urban runoff volumes and implementation of stormwater runoff water quality facilities that will improve the quality of stormwater runoff entering the Newport Back Bay. • Construction of affordable housing units within the Project that will provide affordable housing opportunities to Newport Beach residents. E. This Agreement is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan, including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the Property as "Mixed -Use Horizontal -2," Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan, and the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan that is being adopted and approved by the City Council concurrently with its approval of this Agreement in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate land use and development of the Property consistent with the General Plan. F. In recognition of the significant public benefits that this Agreement provides, the City Council has found 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 and has been approved consistent with the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119) and the final Environmental Impact Report (No. ER2012 -001) (SCH #20 1 005 1 094) ( "EIR ") that has been certified or is being certified for approval by the City Council on or before the Agreement Date, both 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. G. On , 2012, City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Agreement, made findings and determinations with respect to this Agreement, and recommended to the City Council that the City Council approve this Agreement. H. On , 2012, the City Council also held a public hearing on this Agreement and considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Landowner, and members of the public. On , 2012, consistent with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3O 2 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Statute and Development Agreement Ordinance, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. (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 and Landowner 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: "Action" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.10 of this Agreement. "Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. approving and adopting this Agreement. "Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended from time to rime. "Agreement Date" shall mean the date first written above, which date is the date the City Council adopted the Adopting Ordinance. "CEO A" 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.), as the same may be amended from time to time. "CftZ" shall mean the City of Newport Beach, a California charter city, and any successor or assignee of the rights and obligations of the City of Newport Beach hereunder. "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 for all urban consumers (all items) for the smallest geographic area that includes the City 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, 1 izeamQ I .16120'111 v3 3 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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. "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 the 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) Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001 which consists of Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures (dated ---- ---+November 30 2012), Design Guidelines (dated November 30 2012 ), and Phasing Plan (dated November _30,2012)-_(3) Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003; (4) Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002; (5) Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001; (6) Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005; (7) Site Plan (dated -9 -19- 2012); (11) Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #20 1 005 1 094); and (12) all conditions of approval and all mitigation measures approved for the Project on or before the Agreement Date. "Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as of the Effective 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 Effective Date that impairs or restricts Landowner's rights set forth in this Agreement, unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized by this Agreement or is agreed to by Landowner 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 inclusionary housing), and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning, zoning and density bonus), but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code, including I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 the 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 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 such Development Regulations and becomes effective, if applicable; (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the validity or legality 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, and/or the applicable Development Regulations, whether 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 seq., 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 sec ., 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 seq., as amended; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 2601 et se g., 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 sea., 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 et seq., as amended; and California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et sec . "General Plan" shall mean City's 2006 General Plan adopted by the City Council on July 25, 2006, by Resolution No. 2006 -76, excluding any amendment after the Effective Date that impairs or restricts Landowner's rights set forth in this Agreement, unless such amendment is expressly authorized by this Agreement, is authorized by Sections 8 or 9, or is specifically 12/6201 I.16120' 1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 5 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT agreed to by Landowner. The Land Use Plan of the Land Use Element of the General Plan was approved by City voters in a general election on November 7, 2006. "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. "Landowner" shall mean Uptown Newport LP, a Delaware limited partnership, and any successor or assignee to all or any portion of the right, title, and interest of Uptown Newport LP in and to ownership of all or a portion of the Property. "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. "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. "Party" or "Parties" shall mean either City or Landowner or both, as determined by the context. "Project" shall mean all on -site and off -site improvements that Landowner is authorized and/or required to construct with respect to each parcel of 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. "Pro e " is described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B. "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 Landowner is required to obtain to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property after the Agreement Date consistent with the Development Regulations and this Agreement, with the understanding that except as expressly set forth herein City shall not have the right subsequent to the Effective Date and during the Term of this Agreement to adopt or impose requirements for any such Subsequent Development Approvals that do not exist as of the Agreement Date. "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. I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 6 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2. General Provisions. 2.1 Plan Consistency, Zoning Implementation. This Agreement and the Development Regulations applicable to the Property will cause City's zoning and other land use regulations for the Property to be consistent with the General Plan. 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. 2.3 Landowner Representations and Warranties Regarding Ownership of the Property and Related Matters Pertaining to this Agreement. Landowner and each person executing this Agreement on behalf of Landowner hereby represents and warrants to City as follows: (i) that Landowner is the owner of the fee simple title to the Property; (ii) if Landowner or any co -owner comprising Landowner is a legal entity that such entity is duly formed and existing and is authorized to do business in the State of California; (iii) if Landowner or any co -owner comprising Landowner is 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 Landowner to enter into this Agreement have been taken and that Landowner has the legal authority to enter into this Agreement; (v) that Landowner'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 Landowner or any person or entity comprising Landowner has to any third party; (vi) that neither Landowner nor any co- owner comprising Landowner is the subject of any voluntary or involuntary petition; and (vii) that Landowner has no actual knowledge of any pending or threatened claims of any person or entity affecting the validity of any of the representations and warranties set forth in clauses (i)- (vi), inclusive, or affecting Landowner's authority or 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 shall terminate on the "Termination Date." Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if either Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date of this Agreement 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 Parry'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 I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 7 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT termination to the other Party, in which event neither Party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder except that Landowner'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 similarly be null and void at such time. The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) the fifteenth (15th) anniversary of the Effective Date, as said date may be extended in accordance with Section 5.1 of this Agreement; (ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in accordance with Articles 5, 7, and/or Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or 65868 of the Development Agreement Statute; (iii) as to any separate legal lot within the Property (but not as to the balance of the Property or the portion thereof that remains subject to this Agreement at such time), upon the "Lot Termination Date" (defined below); or (iv) completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including Owner'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. As used herein, the tern "Lot Termination Date" for any separate legal lot within the Property means the date on which all of the following conditions have been satisfied with respect to said lot: (i) the lot has been finally subdivided and sold or leased (for a period longer than one year), individually or in a "bulk" of four or fewer lots, to a member of the public or other ultimate user; (ii) a final Certificate of Occupancy or "Release of Utilities" has been issued for the building or buildings approved for construction on said lot. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 13.10 (as well as any other Landowner 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, Landowner 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 (herein, the "Public Benefit Fee ") in the sum of Thirty -Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($32,500.00) per residential dwelling unit Developed as part of the Project, with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased beginning on January 1— ,_20154_by the percentage increase in the CPI Index between the Effective Date and said January I" date (the first "Adjustment Date ") and thereafter with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased on each subsequent January 1 during the Term of this Agreement (each, an "Adjustment Date ") by the percentage increase in the CPI Index in the year prior to the applicable Adjustment Date. The amount of the percentage increase in the CPI Index on the applicable Adjustment Dates shall in each instance be calculated based on the then most recently available CPI 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 I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 8 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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. Landowner shall pay the Public Benefit Fee on a per unit basis prior to the issuance of first building permit for single integrated non - residential project, pro rata payment amount for residential projects at the time each residential building permit is issued, etc. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, during the Term of this Agreement City shall not increase the Public Benefit Fee except pursuant to the CPI Index as stated in this Section 3.1. Landowner acknowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to pay the Public Benefit Fee, 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 Landowner's vesting rights to be acquired hereunder, and that Landowner expressly waives any constitutional, statutory, or common law right it might have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the payment of such fee 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 Landowner's default, if Landowner shall fail to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee 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 Other Public Benefits. In addition to the Public Benefit Fee, the direct and indirect benefits City expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement are as follows: 3.2.1 Park Land Dedication and Improvements. Based upon the number of residential dwelling units approved in the Development Plan, City calculated that Landowner's park land dedication for the Project pursuant to the City General Plan, Government Code Section 66477 ( "Quimby Act ") and Municipal Code Chapter 19.52 is 13.62 acres. City acknowledges that Landowner's performance of its obligations as set forth in this section satisfies all of Landowner's General Plan, Quimby Act and Municipal Code Chapter 19.52 obligations governing park land dedication and fees. City acknowledges that Landowner shall be eligible to receive credit against the payment of fees or dedication of land consistent with the General Plan, Quimby Act and Municipal Code Chapter 19.52. As of the Effective Date, the established fair market value per acre figure used in assessing in -lieu of park dedication fees equals Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000). Landowner fees and credit shall be based on the established Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000) per acre. Landowner shall undertake the following: i. On -Site Parks. Landowner shall construct and improve two (2), one (1) acre parks within the Property pursuant to the Development Plan. Landowner shall offer the two (2) on -site parks to the City for dedication in fee simple, and City shall accept Landowner's offer for dedication provided that the parks have been completed in accordance with the Development Plan. The parks may be offered for dedication and accepted by the City either together as one action or separately at different rimes. The two (2) parks shall be privately I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 9 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT maintained (by Landowner or a private master association) in perpetuity and in accordance with the Development Plan as set forth in a separate written maintenance and license agreement approved to form by the City Attorney that grants Landowner and/or a private master association access to the parks and the park facilities, including drainage and stormwater runoff facilities, for operation and maintenance. The maintenance and license agreement shall provide for Landowner or master association's responsibility for maintaining stormwater and water quality improvements in perpetuity and in accordance with the Development Plan. Landowner shall be eligible to receive credit against the payment of fees or dedication of land for park construction and dedication. The dollar amount of the credit shall be based on land value and final park construction and improvement costs, (excluding land value), which shall be review and approved by the Community Development Director and shall include, but not be limited to, the cost to design, engineer, construct, install, supervise and inspect the park and improvements, including any permit and inspection fees to be paid to City with respect thereto and the cost of obtaining and maintaining in effect security instruments for the work. The credit shall be determined by the Community Development Director at the time the City accepts the offer of dedication. ii. Public Recreational Open Space Areas. Landowner shall construct and improve public recreational open space areas pursuant to the Development Plan. Public recreational open space areas shall be open to the public but privately owned and maintained by Landowner or a private master association in perpetuity and in accordance with the Development Plan. Pursuant to General Plan land use policy 6.15.16, Landowner may be eligible to receive up to thirty percent (30 %) credit; against the payment of fees or dedication of land for such open space recreational areas. The dollar amount of the credit shall be based on land value established by multiplying the eligible acreage by Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000). The percentage credit and the eligible acreage shall be determined by the Community Development Director at the time final improvement plans are approved. The acreage of open space that is accessible to the public during daylight hours, visible from public rights -of -way and of sufficient size to accommodate recreational use by the public may be eligible for credit. Public open space recreational area construction costs shall not be considered for credit. iii. Private Recreational Amenities. Landowner shall construct and improve private recreational amenities and open space pursuant to the Development Plan. Private recreational amenities shall be privately owned and maintained in perpetuity by Landowner or a private master association. For private recreational amenities, Landowner may be eligible to receive up to twenty percent (20 %) credit against the payment of fees or dedication of land. The dollar amount of the credit shall be based on land value established by multiplying the eligible acreage by Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000). The percentage credit and the eligible acreage shall be determined by the Community Development Director at the time building plans are submitted. Credited private recreational facilities include active recreation facilities such as playfields, turfed play areas, tot lots, recreation buildings, swimming pools and playing courts, and similar facilities. Privately maintained bicycle or hiking trails that connect to trails outside the Property and which are open to the public shall be eligible. Passive open space, such as setback areas and passive greenbelts shall not be eligible. iv. In -lieu of parkland dedication fees shall be paid to the City prior to the reeRrdatiRs of of building permits. Payment shall be made for all and included on any final map(s) at the time that the first building permit is issued for any single unit 12/6120Q I, 16x2011' 01� vav3 10 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT included on a final map(s). The fee amount shall be based on the pro -rated gross acreage of the final map minus any parkland dedication and applicable credits for recreational improvements approved by the City pursuant to the General Plan and the Subdivision Code within the area encompassed by the final map. For example, if a final map encompasses 10 acres of the 25.05 acre planned community (or 39.92% of the total acreage), the fee required prior to final map recordation would be 39.92% of the 13.62 acre parkland dedication requirement minus any parkland dedication and any approved credits for recreational improvements. 3.2.2 AHIP. The Parties have negotiated and executed Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001to identify the Project's satisfaction of City affordable housing requirements, pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus). 3.2.3 Underuounding of Electrical Lines City and Landowner may cooperate in good faith with each other in connection with the formation of an assessment district, if any, and construction of underground utility lines. 4. Development of Project. 4.1 Applicable Regulations; Landowner's Vested Rights and City's 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) Landowner 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 discretionary authority City retains under the Development Regulations, (iii) the approval, conditional approval, or denial of any Subsequent Development Approvals that are required for Development of the Project as of the Effective Date, 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 Landowner'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. Landowner has expended and will continue to expend substantial amounts of time and money planning and preparing for Development of the Project. Landowner represents and City I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 II Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT acknowledges that Landowner would not make these expenditures without this Agreement, and that Landowner is and will be making these expenditures in reasonable reliance upon its vested rights to Develop the Project as set forth in this Agreement. Landowner may apply to City for permits or approvals necessary to modify or amend the Development specified in the Development Regulations, provided that 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 and, in addition, Landowner may apply to City for approval of minor amendments to existing tentative tract snaps, 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 Effective 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 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 Landowner shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property at the rate, timing, and sequencing that Landowner deems appropriate within the exercise of Landowner'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 Effective 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 Landowner'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. I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3O 12 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 Landowner 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 Owner, 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 Landowner has 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, Landowner 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 Landowner and the Project in the absence of this Agreement; provided, however, that to the extent the scope and extent of a particular Development Exaction for the Project has been established and fixed by City in this Agreement or 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 Landowner'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 Landowner 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 Section 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 Landowner'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) Landowner does not waive its right to 1 izeamQ I .16120'111 =o 01� av3 13 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 or Landowner shall provide to the other Party 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 and Landowner 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 and Landowner agree to preserve the terms of this Agreement and the rights of Landowner as derived from this Agreement to the maximum feasible extent while resolving the conflict. City agrees to cooperate with Landowner at no cost to City in resolving the conflict in a manner which minimizes any financial impact of the conflict upon Landowner. City also agrees to process in a prompt manner Landowner'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 regulation, program, or official policy would result in the impairment of Landowner'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 Landowner constructs or installs 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 Capacity. 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 Landowner 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. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City covenants to provide utility services to the Project on a non - discriminatory basis (i.e., on the same terms and conditions that City undertakes to provide such services to other similarly situated new developments in the City of Newport Beach as and when service connections are provided and service commences). 1 izeamQ I .16120'111 Q_3 14 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 4.4 Tentative Subdivision Maps City agrees that Landowner may file and process new and existing vesting tentative maps for the Property consistent with California Government Code sections 66498.1- 66498.9 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 19.20. Pursuant to the applicable provision of the California Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code section 66452.6(a)), the life of any tentative subdivision map approved for the Property, whether designated a "vesting tentative map" or otherwise, shall be extended for the Term of this Agreement. 4.5 Light Industrial Land Uses Light industrial land uses will cease on the Property as of March 12, 2027. 5. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement Other than modifications of this Agreement under Section 8.3 of this 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 City of Newport Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.060 or by unilateral termination by City in the event of an uncured default of Landowner. 5.1 Extension. Landowner may request up to, and upon receipt of a written request from Landowner, City tHey shall grant two (2) five (5) year extensions that extend the Term of this Agreement for a total of ten (10) additional years provided that= Landowner may stibmithas submitted its written request to extend this Development Agreement upland the following has occurred: (1) For the first five (5) year extension, fee efibuilding permits for the two hundred fiftieth (250th) units have been issued; and (2) For the second five (5) year extension, receipt of building permits for the-five hundredth (500th) units have been issued. Ne request for e�itenqiHN of the Property is ..1 jeet to a leasehold interest held by a third ......t.. 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 either Party 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. Annual Review of Landowner'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. Landowner (including any successor to the owner executing this Agreement on or before the Agreement Date) shall pay City a reasonable fee in an amount City I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 15 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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. 7.2 Landowner Obligation to Demonstrate Good Faith Compliance. During each annual review by City, Landowner is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Landowner agrees 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 City Council of City shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Landowner has, for the period under review, complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the City Council finds that Landowner has so complied, the annual review shall be concluded. If the City Council finds, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Landowner has not so complied, written notice shall be sent to Landowner by first class mail of the City Council's finding of non - compliance, and Landowner shall be given at least ten (10) days to cure any noncompliance that relates to the payment of money and thirty (30) days to cure any other type of noncompliance. If a cure not relating to the payment of money cannot be completed within thirty (30) days for reasons which are beyond the control of Landowner, Landowner must commence the cure within such thirty (30) days and diligently pursue such cure to completion. If Landowner 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 Landowner'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 Landowner 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 have the right to deliver a written notice (each, a "Notice of Default ") to the defaulting Parry. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the alleged Default and a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (ten -twen (4 -020) days if the Default relates to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less than thirty (30) days in the event of non - monetary Defaults) in which the Default must be cured (the "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 I2/6R01I.16 -20r1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 16 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) days after it receives the Notice of Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion. 8.2 Default by Landowner. If Landowner is alleged to have committed a—nen menetaf 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 Landowner'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 Landowner's appeal of the Notice of Default is timely and in good faith but after a public hearing of Landowner's appeal the City Council concludes that Landowner 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 Landowner's appeal is communicated to Landowner. 8.3 City's Option to Terminate Agreement. In the event of an alleged Landowner Default, City may not terminate this Agreement without first delivering a written Notice of Default and providing Landowner with the opportunity to cure the Default within the Cure Period, as provided in Section 8. 1, and complying with Section 8.2 if Landowner timely appeals any Notice of Default with respect to a non - monetary 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 Landowner. Any such judicial challenge must be brought within ninety (90) calendar days of service on Landowner, 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 City. If Landowner alleges a City Default and alleges that the City has not cured the Default within the Cure Period, Landowner 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 Landowner's performance hereunder shall neither be a Landowner Default nor constitute grounds for termination or cancellation of this Agreement by City and shall, at Landowner's option (and provided Landowner 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 either 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. 8.6 Specific Performance Remedy. I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� vav3 17 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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, both Landowner 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. Landowner 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 Landowner or City for such efforts. For the above reasons, City and Landowner agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if either City or Landowner fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Agreement is necessary to compensate Landowner if City fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement or to compensate City if Landowner falls 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 either 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 Landowner as set forth herein; and (ii) nothing in this Section 8.7 is intended or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict 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. 8.8 Additional City Remedy for Landowner's Default. In the event of any Default by Landowner, 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 Landowner's Default without recourse from Landowner or its successors or assigns. 8.9 No Personal Liability of City Officials, Employees, or Agents. 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 recover all of its actual and reasonable 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 expert witness fees, attorneys' fees, and costs of investigation and preparation before initiation of the Action. The right to recover these costs and expenses shall accrue upon initiation of the Action, regardless of whether the Action is prosecuted to a final judgment or decision. I2/6R01I.16 -20r1 ' ^" 01� vav3 18 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 9. Force Mai cure. Neither 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 Landowner's obligation to pay Public Benefit Fees, be extended pursuant to this Section. 10. Indemnity Obligations of Landowner. 10.1 Indemnity Arising From Acts or Omissions of Landowner. Except to the extent caused by the intentional misconduct or negligent acts, errors or omissions of City or one or more of City's officials, employees, agents, attorneys, and contractors (collectively, the "City's Affiliated Parties ") , Landowner shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and against all suits, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, penalties, obligations, and expenses (including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) (collectively, a "Claim ") that may arise, directly or indirectly, from the acts, omissions, or operations of Landowner or Landowner's agents, contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in the course of Development of the Project or any other activities of Landowner relating to the Property or pursuant to this Agreement. City shall have the right to select and retain counsel to defend any Claim filed against City and/or any of City's Affiliated Parties, and Landowner shall pay the reasonable cost for defense of any Claim. 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. 10.2 Third Party Litigation. In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, Landowner 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 reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and court costs. City shall promptly notify Landowner of any such Claim and City shall cooperate with Landowner in the defense of such Claim. If City fails to promptly notify Landowner of such Claim, Landowner shall not be responsible to indemnify, defend, and hold City harmless from such Claim until Landowner is so notified and if City fails to cooperate in the defense of a Claim Landowner 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 Landowner's indemnity obligation, provided that such counsel shall reasonably cooperate with Landowner in I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 19 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT an effort to minimize the total litigation expenses incurred by Landowner. In the event either City or Landowner recovers any attorney's fees, expert witness fees, costs, interest, or other amounts from the party or parties asserting the Claim, Landowner 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 Indemnity. In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, from and after the Agreement Date Landowner 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 reasonable 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 Landowner in connection with Landowner's Development of the Project. The foregoing indemnity obligations shall not apply to any Hazardous Substance placed or stored on a separate legal lot within the Property after the Lot Termination Date for said lot, as provided in Section 2.4 of this Agreement. 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. Landowner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign (hereinafter, collectively, a "Transfer ") Landowner's fee title to the Property, in whole or in part, to a Permitted Transferee(which successor, as of the effective date of the Transfer, shall become the "Landowner" 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 Landowner'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 Landowner'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, Landowner (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 Landowner and in a form subject to the reasonable approval of the City Attorney of City (or designee), pursuant to which the transferring Landowner assigns to the successor Landowner and the successor Landowner assumes from the transferring Landowner all of the rights and obligations of the transferring Landowner 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 e€f 12/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 20 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT of the portion r outside of the Property so Transferred that are a condition precedent to the successor Landowner'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 Landowner under this Agreement with respect to the portion of 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 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 Landowner with respect to the balance of the Property. Notwithstanding any Transfer, the transferring Landowner shall continue to be jointly and severally liable to City, together with the successor Landowner, to perform all of the transferred obligations set forth in or arising under this Agreement unless there is full satisfaction of all of the following conditions, in which event the transferring Landowner shall be automatically released from any and all obligations with respect to the portion of the Property so Transferred: (i) the transferring Landowner 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 Landowner 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 Landowner 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 Landowner either (A) provides City with substitute security equivalent to any security previously provided by the transferring Landowner to City to secure performance of the successor Landowner'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 Landowner either provides security reasonably satisfactory to City or otherwise demonstrates to City's reasonable satisfaction that the successor Landowner 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. 12. Mortgagee Rights. 12.1 Encumbrances on Property. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Landowner 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 I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3,3 21 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 Landowner or other affirmative covenants of Landowner, 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 Landowner 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 Landowner of its obligations set forth in this Agreement. Each Mortgagee shall have a further right, but not an obligation, to cure the Default within thirty (30) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a monetary Default and within sixty (60) 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 sixty (60) days after obtaining possession and, except in case of emergency or to protect the public 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 sixty (60) -day period. In the case of a non - monetary Default that cannot with diligence be remedied or cured within sixty (60) 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 sixty (60) days and diligently prosecutes the cure to completion. 13. Miscellaneous Terms. 13.1 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 in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, and postage prepaid; or delivered 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: I2/6R01I.16 120'1 'I_ 'g'201 v_O 22 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO CITY: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Post Office Box 1768 With a copy to: TO LANDOWNER: With a copy to: Newport Beach, California 92663 -3884 Attn: City Manager City Attorney City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Post Office Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92663 -3884 Uptown Newport, LP c/o The Shopoff Group, L.P 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700 Irvine, CA 92614 Attn: William A. Shopoff Jackson DeMarco Tidus Peckenpaugh 2030 Main Street, 12th Floor Irvine, CA 92614 Attn: Gregory P. Powers, Esq. Either Party may change the address stated in this Section 13.1 by delivering notice to the other Party in the manner provided in this Section 13.1, 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. 13.2 Project as Private Undertaking, The Development of the Project is a private undertaking. Neither Party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect, and each Party is 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 of the property. 13.3 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. 1 izeamQ I .16120'111 <Q O 23 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 13.4 Estoppel Certificates. At any time, either 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. 13.5 Rules of Construction. The singular includes the plural; the masculine and neuter include the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; and "may" is permissive. 13.6 Time Is of the Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 13.7 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. 13.8 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two 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 and the same agreement. 13.9 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 except for the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (No. AH2012 -001). 13.10 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 1 izeamQ I .16120'111 _ O 24 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 neither 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 Landowner shall not receive any of the benefits of this Agreement if any of Landowner'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 Landowner shall cooperate as required, despite this Agreement, should third party litigation result in the nonperformance of Landowner's obligations under this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 13.10 shall apply regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs and after the Termination Date. 13.11 Construction. This Agreement has been drafted after extensive negotiation and revision. Both City and Landowner are sophisticated parties who were represented by independent counsel throughout the negotiations or City and Landowner had the opportunity to be so represented and voluntarily chose to not be so represented. City and Landowner each agree and acknowledge that the terms of this Agreement are fair and reasonable, taking into account their respective purposes, terms, and conditions. This Agreement shall therefore be construed as a whole consistent with its fair meaning, and no principle or presumption of contract construction or interpretation shall be used to construe the whole or any part of this Agreement in favor of or against either Party. 13.12 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 13.12 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 Section 11. 13.13 No Third Party Beneficiaries. The only Parties to this Agreement are City and Landowner. 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. 13.14 Applicable Law and Venue. I2/6R01I.16 120'1 ' ^ 01� v3O 25 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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. 13.15 Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 13.16 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: EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION A Legal Description of Property B Depiction of the Property 13.17 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] I2/6R01I.16 -20r1 ' ^"01� v3,3 26 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SIGNATURE PAGE TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT "LANDOWNER" UPTOWN NEWPORT LP, a Delaware limited partnership By: G &I VI NEWPORT CORP., a Delaware corporation, its General Partner By: _ Name: Its: "CITY" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH IM Its: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Aaron Harp, City Attorney I2/6R01I.16 -20r1 ' ^"01� v3,3 27 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared and , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be—the—persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities and that by their signature on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf of which the persons 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. Notary Public in and for said County and State STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared on the basis of satisfactory evidence to and , who proved to me be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities and that by their signature on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf of which the persons 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. Notary Public in and for said County and State 1 izeamQ 20. -1 01? v2 -28- Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY [TO BE INSERTED[ 12/6Q0Q 20'11 01? v2 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B DEPICTION OF PROPERTY [TO BE INSERTED] 12/ 6/ 201 z1- z;......,,. „��......... . +z Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Definitions ........................................................................................... ..............................3 2. General Provisions .............................................................................. ..............................7 2.1 Plan Consistency, Zoning Implementation ............................. ..............................7 2.2 Binding Effect of Agreement .................................................. ..............................7 2.3 Landowner Representations and Warranties Regarding Ownership of the Property and Related Matters Pertaining to this Agreement .. ..............................7 2.4 Term ........................................................................................ ..............................7 3. Public Benefits .................................................................................... ..............................8 3.1 Public Benefit Fee ................................................................... ..............................8 3.2 Other Public Benefits .............................................................. ..............................9 4. Development of Project ..................................................................... .............................11 4.1 Applicable Regulations; Landowner's Vested Rights and City's Reservation of Discretion With Respect to Subsequent Development Approvals............................................................................. ............................... 11 4.2 No Conflicting Enactments .................................................... .............................12 4.3 Reservations of Authority ...................................................... .............................13 4.4 Tentative Subdivision Maps .................................................. .............................15 5. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement ......................15 6. Enf orcement ....................................................................................... .............................16 7. Annual Review of Landowner's Compliance With Agreement ........ .............................16 7.1 General ................................................................................... .............................16 7.2 Landowner Obligation to Demonstrate Good Faith Compliance .......................16 7.3 Procedure ............................................................................... .............................16 7.4 Annual Review a Non- Exclusive Means for Determining and Requiring Cure of Landowner's Default ................................................ .............................17 8. Events of Default ............................................................................... .............................17 8.1 General Provisions ................................................................. .............................17 8.2 Default by Landowner ........................................................... .............................17 8.3 City's Option to Terminate Agreement ................................. .............................17 8.4 Default by City ....................................................................... .............................18 8.5 Waiver .................................................................................... .............................18 8.6 Specific Performance Remedy ............................................... .............................18 8.7 Monetary Damages ................................................................ .............................18 8.8 Additional City Remedy for Landowner's Default ............... .............................19 8.9 No Personal Liability of City Officials„ Employees, or Agents ........................19 8.10 Recovery of Legal Expenses by Prevailing Party in Any Action .......................19 a ForceMajeure .................................................................................... .............................19 4 12/6/20121 -2 „^c 12 In a I I/A 0�2 12 Q -1 Attachment PC 1 - L REVISED DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 10. Indemnity Obligations of Landowner ................................................ .............................19 10.1 .......................................................... ............................... ........................ ............19 10.2 Third Party Litigation ............................................................ .............................20 11. Assignment ........................................................................................ .............................21 12. Mortgagee Rights ............................................................................... .............................22 12.1 Encumbrances on Property .................................................... .............................22 12.2 Mortgagee Protection ............................................................. .............................22 12.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated ...................................................... .............................22 12.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure ............................22 13. Miscellaneous Terms ......................................................................... .............................23 13.1 Notices ................................................................................... .............................23 13.2 Project as Private Undertaking ............................................... .............................23 13.3 Cooperation ............................................................................ .............................24 13.4 Estoppel Certificates .............................................................. .............................24 13.5 Rules of Construction ............................................................ .............................24 13.6 Time Is of the Essence ........................................................... .............................24 13.7 Waiver .................................................................................... .............................24 13.8 Counterparts ........................................................................... .............................24 13.9 Entire Agreement ................................................................... .............................25 13.10 Severability , ............................................................................ .............................25 13.11 Construction ........................................................................... .............................25 13.12 Successors and Assigns; Constructive Notice and Acceptance ..........................25 13.13 No Third Party Beneficiaries ................................................. .............................26 13.14 Applicable Law and Venue .................................................... .............................26 13.15 Section Headings ................................................................... .............................26 13.16 Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits .................................. .............................26 13.17 Recordation ............................................................................ .............................26 12/6/2072.2.e.� 15004114110120P 'n- Item 5c: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Uptown Newport Proposed Condition Prior to Final Map Recordation, Final Site Pan approval or any Grading Permit, Applicant will obtain and provide a recorded private Reciprocal Use Agreement(s) to assure acceptable common ingress and egress and joint maintenance of all common access, parking areas, drives, and drainage acceptance with both KCN and Courthouse Plaza Associations, Should applicant's site plan and or aspects of the project require material changes which result from the outcome of the procurement of these Agreements, then Applicant will be required to resubmit the revised Parcel Map and revised site plan for City re- approvals. Submitted by Bruce McDonald 12/6/12 l( = C O N! X A N T 1 December 6, 2012 Chairman Toerge & Newport Beach Planning Commission 3300 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 RE: SUPPORT Uptown Newport — PA 2011 -134 4311 -4321 Jamboree Road Dear Chairman Toerge & the Newport Beach Planning Commission: Item No. 5d: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) CONE %ANT SYSTEMS INC. 4000 MacAilhu, Blvd Newpwl Beach, CA 92660 Our company occupies the office building located at 4000 MacArthur Blvd., Newport Beach. Our office building directly abuts the Uptown project on northerly property edge. We are generally familiar with the plans for Uptown Newport and have discussed the project with the applicant, The Shopoff Group. We are writing this letter in support of the proposed project. We believe the project will he beneficial to the area in general and more specifically as our neighbor. We support this project as we believe that: • A master planned mixed use project is an appropriate use for the property. • The addition of over 2 acres of urban parks will provide an amenity for our employees. This should become an area they can utilize during their breaks while staying in the area. • A new high density residential community will provide much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. This could be a useful recruiting tool for our firm and others in the area providing potential for shorter commutes to work. • The current industrial uses, while being a good neighbor for many years, are becoming outdated for the area and are suitable for redevelopment. • Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail and urban parks should enhance property values and bring a new vitality to the area. We support this project and respectfully request your approval as we believe it provides many benefits to the area and the city of Newport Beach. We believe it is compatible with our office building and look forward to seeing this project come to fruition. Very truly yours, R 1:3 C-1 0 Q a_ Dennis R. Gallagher Vice President, Legal, General Counsel and Assistant Secretary Conexam Systems, Inc. Phone: (949) 483-5805 Email: dennis.eallaehertr7rconexanl.com I TAIT l,t,Na Ta TMl CNICCCNlt P 714156018200 w to., corn December 7. 2012 City of Newport Beach, Planning Commission: Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) 701 N Parkcenter Dn.a. Soma Ano. CA 92705 As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, a resident of Newport Beach, and a proponent of reasonable growth, I would like to convey my support of the Newport Uptown development project. This project will have a positive impact on our city, as it provides a healthy mix of uses, brings more residents into a predominantly commercial area, attracts development and promises to bring additional tax dollars to the city due to retail sales. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Newport Uptown. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and co ideration. K. Richard Tait President, Tait & Associates, Inc. Resident of Newport Beach Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Thursday, December 06, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Comrnissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Charissa Earely PO Box 10946 Palm Desert, CA 92255 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Thursday, December 06, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Michelle Pate 30951 Silver Leaf Dr San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Thursday, December 06, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear. Comma- ssa -oner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County and long time resident of the City of Newport, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport- development project-. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment, A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,299 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Daniel McDonough 518 BOlsa Ave Newport Beach, CA 92663 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jeffrey Landon 12507 Holland P1 Poway, CA 92064 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: RE: Please Approve Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, John Hogan 26932 Falling Leaf Dr Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Brian Geis 11232 Vista del Lago Santa Ana, CA 92705 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, John Ursini 1836 Port Taggart Pi Newport Beach, CA 92660 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Vicki Higginson 6 Argonaut Ste 140 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Robert J. Talafus, PE 3 Hutton Centre Dr Ste 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commmissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Julie Grooms 422 Cribbage Ln San Marcos, CA 92078 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Gary hildabrand 25 Enterprise Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Dave Stefanides 25552 La Paz Rd Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Les Card 20 Executive Park Ste 200 Irvine, CA 92614 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Conunission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey ray support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joseph Kody 15400 Graham St Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport, The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jeanette Justus 10 Sherwood Newport Beach, CA 92660 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Mark Ellis 21126 Hidden Spring Ln Trabuco Canyon, CA 92679 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Sarah Karlovic 16845 von Karman Ave Ste 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Kara Gonzalez 16645 Von Karman Ave Ste 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Michael McCann 28382 Rancho Cristiano Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: RE: Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As past President of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing and economic activity in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet housing demands. The industrial uses have run their course and served the City and this area well. Now is the time to move on and transition to more viable economic uses. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will bring significant increases property and sales taxes that will benefit the City, school distircts and other affected taxing entities. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Sincerley, Sincerely, Dave Bartlett 4 Thalia St Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a homebuilder headquartered here in Newport Beach and a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. In my opionion, a master planned mixed use project is an excellent use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. The current industrial use out of place at this location. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. i believe the project warrants your approval. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. it provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, William Watt 160 Newport Center Dr Ste 155 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area, I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Anita Seiveley 410 38th St Newport Beach, CA 92663 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Robert Montgomery 33850 Colegio Dr Dana Point, CA 92629 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Daniel Hoon 3242 Halladay St Ste 203 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. while the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration Sincerely, JAMIE BOLDUC 2510 IN Macarthur Blvd Unit L Santa Ana, CA 92704 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Steve Ormonde 28132 Via Rueda San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Conmiissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,299 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Cary Treff 25750 Pacific Hills Dr Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Dan Olney 8754 Via Norte Dr Riverside, CA 92503 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Marc Moody 4125 Sorrento Valley Blvd Ste D San Diego, CA 92121 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Conunissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration Sincerely, Thomas Steele 613 E Avenida San Juan San Clemente, CA 92672 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Christine Loomans 12565 Woodlawn Ave Tustin, CA 92780 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Scott Starkey 21742 Paxton Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Don Terres 11 Wedgewood Irvine, CA 92620 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Melissa Higgins 2911 N Orange Olive Rd Orange, CA 92865 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December OS, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Uptown Newport Support Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Kris Weber 3 Hughes Irvine, CA 92618 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: In Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Angela Wilson 8105 Irvine Center Dr Ste 1450 Irvine, CA 92618 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. I've been in this business for over 30 years, and have seen the evolution of value - enhancing developments in cities of La Jolla, Los Angeles (Playa Vista), Valencia, Portland among many others. While creating higher - density hubs that support both employment and housing objectives, these types of development also accomplish such goals without affecting the nature of the core attractions of the exisitng city's "image" and history. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Michael Hixson 302 Juniper Ave Santa Ana, CA 92707 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Scott Pasternak 21 Via Alonso San Clemente, CA 92673 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Tom Farrier 43280 Business Park Dr Ste 107 Temecula, CA 92590 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Mohamed Somji 532 Coyote Canyon Way Brea, CA 92821 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Stephen McFarlane 946 Calle Amanecer San Clemente, CA 92673 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Marc Bui 3403 S Main St Unit H Santa Ana, CA 92707 Item No. 5e: Additional Materials Received Planning Commission December 6, 2012 Uptown Newport (PA2011 -134) Wednesday, December 05, 2012 Commissioner Larry Tucker Planning Commission 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Support of Uptown Newport Dear Commissioner Tucker: As a member of the Building Industry Association of Orange County, I would like to convey my support of the Uptown Newport development project. This project will provide the much needed housing in this area of Newport Beach and will allow its residents to experience a live /work environment. A master planned mixed use project is the appropriate use for the property considering the new priorities for the City to meet the housing demand. While the previous industrial uses have occurred without issue, at this time they are becoming outdated for the area and are in great need of redevelopment. Redevelopment of this site with the proposed 1,244 residential units and associated retail will enhance residential property values and bring a new vitality to the area. I respectfully request your approval of Uptown Newport. The project directly supports City's goals for the area. It provides the many benefits the city anticipated for an urban residential lifestyle community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Anna Hogan 3242 Halladay St Santa Ana, CA 92705