HomeMy WebLinkAbout04_PRES_Office_Building_BCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
August 5, 2010
Agenda Item 4
SUBJECT: PRES Office Building B - (PA2007 -213)
4300 Von Karman Avenue
• General Plan Amendment No. GP2007 -009
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2007 -006
• Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2010 -005 (County Tentative Parcel Map
No. 2008 -123)
APPLICANT: Professional Real Estate Services, Inc. (PRES, Inc.)
PLANNER: Janet Johnson Brown, Associate Planner
(949) 644 -3236, jbrown @newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant proposes development of a new three -story office building. The following
approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed:
1. A General Plan Amendment to increase the maximum allowable development limit in
Anomaly Location #2 in Statistical Area L4 (Airport Area) of the General Plan Land
Use Element by 11,544 gross square feet.
2. An amendment to the Koll Center Newport (PC -15) Planned Community text to allow
an increase to the Allowable Building Area for Professional & Business Office Site B
by 9,917 net square feet.
3. A tentative parcel map is proposed to subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot
parcel of land into two separate parcels.
4. An exception to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community General Development
standards which require a minimum site of area of not less than 30,000 square feet,
and a change in the off - street parking requirement of one space for each 225 square
feet to one space for each 250 square feet of net floor area.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Conduct a public hearing; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. _ (Attachment No. PC1) recommending that the City
Council:
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 2
a. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, including the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program; and
b. Approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2007 -009 ; and
c. Approve Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2007 -006;
and
d. Approve Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2010 -006, subject to findings and
conditions; and
e. Approve the requested exceptions to the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community General Development standards relative to minimum site area and
off - street parking requirements.
i r�s r
i
x'" �
h�
e' } r ~�
C -:�
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 4
1►` 09101 I0311[OL.
Proiect Settin
The existing 55,779- square -foot (1.28 acres) project site is located in the northern
portion of the City of Newport Beach, the within the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community, a 180 -acre master planned campus office park. The site is currently
developed with the existing PRIES Office Building A, a 6,850- gross- square -foot single -
story office building, and surface parking lot comprised of 84 off - street parking spaces.
Surrounding land uses include commercial office buildings to the north and south of the
project site, light industrial uses to the east, and a private club and commercial office
buildings to the west across Von Karman Avenue.
Project Description
The project site is located in Statistical Area L4 (Airport Area) of the Land Use Element
of the General Plan, within an area identified as Anomaly Location #2 on the Land Use
Plan. Anomaly Location #2 is comprised of several parcels of land, and establishes a
precise development limit of 1,060,146 gross square feet ( "GSF")l for this area. The
applicant requests an amendment to the Land Use Element to allow for an 11,544 -GSF
increase in the development limit to implement development of the proposed new office
building.
The Koll Center Newport Planned Community land use plan identifies the project site as
Professional & Business Office Site B ( "Office Site B "), and limits the allowable building
area to 967,803 net square feet ( "NSF,)2. An amendment to the planned community
text to increase the allowable building area by 9,917 NSF is necessary to implement the
proposed development of the new office building.
A tentative parcel map is proposed to subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot parcel
of land into two separate parcels. Proposed Parcel 1 would consist of approximately
32,395 square feet, and proposed Parcel 2 would consist of approximately 23,383
square feet. The proposed new office building would be located on Parcel 2, as
depicted in the attached project plans (Attachment No. PC2)
In order to implement the proposed project, the applicant requests an exception to the
Koll Center Newport Planned Community General Development standards which
1 The amount of existing square footage in Anomaly Location #2 was verified at the time of the
comprehensive General Plan update in 2006.
2 The amount of existing square footage in Professional & Business Office Site B was verified during the
processing of General Plan Amendment No. 2006 -003.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 5
require a minimum site of area of not less than 30,000 square feet, and to lower the
parking requirement of one space for each 225 NSF to one space for each 250 NSF.
The applicant proposes to develop an 11,960 -GSF office building comprised of two
levels of office space over a ground -level parking structure. The new office building
would be located east of the existing office building in an area of the existing surface
parking lot. Detailed project plans (Attachment No. PC2) have been prepared by the
applicant for the proposed new office building. These plans have been provided for
informational purposes only, and are not under consideration as part of the proposed
project.3
Background
The project site was originally developed in 1974 as a restaurant with the associated
required off - street parking. The site was subsequently acquired by the applicant, and in
2005 the building was renovated and converted from restaurant use to office use.
In 2006, the Koll Center Newport Planned Community development standards were
amended in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2006 -003. These
amendments granted the transfer of development rights and unused retail, restaurant
and office square footage from Office Site B to Office Site A. As a result of the
amendments, a restaurant use is no longer a permitted use of the project site.
The project site is occupied by the existing 6,652 -NSF office building, which is used by
the applicant as the corporate headquarters office for PRIES, and an 84 -space parking
lot. Based on the off - street parking requirement of one space for each 225 NSF, 30
parking spaces are required for the existing office use, with 54 surplus parking spaces
remaining. The applicant has stated the site was selected not only for its unique
character and setting in the Koll Center, but because the conversion of the use from
restaurant to office would allow for future growth of its successful commercial real estate
brokerage services company. As such, the applicant requests an amendment to the
General Plan and Koll Center Newport Planned Community text to implement the
proposed development of a new office building on the project site.
3 Pursuant to Council Policy K -1 (General Plan) which provides procedures for amendments to the
General Plan, detailed plans are not a required submittal item. The Koll Center Newport Planned
Community Development Considerations require that a precise development plan be submitted by the
developer to the Planning Director for review prior to the issuance of any building permits.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 6
DISCUSSION
Anal sis
Amendments to the General Plan and the Koll Center Newport Planned Community text
are legislative acts. There are no required findings for approval or denial for such
amendments established by either City or State Planning laws. However, when making
a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission should consider
whether or not a project is consistent with various declarative goals and policies of the
General Plan.
General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element designates the project site as Mixed -Use
Horizontal 2 ( "MU -H2 "). The MU -H2 designation provides for a horizontal intermixing of
uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -
use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses.
The proposed new commercial office building is consistent with this designation.
The General Plan provides for the development of office, industrial, retail and airport-
related businesses in the Airport Area (Statistical Area L4), and includes goals and
policies related to development in the City, and specifically in the Airport Area. A
complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies is
included Appendix C of the Mitigated Negative Declaration ( "MND ") on Pages C1
through C14 of Attachment No. PC3.
The applicant requests to amend the General Plan to increase the maximum allowable
development limit by 11,544 GSF in Anomaly Location #2, from 1,060,146 GSF to
1,071,690 GSF. In considering the proposed General Plan amendment to increase the
allowable development limit, the Planning Commission should consider the following
Land Use Element policies:
LU 3.2 Growth and Change
Enhance existing neighborhoods, districts, and corridors, allowing for re -use and infill
with uses that are complementary in type, form, scale, and character. Changes in use
and /or densitylntensity should be considered only in those areas that are
economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate Newport Beach's
share of projected regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
commuting distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that distinguish
Newport Beach as a special place to live for its residents. The scale of growth and
new development shall be coordinated with the provision of adequate infrastructure
and public services, including standards for acceptable traffic level of service. (Imp
1.1, 2.1, 5.1, 10.2, 16.2, 16.3, 17.1, 18.1, 19.1, 22.1, 23.1, 23.2)
The applicant requests an amendment to the General Plan to increase development
limits in order to continue operating and expand its business in this location. If the
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 7
General Plan amendment is approved, the project as proposed would be consistent with
Policy LU 3.2 for the following reasons:
• The increased development limit would allow for development and infill with a
new commercial office building that is complementary in type, form, scale and
character, and consistent with the existing development pattern in the area.
The proposed project would be served by adequate infrastructure and public
services, and the proposed increase in development limits would not exceed
existing service levels for public services or utilities.
As described in the analysis included in the Transportation and Traffic Section of
the MND (Pages 3 -59 through 3 -65, and in the Errata, Pages 4 -16 through 4 -18),
the proposed project is expected to generate a total of 132 ADT (average daily
trips) per day, and a total of 19 a.m. peak hour trips and 18 p.m. peak hour trips.
These assumptions are based on criteria from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition. Per the Circulation Element of the
General Plan, a Level of Service (LOS) E is considered acceptable at
intersections in the John Wayne Airport Area shared with the City of Irvine. The
addition of 19 a.m. peak hour trips and 18 p.m. peak hour trips is not anticipated
to worsen the LOS at these shared intersections with implementation of the
proposed project. Thus, operation of the proposed project would not impact the
standards for acceptable traffic LOS in this area.
LU 6.15.1 Land Use Districts and Neighborhoods
Provide for the development of distinct business park, commercial, and airport-
serving districts and residential neighborhoods that are integrated to ensure a quality
environment and compatible land uses. (Imp 1. 1, 2.1)
The proposed General Plan amendment would be consistent with Policy LU 6.15.1
specific to the Airport Area for the following reason:
The proposed project would provide for development of the site with a new
commercial office building, integrated to ensure a quality environment that is
compatible with the existing surrounding land uses in the Koll Center Newport
Planned Community.
Staff believes the proposed project can be found consistent with the General Plan goals
and policies, and supports the proposed General Plan amendment. If this proposed
General Plan amendment is approved, Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) of the General
Plan Land Use Element would be updated to reflect a maximum development limit of
1,071,690 GSF. See Attachment No. PC4 for draft changes to Land Use Element.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 8
Charter Section 423 (Measure S)
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to
the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases
allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area, or
increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips, or increases residential
dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting
from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases resulting from other
amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown
in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years.
Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed amendments to the General Plan be
reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach electorate would be required.
This policy includes a provision that all General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior
Amendments" for ten years to determine if minor amendments in a single Statistical
Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
The project site for which the General Plan amendment is proposed is located within
Statistical Area L4 of the General Plan Land Use Element, and would result in an
increase of 11,544 GSF of non - residential floor area. Based on the trip generation rates
contained in the Council Policy A -18 (single- tenant office), the proposed project is
forecast to generate an additional 21 a.m. peak hour trips and 20 p.m. peak hour trips.
There has been one prior amendment approved within Statistical Area L4 since
adoption of the 2006 General Plan, which was adopted on January 9, 2007. Table 1
below shows the area and peak hour trips analysis for the prior amendment and the
proposed project:
Prior Amendment
n_onnnc nna ` 19,212.8 sq.ft. (80 %) ` 34.19 a.m. trips (80 %) ' 33.04 a.m. trips (80 %)
Amendment 1 11,544 sq.ft. (100 %)
20.54 a.m. trips (100 %)
a.m.
19.85 p.m. trips (100 %)
As indicated in the above table, the proposed General Plan amendment does not
exceed the non - residential floor area threshold, and does not exceed the peak hour
vehicle trips threshold. Therefore, none of the three thresholds that require a vote
pursuant to Charter Section 423 are exceeded. If the proposed General Plan
amendment is approved by City Council, the amendment will become a prior
amendment that will be tracked for ten years for any proposed future amendments.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 9
It should be noted that a second request for a General Plan amendment appears on the
August 5, 2010, Planning Commission meeting agenda. None of the three thresholds
that require a vote pursuant to Charter Section 423 would be exceeded if both requests
are granted by the City Council, as demonstrated in Table 2 below:
GP2006 -096M V 19,212.8 sq.ft. (80 %)
This Proposed
Amendment 9,235.2 sq.ft. (80 %)
Proposed
Amendment 11,544 sq.ft. (100 %)
Planned Community Text Amendment
34.19 a.m. trips (80 %)
16.43 a.m. trips (80 %)
34.63 a.m. trips (100°/x)
33.04 a.m. trips (80 %)
15.88 p.m. trips (80 %)
46.17 p.m. trips (100 %)
The Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Standards were adopted by
the City Council on August 14, 1972. The applicant is requesting to amend Part II
( "Commercial') of Section I ( "Site Area and Building Area ") of the planned community
text to increase the allowable building area for Office Site B from 967,803 NSF to
977,720 NSF. The applicant proposes to develop a new 9,917 -NSF office building on
the project site east of the existing office building in an area where there are currently
surplus parking spaces.
The proposed change in allowable building area affects the Statistical Analysis data for
Office Site B, which has been revised accordingly. The proposed changes to Part II,
Section I of the Koll Center Newport Planned Community text are shown on Attachment
No. PC5.
In order to implement the project, the applicant has requested an exception to the Koll
Center Newport Planned Community General Development standards with regard to the
minimum site area, and the General Parking Requirement standards. No other
exceptions have been requested or are necessary to implement the proposed project.
Exception to Minimum Site Area
The applicant requests an exception to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community
General Development standards which require a minimum site of area of not less than
30,000 square feet. The applicant proposes to subdivide the existing 55,779- square-
foot parcel of land into two separate parcels. Proposed Parcel 1 would consist of
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 10
approximately 32,395 square feet, and proposed Parcel 2 would consist of
approximately 23,383 square feet.
Section III of Part II ( "General Development Standards for Commercial Land ") of the Koll
Center Newport Planned Community provides that the Planning Commission may
authorize an exception to the minimum site area. In order for the exception to be
granted, the Planning Commission must find the following facts:
Finding: That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity.
Facts in Support of Finding: The granting of the exception to the minimum lot
size would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the vicinity because:
• The area in which the project site is located is fully developed and bounded
on the north by common areas comprised of landscaping and a large water
feature (referred to as a retarding basin in the MND).
The proposed development would be located within the building envelope of
the project site, would meet the setback requirements, and would not exceed
the maximum height requirements.
The proposed lot size of 23,383 square feet is similar to or larger than other
lots in the vicinity of the project site (4320 Von Karman: approximately
12,294 square feet; 4220 Von Karman: 23,065 square feet; and 4040
MacArthur Blvd.: 25,847 square feet).
2. Finding: That the Development Considerations and intent of this Planned
Community Development Standards are substantially met.
Facts in Support of Finding: The Development Considerations are provided on
Page 2 of the Koll Center Newport Planned Community text, and includes a
provision that a precise development plan be submitted to the Planning Director
for review in order to insure development consistent with the master plan concept
of the Koll Center. The precise plan shall be reviewed prior to the issuance of
any building permit to show conformance with the requirements of the planned
community text. The plan review material shall include:
1. Building Criteria: a) size, b) location, c) height, and d) materials
2. Parking Criteria: a) areas, including drives and accesses, b) quantity, and c)
size
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 11
3. Landscaped Areas: a) setbacks, b) walls, c) plazas, and d) pools, fountains
and /or other amenities
4. Signing Criteria: a) location, b) size, and c) quantity
5. All other site improvements as directed by the Planning Director
Detail plans have been submitted for informational purposes, and include of the
above required items, with the exception of signage plans which would be
required for review prior to the issuance of any building or sign permit.
If the amendment to the General Plan and planned community text is approved
to allow an increase in the development limits, and the exception to the minimum
site area and parking requirements were granted, the intent of the development
standards would be substantially met because:
• A commercial office building is a permitted use in Office Site B.
The proposed development would be located within the building envelope of
the site.
• The proposed building would meet the required setback, building height and
landscape requirements.
• The proposed project would be incorporated into the overall development
pattern of the Koll Center, a master planned campus office park complex.
Staff believes the facts support the above required findings and recommends the
exception to the minimum site area be granted.
General Parking Requirement Standards
Per the Koll Center Planned Community General Parking Requirement standards, the
parking requirement for Business & Professional Office uses is one space for each 225
square feet of net floor area (NFA). The applicant has requested to lower the parking
requirement to one space for each 250 NFA. The General Parking Requirement
standards provide that the parking requirement may be lowered to one space for each
250 square feet of NFA upon review and approval of the modification committee. In this
case, the Planning Commission, and ultimately the City Council is the decision -maker
for the proposed project, and therefore has the authority to review and approve the
request.
The General Parking Requirement standards state that adequate off - street shall parking
be provided to accommodate all parking needs for a site, with the intent of eliminating
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 12
the need for any on- street parking. As proposed, a total of 71 parking spaces would be
provided where 75 parking spaces would be required for the existing 6,652 -NSF office
building and proposed new 9,917 -NSF office building.
The off - street parking requirement of one space for each 250 square feet of NFA is
consistent with the regulations in Chapter 20.66 (Off- Street Parking and Loading
Regulations) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ( "NBMC ") for business and
professional office use classifications. If the exception to reduce the off - street parking
requirement were granted, the intent of providing adequate off - street parking would be
met. Staff recommends the exception be granted.
If the exception to the minimum site area of less than 30,000 square feet is granted, and
the off - street parking required is lowered to one space for each 250 square feet of NFA,
staff believes the project as proposed meets the intent of the Koll Center Newport
Planned Community Development Considerations. The development standards would
be substantially met, and the project as proposed would not be detrimental to the
surrounding office developments.
Tentative Parcel Map
The applicant has submitted a tentative parcel map to subdivide the existing 55,779 -
square -foot parcel of land into two separate parcels. In approving a tentative parcel
map, the decision - making body must make all of the following findings per Section
19.12.070 of Title 19 of the NBMC. Staff believes the proposed parcel map is
consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the NBMC, and the following facts
support the findings required pursuant to Section 19.12.070 to grant approval of a
tentative parcel map:
1. Finding: 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: The purpose of the proposed parcel map to
subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot parcel of land into two separate
parcels. As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests approval of a
General Plan amendment to increase the maximum allowable development limit
on the subject property to allow development of new office building on one of the
two parcels. If the General Plan amendment is approved, the proposed
subdivision and improvements of the subdivision would be consistent with the
General Plan and the MU -H2 land use designation.
2. Finding: That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of
development.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 13
Facts in Support of Finding:
The proposed subdivision would create two lots which would be physically
suitable to accommodate the proposed development of a new office building,
and the lots have a slope of less than 20 percent, which is suitable for
development.
As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests approval of a General
Plan amendment and an amendment to the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community text to increase the maximum allowable development limit on the
subject property. If the General Plan amendment and planned community
text amendment are approved, the project site would be physically suitable for
the amount of entitlement (or intensity) proposed for development of the site.
3. Finding: That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will
not 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: A MND has been prepared for the proposed
project, and it has been determined that the design of the subdivision for the
proposed development will not result in a significant effect on the environment,
nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
4. Finding: 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: The proposed parcel map would subdivide the
existing 55,779- square -foot parcel of land into two separate parcels.
Construction for the proposed new office building would 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 developer per Section
19.28.010 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act.
All ordinances of the City and all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with.
5. Finding: 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
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 14
equivalent to easements 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: The design of the development will not conflict
with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of
property within the proposed development, and all on -site easements including
those for reciprocal ingress and egress shall be incorporated on the final parcel
map.
6. Finding: 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: Because the subject property is not considered
an agricultural preserve and is less than 100 acres, it is not subject to the
Williamson Act. In addition, the subject property is zoned PC -15 (Koll Center
Newport Planned Community), which does not allow agricultural uses.
7. Finding: That, in the case of a 'land project' as defined in Section 11000.5 of the
California Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan
for the area to be included within the land project; and (b) the decision- making
body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for
the area.
Facts in Support of Finding: The property is not a 'land project' as defined in
Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code, and the
project site is not located within a specific plan area.
8. Finding: 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: The proposed parcel map and improvements
associated with the proposed project 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 Building Department enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check
and inspection process.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 15
9. Finding: 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: The proposed parcel map would subdivide the
existing 55,779- square -foot parcel of land into two separate parcels. No
residential uses are proposed as part of the project, and no affordable housing
units are being eliminated.
10. Finding: 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 ( "RWQCB ").
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed project would not exceed
wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB, and additional wastewater
discharge into the existing sewer system generated by the proposed project
would not violate RWQCB requirements.
11. Finding: 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: The subject property is not located in the Coastal
Zone.
Environmental Review
A MND has been prepared for the proposed project by ICF Jones & Stokes, an
environmental consulting firm, in accordance with the implementing guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND is attached as Attachment No
PC3.
Based on the analysis in the MND, six categories were identified which the project
would have potentially significant impacts, as follows: Biological Resources, Cultural
Resources, Geology /Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, and Utilities and
Service Systems. Specific mitigation measures have been prepared to reduce the
potentially significant adverse effects to a less than significant level, and are included in
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( "MMRP ").
The MND
was circulated for a 20 -day public review period
on May 19,
2010, and
concluded
on June 7, 2010. Staff has received four comment
letters from
agencies,
and one
comment letter from a law firm representing
the Meyers
Properties
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 16
Corporation, which represents the adjacent property at 4320 Von Karman Avenue. This
letter raised a variety of issues regarding the adequacy of the environmental document
prepared for the proposed project related the following categories: Aesthetics,
Biological Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Services, and
Transportation and Traffic.
An Errata to the MND (Chapter 4) has been prepared to address minor modifications to
the MND. The changes are related to the CEQA issues that were raised in the public
comment letters received. No new significant environmental impacts were identified,
and no new mitigation measures have been added to the MMRP. Comment letters are
attached as Attachment No. PC5.
Summary
Staff believes the proposed General Plan amendment does not conflict with the
declarative goals and policies of the General Plan, and the proposed project can be
found consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project does not exceed any of
the thresholds established by Charter Section 423. Staff believes the amendment to the
Koll Center Newport Planned Community text can be supported. If the exceptions to
the minimum lot size and off - street parking requirements are granted, the project as
proposed would be consistent with the Development Considerations and the intent the
planned community development standards, and would not be detrimental to the
surrounding office development.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the draft resolution recommending
City Council adoption of the MND, and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-
009, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. 2007 -006, and Tentative
Parcel Map No. 2010 -00t subject to the attached findings and conditions (Attachment
No. PC1)
Alternatives
The Planning Commission may approve the draft resolution and recommend City
Council approval of the proposed project as requested, approve a revised project,
continue the item, or deny the project. Should the Planning Commission choose to
approve a revised project, staff will return at a date certain with a revised resolution
incorporating new findings and /or conditions.
Public Notice
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within
300 feet of the property (excluding roads and waterways) and posted at the site a
minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. The
environmental assessment process has also been noticed in a similar manner and all
mandatory notices per the California Environmental Quality Act have been given.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
August 5, 2010
Page 17
Finally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City
Hall and on the city website.
Prepared by:
('Jahet ohn on Brown
ocia a fanner
ATTACHMENTS
Submitted b
Patrick J. Alford
Planning Manager
PC 1
Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2
Project plans
PC 3
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
PC 4
General Plan Land Use Element Text Changes
PC 5
Planned Community Text Changes
PC 6
Comment Letters
Attachment No. PC 1
Draft Resolution with Findings and
Conditions
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVAL OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2007 -009, APPROVAL
OF PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. PD2007 -006, APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. NP2010 -005, AND APPROVAL OF
EXCEPTIONS TO THE PLANNED COMMUNITY GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A NEW COMMERCIAL
OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED 4300 VON KARMAN AVENUE
(PA2007 -213)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by Professional Real Estate Services, Inc. (PRES), with respect
to property located at 4300 Von Karman Avenue, and legally described as Parcel 1 of
Parcel Map, as per map filed in Book 60, Page 14 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the
Orange County Recorder, requesting approval of: 1) a General Plan Amendment to
increase the maximum allowable development limit for Anomaly Location #2 of the Land
Use Element by 11,544 gross square feet, 2) an amendment to the Koll Center Newport
(PC -15) Planned Community text to allow an increase to the Allowable Building Area for
Professional & Business Office Site B by 9,917 net square feet, 3) approval of a tentative
parcel map to subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot parcel of land into two separate
parcels, and an exception to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community General
Development standards which require a minimum site of area of not less than 30,000
square feet, and to lower the parking requirement of one space for each 225 net
square feet to one space for each 250 net square feet.
2. The applicant proposes to develop a new 11,960- gross- square -foot office building.
3. The subject property is located within the Koll Center Newport (PC -15) Planned
Community Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is Mixed -
Use Horizontal 2 (MU -1-12).
4. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone.
5. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 5, 2010, in the City
Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport
Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and
considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 2 of 19
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines,
and City Council Policy K -3.
2. The draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 20 -day public comment
period beginning on May 19, 2010, and ending on June 7, 2010. The contents of the
environmental document and comments on the document were considered by the
Planning Commission in its review of the proposed project.
3. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project, with
mitigation measures, will have a less than significant impact upon the environment and
there are no known substantial adverse affects on human beings that would be
caused. Additionally, there are no long -term environmental goals that would be
compromised by the project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in connection with the
project. The mitigation measures identified and incorporated in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program are feasible and will reduce the potential
environmental impacts to a less than significant level.
4. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
attached as Exhibit "A" is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council. The
document and all material, which constitute the record upon which this decision for
recommendation was based, are on file with the Planning Department, City Hall, 3300
Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California.
5. 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 project site is located in the Statistical Area L4 (Airport Area) of the Land Use
Element of the General Plan, and is identified as Anomaly Location #2. The General
Plan Land Use Element designates the project site as Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 ( "MU-
1-12 "). The MU -H2 designation provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may
include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings,
industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses. The proposed
new commercial business plaza is consistent with this designation.
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 3 of 19
2. General Plan Policy LU 3.2 encourages the enhancement of existing neighborhoods,
districts, and corridors, by allowing for re -use and infill with uses that are
complementary in type, form, scale, and character. The policy states that changes in
use and /or density /intensity should be considered only in those areas that are
economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate Newport Beach's
share of projected regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
commuting distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that distinguish
Newport Beach as a special place to live for its residents. The scale of growth and new
development shall be coordinated with the provision of adequate infrastructure and
public services, including standards for acceptable traffic level of service.
The proposed General Plan amendment to increase the maximum allowable
development limit in Anomaly Location #2 from 1,060,146 gross square feet to
1,071,690 gross square feet is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 3.2 as follows:
The increased development limit would allow for development and infill with a new
commercial office building that is complementary in type, form, scale and
character, and consistent with the existing development pattern in the area.
The proposed project would be served by adequate infrastructure and public
services, and the proposed increase in development limits would not exceed
existing service levels for public services or utilities.
• As described in the analysis included in the Transportation and Traffic Section of
the MND (Pages 3 -59 through 3 -65, and in the Errata, Pages 4 -16 through 4 -18),
the proposed project is expected to generate a total of 132 ADT (average daily
trips) per day, and a total of 19 a.m. peak hour trips and 18 p.m. peak hour trips.
These assumptions are based on criteria from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition. Per the Circulation Element of the General
Plan, a Level of Service (LOS) E is considered acceptable at intersections in the
John Wayne Airport Area shared with the City of Irvine. The addition of 19 a.m.
peak hour trips and 18 p.m. peak hour trips is not anticipated to worsen the LOS at
these shared intersections with implementation of the proposed project. Thus,
operation of the proposed project would not impact the standards for acceptable
traffic LOS in this area.
3. General Plan Policy LU 6.15.1 provides for the development of distinct business park,
commercial, and airport - serving districts and residential neighborhoods that are
integrated to ensure a quality environment and compatible land uses. The proposed
General Plan amendment to increase the maximum allowable development limit is
consistent with this policy as follows:
• The proposed project would provide for development of the site with a new
commercial office building, integrated to ensure a quality environment that is
compatible with the existing surrounding land uses in the Koll Center Newport
Planned Community.
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 4 of 19
4. Charter Section 423 requires that all proposed General Plan Amendments be
reviewed to determine if the square footage (for non - residential projects), peak hour
vehicle trip, or dwelling units thresholds would be exceeded as the means to
determine whether a vote by the electorate would be required to approve the General
Plan Amendment. Pursuant to Council Policy A -18, voter approval is not required as
the proposed General Plan Amendment does not exceed the non - residential floor area
threshold, does not exceed the peak hour vehicle trips threshold, and does not create
any new dwelling units.
5. The General Plan includes several goals and policies emphasizing high quality
redevelopment and new development of sites, utilizing adequate standards for site and
building design, parking and undergrounding of utilities, landscaping, and signage
control. The Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Standards
provides the regulations to implement these various goals and policies.
6. The amendment to the Koll Center Newport Planned Community text to increase the
allowable building area for Office Site B from 967,803 net square feet to 977,720 net
square feet, with the granting of exceptions to the minimum site area of not less than
30,000 square feet, and a change the off - street parking requirements of one space for
each 225 square feet to one space for each 250 square feet would meet the intent of
the Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Considerations. As
described below, the development standards would be substantially met, and the
project as proposed would not be detrimental to the surrounding office developments.
7. The granting of the exception to subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot parcel of
land into two separate parcels, comprised of approximately 32,395 square feet, and
approximately 23,383 square feet can be made subject to the facts in support of
following findings:
A. Finding:
That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other property in the vicinity.
A.1 Facts in Support of Finding:
The granting of the exception to the minimum lot size would not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity because:
• The area in which the project site is located is fully developed and bounded
on the north by common areas comprised of landscaping and a large water
feature (referred to as a retarding basin in the MND).
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 5 of 19
The proposed development would be located within the building envelope of
the project site, would meet the setback requirements, and would not
exceed the maximum height requirements.
• The proposed lot size of 23,383 square feet is similar to or larger than other
lots in the vicinity of the project site (4320 Von Karman: approximately
12,294 square feet; 4220 Von Karman: 23,065 square feet; and 4040
MacArthur Blvd.: 25,847 square feet).
B. Finding:
That the Development Considerations and intent of this Planned Community
Development Standards are substantially met.
B.1 Facts in Support of Finding:
The Development Considerations are provided on page 2 of the Koll Center
Newport Planned Community text, and includes a provision that a precise
development plan be submitted to the Planning Director for review in order to
insure development consistent with the master plan concept of the Koll Center.
The precise plan shall be reviewed prior to the issuance of any building permit
to show conformance with the requirements of the planned community text. The
plan review material shall include:
1. Building Criteria: a) size, b) location, c) height, and d) materials
2. Parking Criteria: a) areas, including drives and accesses, b) quantity, and c)
size
3. Landscaped Areas: a) setbacks, b) walls, c) plazas, and d) pools, fountains
and /or other amenities
4. Signing Criteria: a) location, b) size, and c) quantity
5. All other site improvements as directed by the Planning Director
Detail plans have been submitted for informational purposes, and include of the
above required items, with the exception of signage plans which would be
required for review prior to the issuance of any building or sign permit.
B.2. Facts in Support of Finding,
If the amendment to the General Plan and planned community text is approved
to allow an increase in the development limits, and the exception to the
minimum site area and parking requirements were granted, the intent of the
development standards would be substantially met because:
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 6 of 19
• A commercial office building is a permitted use in Office Site B.
• The proposed development would be located within the building envelope of
the site.
• The proposed building would meet the required setback, building height and
landscape requirements.
• The proposed project would be incorporated into the overall development
pattern of the Koll Center, a master planned campus office park complex.
8. The granting of the exception to the Koll Center Planned Community General Parking
Requirement standards to lower the parking requirement of one space for each 225
net square feet to one space for each 250 net square feet can be made because this
parking ratio is consistent with Chapter 20.66 of the NBMC, and adequate off- street
parking to accommodate all parking needs for the project site will be provided.
9. A tentative parcel map tentative parcel map to subdivide the existing 55,779- square-
foot parcel of land into two separate parcels in order to accommodate development of
the new office building has been prepared in accordance with Title 19 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). The Planning Commission determined in this case
that the proposed parcel map is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the
NBMC, and the following findings per Section 19.12.070, and facts in support of such
findings are set forth:
A. Finding:
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 purpose of the proposed parcel map to subdivide the existing 55,779 -
square -foot parcel of land into two separate parcels. As part of the proposed
project, the applicant requests approval of a General Plan amendment to
increase the maximum allowable development limit on the subject property to
allow development of new office building on one of the two parcels. If the
General Plan amendment is approved, the proposed subdivision and
improvements of the subdivision would be consistent with the General Plan and
the MU -H2 land use designation.
B. Finding:
That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paoe 7 of 19
Facts in Support of Finding:
B -1. The proposed subdivision would create two lots which would be physically
suitable to accommodate the proposed development of a new office building,
and the lots have a slope of less than 20 percent, which is suitable for
development.
B -2. As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests approval of a General
Plan amendment and an amendment to the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community text to increase the maximum allowable development limit on the
subject property. If the General Plan amendment and planned community text
amendment are approved, the project site would be physically suitable for the
amount of entitlement (or intensity) proposed for development of the site.
C. Finding:
That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not 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. A MND has been prepared for the proposed project, and it has been
determined that the design of the subdivision for the proposed development will
not result in a significant effect on the environment, nor substantially and
avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
D. Finding:
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. The proposed parcel map would subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot
parcel of land into two separate parcels. Construction for the proposed new
office building would 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 developer per Section 19.28.010 of the
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 8 of 19
Municipal Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act. All ordinances
of the City and all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with.
E. Finding:
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 easements 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:
EA The design of the development will not conflict with any easements acquired by
the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
development, and all on -site easements including those for reciprocal ingress
and egress shall be incorporated on the final parcel map.
F. Finding:
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 Because the subject property is not considered an agricultural preserve and is
less than 100 acres, it is not subject to the Williamson Act. In addition, the
subject property is zoned PC -15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community),
which does not allow agricultural uses.
G. Finding:
That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the
California Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan
for the area to be included within the land project; and (b) the decision - making
body finds that the proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for
the area.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 9 of 19
Facts in Support of Finding:
G.1 The property is not a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the
California Business and Professions Code, and the project site is not located
within a specific plan area.
H. Finding:
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 parcel map and improvements associated with the proposed
project 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 Building Department
enforces Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process.
Finding:
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 The proposed parcel map would subdivide the existing 55,779- square -foot
parcel of land into two separate parcels. No residential uses are proposed as
part of the project, and no affordable housing units are being eliminated.
J. Finding:
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 ("RWQCB').
Facts in Support of Finding:
J.1 The proposed project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the RWQCB, and additional wastewater discharge into the existing sewer
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 10 of 19
system generated by the proposed project would not violate RWQCB
requirements.
K. Finding:
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 subject property is not located in the Coastal Zone.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby find, on the basis of
the whole record, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect on the environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects
the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. The Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as
Exhibit "A ". The document and all material, which constitute the record upon which
this decision was based, are on file with the Planning Department, City Hall, 3300
Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that
the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2008 -007 to increase the
maximum allowable development for Anomaly Location #6 from 34,500 gross square
feet to 46,044 gross square feet.
3. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that
the City Council approve Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. 2009-
001 to amend the Koll Center Newport (PC -15) Planned Community text to allow an
increase in the allowable building area for Professional & Business Office Site F from
24,300 net square feet to 42,646 net square feet.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that
the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map NP2010 -006 subject to the conditions set
forth in Exhibit "B."
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
BY:
Earl McDaniel, Chairman
BY:
Michael Toerge, Secretary
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paqe 12 of 19
EXHIBIT "A"
Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
No.
Mitigation Measure ;
Time Frame for
Responsible
Verification of Compliance
Implementation&
Monitoring
Initials
Date
Remarks
Monitorin
A enc
BiologicalResoutces'
BI0-1
The removal of ornamental trees on site shall not
During construction
Project
be scheduled during the avian nesting season
construction
(approximately February I through August 31)
contractor
to ensure project conformance with the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If clearing and
grubbing are proposed to occur between
February 1 and August 31, a preconstruction
survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to
the start of construction.
If nesting bids occur within the disturbance
limits, a buffer around the nest shall be
determined by a qualified biologist. All
construction activities shall occur outside the
buffer area until a qualified biologist has
determined that the nest is complete and that no
new nesting activity has occurred within the
buffer area.
... .— _._ sisi
Gulttual Resources
CR -1
Project plans shall specify that that a qualified
During construction
Project
paleontologist shall be contacted in the event that
construction
potential paleontological resources are
contractor
discovered. During construction, the contractor
shall halt site excavation or preparation if
suspected fossilized remains are unearthed.
Construction shall cease on site and shall not be
resumed until a qualified paleontologist is
contacted to assess the resources and identify
appropriate treatment measures, if applicable.
Treatment measures may include salvaging
fossils and samples of sediments as they are
unearthed to avoid construction delays and/or
temporarily halting or diverting equipment to
allow removal of abundant or large specimens.
Recovered specimens shall be prepared to a point
of identification and permanent preservation,
including washing of sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates. Specimens shall
be curated into a professional, accredited
museum repository with permanent retrievable
storage. A report of findings, with an appended
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007-213)
Page 13 of 19
No.
Mitigation Measure
Time Frame for
Responsible
Verification of Compliance .
Initials
Date
Remarks
Implementation&
Monitoring
Monitoring
Agency
itemized inventory of specimens, shall be
prepared and shall signify completion of the
program to mitigate impacts on paleontological
resources.
Geology an Soils d : -- -------- - ------ - ---
.... .... .. . . ....
GEO-I
Prior to approval of grading permits, soil
Prior to issuance of
City of Newport
preparation measures to minimize expansion
grading permits
Beach Building
potential shall be identified by the applicant in
Department
construction documents and grading permits.
During construction, grading of the site by the
contractor shall adhere to grading plans approved
by the City. Soils required to bring the site to
final grade shall be placed as engineered fill. The
site soils may be re-used as compacted fill
provided the material is cleaned of organics,
demolition debris, and other deleterious
materials. Fill originating on the project site shall
be moisture-conditioned to approximately 130%
of optimum and compacted to a minimum
relative compaction of 90% in accordance with
American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) standard D1557 for laboratory
compaction characteristics. The implementation
of these measures shall be verified during field
inspections.
GEO-2
Prior to approval of grading permits, the grading
Prior to issuance of
City of Newport
plans shall stipulate that all fill shall consist of
grading permits
Beach Building
non- expansive materials, moisture-conditioned
Department
to near optimum if cohesionless, and to 130% of
optimum if cohesive or clayey. The
characteristics of the fill soil shall be evaluated
by the geoteclinical consultant prior to
placement, and confirmed to meet grading plan
specifications.
GEO-3
Prior to approval of grading permits, the grading
Prior to issuance of
City of Newport
plans shall stipulate that wall backfill soils shall
grading permits
Beach Building
consist of granular, coliesionless backfill with
Department
sand equivalent greater than 30 and an expansion
index less than 20. The characteristics of the fill
soil shall be evaluated by the geotechnical
consultant prior to placement, and confirmed to
meet grading plan specifications.
,Quality and Wat.e Quality
Jiyde.ri Water
WQ-I
Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
Prior to issuance of
City of Newport
applicant shall prepare and have approved by the
grading permits
Beach Public
City a SYv`PPP to be implemented during
Works
construction, which shall include BMPs to
Department
prevent discharges of polluted stonnwater from
construction sites from entering the storm drains
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Paae 14 of 19
No..
Mitigation Measure
Time Frame for
Responsible
Verification of Compliance
Initials
Date
Remarks
Implementation&
Monitoring
Monitorin
A enc
or the existing retarding basin. The SWPPP shall
be prepared as directed in the City's stormwater
protection requirements, and may include, but
not be limited to, the following measures:
• Diversion of off -site runoff away from the
construction site.
• Revegetation of exposed soil surfaces as
soon as feasible following grading activities.
• Installation of perimeter straw wattles to
prevent off -site transport of sediment.
• Protection of drop inlets (filters and sand
bags or straw wattles) with sandbag check
dams in paved roadways.
• Provision of specifications for construction
waste handling and disposal.
• Training of subcontractors on general site
housekeeping.
Notse -; ..:'
N -1
All noise - producing project equipment and
During final design
City of Newport
vehicles using internal combustion engines shall
and prior to plan
Beach Code
be equipped with mufflers, air -inlet silencers
check approval
Enforcement
where appropriate, and any other shrouds,
shields, or other noise - reducing features in good
City of Newport
operating condition that meet or exceed original
Beach Building
factory specification. Mobile or fixed "package"
Department
equipment (e.g., arc welders, air compressors)
shall be equipped with shrouds and noise control
features that are readily available for that type of
equipment.
N -2
All mobile and fixed noise- producing equipment
During grading, site
City of Newport
used on the proposed project that is regulated for
preparation, and
Beach Code
noise output by a local, state, or federal agency
construction
Enforcement
shall comply with such regulation while in the
course of project activity.
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -3
Electrically powered equipment shall be used
During final design
City of Newport
instead of pneumatic or internal combustion—
and prior to plan
Beach Code
powered equipment, where feasible.
check approval
Enforcement
During grading, site
City of Newport
preparation, and
Beach Building
construction
Department
N -4
Mobile noise- generating equipment and
During, grading, site
City of Newport
machinery shall be shut off when not in use.
preparation, and
Beach Code
construction
Enforcement
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 15 of 19
No.
Mitigation Measure
Time Frame for
Responsible
Verification of Compliance
Implementation&
Monitoring
Initials
Date
Remarks
Monitoring
Agency
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -5
Material stockpiles and mobile equipment
During, grading, site
City of Newport
staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be
preparation, and
Beach Code
located as far as practical from noise - sensitive
construction
Enforcement
receptors.
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -6
Construction site and access road speed limits
During, grading, site
City of Newport
shall be established and enforced during the
preparation, and
Beach Code
construction period.
construction
Enforcement
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -7
The use of noise - producing signals, including
During, grading, site
City of Newport
horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for
preparation, and
Beach Code
safety warning purposes only.
construction
Enforcement
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -8
No project - related public address or music
During, grading, site
City of Newport
system shall be audible at any adjacent receptor.
preparation, and
Beach Code
construction
Enforcement
City of Newport
Beach Building
Department
N -9
The onsite construction supervisor shall have the
During final design
City of Newport
responsibility and authority to receive and
and prior to plan
Beach Code
resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process
check approval
Enforcement
to the project proponent shall be established
prior to construction commencement that shall
During grading, site
City of Newport
allow for resolution of noise problems that
preparation, and
Beach Building
cannot be immediately solved by the site
construction
Department
supervisor.
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 16 of 19
EXHIBIT "B"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, NP2010 -005
1. A parcel map shall be recorded with the Orange County Clerk- Recorder Department.
The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD83). 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 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.
2. Prior to recordation of the parcel 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 Sections 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.
3. All improvements shall be constructed as required by City Ordinance and the Public
Works Department, and shall comply with all Building, Public Works and Fire Codes.
4. No permanent structures may be built within the limits of any easement within the
property, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department.
5. All work conducted within the public right -of -way shall be approved under an
encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department.
6. All applicable Public Works Department plan check fees, improvement bonds and
inspection fees shall be paid prior to processing of the map by the Public Works
Department.
7. County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits, if
required by the Public Works Department or the Building Department.
8. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, fair share fees shall be paid in accordance with
City Ordinance 94 -19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
9. Additional Public Works improvements, including street and alley reconstruction, work
may be required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 17 of 19
10. If any of the existing public improvements surrounding the site is damaged by the
private work, public works improvements including, but not limited to, curb and gutter,
sidewalk, and alley /street reconstruction may be required at the discretion of the Public
Works Inspector.
11. An encroachment agreement shall be applied for and approved by the Public Works
Department for all 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.
12. Arrangements shall be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee
satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel
map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements.
13. Overhead utilities serving the site shall be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate
pole in accordance with Section 19.28.090 of the Municipal Code unless it is
determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or
impractical.
14. A sewer demand capacity study shall be submitted to the Public Works Department
along with the first plan check. The study recommendation (s) shall be incorporated as
part of the submitted plans. Any cost of upgrading the existing City sewer lateral shall
be borne by the applicant.
15. The applicant shall provide a new public sewer easement for the existing City sewer
lines along the southerly property lines. (Note: The new easements do not appear to
impact the proposed development.)
16. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 (or any other applicable chapters) of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code, additional street trees may be required and
existing street trees shall be protected in place during construction of the subject
project, unless otherwise approved by the General Services Department and the
Public Works Department through an encroachment permit or agreement.
17. All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. See City
Standard 110 -L.
18. The parking layout and circulation is subject to further review by the Public Works
Department. The parking layout shall comply with City Standard STD - 805 -L -A and
STD - 805 -L -B.
19. Trash service shall be provided prior to the start of the work day so it does not impact
the overall circulation of the site.
20. All on -site drainage shall comply with the latest City Water Quality requirements.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
PRIES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 18 of 19
21. All existing drainage facilities in the public right -of -way shall be retrofitted to comply
with the City's on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements. The Public Works
Inspector shall field verify compliance with this requirement prior to recordation of the
parcel map.
22. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of
construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and
flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be
conducted in accordance with state and local requirements.
23. In compliance with the requirements of Chapter 9.04, Section 901.4.4, of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code, approved street numbers or addresses shall be placed on all
new and existing buildings in such a location that is plainly visible and legible from the
street or road fronting the subject property. Said numbers shall be of non - combustible
materials, shall contrast with the background, and shall be either internally or
externally illuminated to be visible at night. Numbers shall be no less than four inches
in height with a one -inch wide stroke. The Planning Department Plan Check designee
shall verify the installation of the approved street number or addresses during the plan
check process for the new or remodeled structure.
24. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold
harmless 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 City's approval of the Newport
Business Plaza including, but not limited to, the General Plan Amendment No.
GP2007 -009, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2007 -006,
and Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2010 -005. This indemnification shall include, but not
be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees,
and other 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
any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed
in this condition.
25. This Parcel Map shall expire if the map has not been recorded within three years of
the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Director in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.16 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code.
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
PRES Office Building B (PA2007 -213)
Page 19 of 19
Mitigation Measures
26. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures and standard conditions
contained within the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program of the
adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit "A ") for the project.
Attachment No. PC 2
Project Plans
LSarchitects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Mermen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92880
ti. 1
e
LSI ___architects
xra LADLAw SCHULTZ
B I
Perspective
2 1
Contact Information
3 1 Vicinity Map
6�-,k
Building Statistics
Architectural
Cm.VpCbv iyp. 50.
PrM 1, Pbcd vap 60-10 (R.fbdiJYan N0. 1b)
E.11'nb Hu (Pb <d to }I' Pu" 1 P >" ]' P14'79.14
A.100 - Project 0alp m1 Nc'ray Vw
E,Wb R019q HM flo11d
Cl.nl Re or
lot 9L - [Yrtiq Pdf ✓.55.2!9.16 J UxAe+9r6 )),5959) [I }}, µR5 of f
!
Applicant
= rr.=
No. doer N" 6,65} a 9,912 91 6.652 .I 9.212 a 16.569 91
A, 200 - P.F ,and tom L.M Plop[
Dente O ,ty C"4a,l
Prof. a of flex rotor. 9aJie4 N[.
6.f. Dom A2.R 6,050 of 11,960 21 • 6.550 0 11,960 of 16.610 91
(M-.. S)
A 201 - 1pPm and Roof l.etl Nm.
10006 fny .y
O[b0en[y a .. d" B
W RONWm
4b0 9m Rbmbl Avmu.
K, - Sd,N b,d W,l Elewl .
F'. 20'ml: t Nq 1 \0 b •i0a, 150' U. 40.
A rpve[I le g -1 N. Cendd PNn LMd OH
s ?f'
N..W BeuF. CA 92660
o,
1 le 6o kcel.d w N. wm. Yd
ll F. W.I
and Na Cenlw Nbned Ny Te[I
E,IW.q e'. 1},{ 4.9-95! 20µR 26511E
?;i ✓)fi.
PFmR (949) 261 223E fµ: (949) 442 1925
1
HIOL 9-9' -10 I/1' S0' -f 1/P
0-d. Ne/,4
09.2600
Cede Cemp't ]00) Carernlo Dafdn9 Cello
Cmlof0 vkna.l To,
24.43
Imdp (R): 0in 50631E 4.650 41.43
34.M
0900.00
Ee PbmiL tm mdi" W. t, a rpbw 10 a m1
Po
914191 No -hey
-d 9,.6.5 . o
and 0916.9 net .µb. !eel N mdm to
P^e`n9 0): µ.nr 54.220 44.501{ 66µ1{•e
Civil
wlMti.. NAlkrrgpnl tr
.00tl
Imgewnmlu
"GI�y tliOCi /o N�1
w[anpol. Na Cm.VUdkn of o 3 -aldY orfso
..
Not" • 4160 Gow dw rbno.M Ncrn (E) .WiWw Ru% d10.1 . D.S 4.1 . 11,960.!
Owner
Glace reµ,W
Siewve
b"' p
p-
I �' 1'•
J
01- .iN- bdnvq! .Y m -a:le banmj. Ndl [~y NIF iM Ialefl
Proleub d Rod E.W. S JU Ins.
4e
04.02.0
q'ul,
00
1
11
43Co 9m Kbmon A.mw.
Nlt.pxt 80.0[0 CA 92660
Pbmil vcb4ol'e revelled mooMalyn W nose.. N'oI 1,
l6. CCR'. I .la Pb 225.µm hot 10 As Gly al
_
Y�+ 11 •i �i
��
PI'ma (949) 261 AJ) fur: (949) 442 1025
- Ole Olin. 0 Sion. 0 Sla. 0 Slat
pub. lwl.
Tmte1M Par" Vep:Reew.l W Tmta4n Pecd Vw \ahq IM lot of
too } .tbka of 0180 .w[0. wb mo IQ 911 1N
W W 9
PM�o
9 b" T.
IWOW[d - a n0. 29 Sldlf b Sla. b Sla.
CmIxU 41meY imq
.W[SNi6
Cew.d - a Clr p sla. It slat 12 s\o!.
• 52,3959591, Pa" 2 • 23.3µ2M1.
2 5lao
PoiMq to Na k. 250 [r /.Idh21 e1a1. - 14.6W net .1 dwalp.
Contact Information
12.250 nO .r dro.ab'r6.65X.hr- n.09eaKmm)
Existing Lot Area
U11t, N<Mle[,
5.222810 0. fl.
7
1 Code Review
Zo..
1 $KaM Ah
1 Description
5
1 Building Statistics
11
1 Sheet Index
Cbmo 00 Vd. CA 92625
fton% 49) 45 9,0.
C.1.: &of 645 0962 le.. (9494 645 95N
ti. 1
e
LSI ___architects
xra LADLAw SCHULTZ
B I
Perspective
2 1
Contact Information
Code Review
Legal Description
Building Statistics
Architectural
Cm.VpCbv iyp. 50.
PrM 1, Pbcd vap 60-10 (R.fbdiJYan N0. 1b)
E.11'nb Hu (Pb <d to }I' Pu" 1 P >" ]' P14'79.14
A.100 - Project 0alp m1 Nc'ray Vw
E,Wb R019q HM flo11d
Cl.nl Re or
lot 9L - [Yrtiq Pdf ✓.55.2!9.16 J UxAe+9r6 )),5959) [I }}, µR5 of f
A101 - Vt* Plm
$MLlre SNNtlsed CIA WmAo,.o Splwn
= rr.=
No. doer N" 6,65} a 9,912 91 6.652 .I 9.212 a 16.569 91
A, 200 - P.F ,and tom L.M Plop[
Dente O ,ty C"4a,l
Project Description
6.f. Dom A2.R 6,050 of 11,960 21 • 6.550 0 11,960 of 16.610 91
(M-.. S)
A 201 - 1pPm and Roof l.etl Nm.
10006 fny .y
O[b0en[y a .. d" B
W RONWm
GOU nam N. 6.610 .1 10.Aµ el 6,850 .1 1043) .1 1 },2µ .1
K, - Sd,N b,d W,l Elewl .
F'. 20'ml: t Nq 1 \0 b •i0a, 150' U. 40.
A rpve[I le g -1 N. Cendd PNn LMd OH
(0n.rd Nan MsM)
A bl - WW end ea Dense+[
o,
1 le 6o kcel.d w N. wm. Yd
ll F. W.I
and Na Cenlw Nbned Ny Te[I
E,IW.q e'. 1},{ 4.9-95! 20µR 26511E
A1C0 - eiid'nq $Kllm
W.
a Iy .VOI m N. Fi. oo.T,
to MmI aOwNe ,"for
b N Ia Prefefiend
HIOL 9-9' -10 I/1' S0' -f 1/P
0-d. Ne/,4
09.2600
Cede Cemp't ]00) Carernlo Dafdn9 Cello
and t o O by 1.
8 6Y 11,5[0. rem .µor
24.43
Imdp (R): 0in 50631E 4.650 41.43
34.M
0900.00
Ee PbmiL tm mdi" W. t, a rpbw 10 a m1
Po
914191 No -hey
-d 9,.6.5 . o
and 0916.9 net .µb. !eel N mdm to
P^e`n9 0): µ.nr 54.220 44.501{ 66µ1{•e
Civil
wlMti.. NAlkrrgpnl tr
.00tl
Imgewnmlu
"GI�y tliOCi /o N�1
w[anpol. Na Cm.VUdkn of o 3 -aldY orfso
..
Not" • 4160 Gow dw rbno.M Ncrn (E) .WiWw Ru% d10.1 . D.S 4.1 . 11,960.!
00.890
Glace reµ,W
Siewve
b"' p
e'RmN91E t'dudes bw .IIF'n Buld'nq mMwe, 0.e uead Iw pVYN9 /bMn9
I of l - E.%t+' Site Coomtm. Nm
01- .iN- bdnvq! .Y m -a:le banmj. Ndl [~y NIF iM Ialefl
C6
4e
04.02.0
Gly We. O.al rp�94mtnt+
00
{Based en 1 /]µ) 80.8,20.1 PreJLM Wot
Pbmil vcb4ol'e revelled mooMalyn W nose.. N'oI 1,
l6. CCR'. I .la Pb 225.µm hot 10 As Gly al
Building Description
Py4FQ f'y[ '
UxersN - Q its 2) Slao 79 Sla. ]9 Slda
X. .t B -. reµ9.mwt of 1 as W 250
CenoWatkn of a n.. W. (3) .IbY oIfo. to." cbnwi+ed a
- Ole Olin. 0 Sion. 0 Sla. 0 Slat
pub. lwl.
Tmte1M Par" Vep:Reew.l W Tmta4n Pecd Vw \ahq IM lot of
too } .tbka of 0180 .w[0. wb mo IQ 911 1N
W W 9
PM�o
9 b" T.
IWOW[d - a n0. 29 Sldlf b Sla. b Sla.
5i2M.le. and 54t, V Wo too par Yf. Pn" 1
.W[SNi6
Cew.d - a Clr p sla. It slat 12 s\o!.
• 52,3959591, Pa" 2 • 23.3µ2M1.
2 5lao
PoiMq to Na k. 250 [r /.Idh21 e1a1. - 14.6W net .1 dwalp.
12.250 nO .r dro.ab'r6.65X.hr- n.09eaKmm)
Existing Lot Area
5.222810 0. fl.
7
1 Code Review
6
1 Description
5
1 Building Statistics
11
1 Sheet Index
PRES - Office Bullding
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92690
rATITIM
eev Wwi•4
uwr[e
ryeeui 4 MWrlre
a
K
00.910}
C0.n1 R6vMOr
00
W
02.!0.0}
C6oM R.vl.s
CO
W
012097
Cl.nl Re or
OK
W
00.Wo}
= rr.=
IW
W
0028.0E
CIOM T1.Vo.
DN
C0
0324.011
W RONWm
W
CB
112108
B60Po INvlt.
DK
Ca
1608.0e
Oon[r41 Plon
MM"
AnpOSwl
09.2600
OPA R.d11Pn4
CK
C8
0900.00
O.Hwa PW
W
08
00.890
W.Mnpl
ROVWmO
00
A9
0}20.00
WA
WA Waa .
C6
4e
04.02.0
WA Avv R1vYM+
00
W
rATITIM
eev Wwi•4
uwr[e
ryeeui 4 MWrlre
/
/
- -�� ASPH \\ /
ASGH V
In e l �\
(U1Pmpa.i 5V hi
a
((( `. - -_
' '
9'� 4 ��, rz'rRErI
yl 6, 1IC5'ilrl t' ` y I PGVJ
O n4R LE @O
JZ00
YI I 67 5'
LG'EFD.Fl ^-
6 { \ CI'C ' BAD,L
?ASS ,
a
I t IA
of
to
_
1
L I
.
(Dal (D o
_ ❑ �:'
II 4r` ,/ f}J
o '•fin o� o
'911, �Ij, oX
1111 / I II QEi \ 28._0. p1Y_O�yp
jI1 I r!- I r
- x, - -- -- - fit_ I; �bI 4
1
3
al
`f 9 (i l
II
. 1 I�. �� II I II. � I I r .0 �s
i l i+ 6 tl
3
Role'. Eda4rg Pull, Spats .,a Celled Ly numbered (ies'gnallov. NeA Per "' Spaiee om denoted br a Numbered DuTgnalOn %i n o Grde Circumscribed Atoul the Destination.
Lot Sze 55.779.18 of
3 1 Site Plan
GRY
o-ncE R Ml °_ PRES - 011lca Buffeting
(`efER.'raJ_ 4310 Von Kerman Avenue
=
Newport Beach, CA 82680
I — (v) 8 '. O4 9l 51< 1 Sg q 9 A3C0 = one nxaavaur ce.n. u\e•,
3b Y
Mating e ROVIOw Os c8
0]40.00 agent n
) cAent Review as OS
0143.07 cff..k DK c8
client 00.13.07 CEenl RevView OK CB
001807 Went Review OR 08
I _ 034408 VE ROVUIOne cs CS
104008 Bldg Cade Review DK c3
-- - - 1 — 12.0808 (HR ... I PleO DK. M 08
I I I I o I APA Rch, l
030608 E.. ril Pitons DK as
OB 0808 Oenerel Plen as 09
EncOlesure O O O OI I JI J I�' I I Oa.l >.OB OPA dreaton0 08 JB
0713.09 ORA RevlelOns C3 Je
Line al Bitter 9 6.uho, 04.07.10 ORA Revlebn0 CS Ce
C=
(E) Innh Encmenre la be Reaceled
Lot Site = 55,779.18 of
I I lolol�lololololololo�T I I
Easement Notes
Ej
10' Priwte Sturm Or Easement pq Bcei 10413 Page 573. His Item Is Platted
1
f I_1
El
OO
�
Huean wet Bas Affect the 50anol Preterit
A.101
E2
Pritl le Easement Rate', Page 5]]. Thls Item Is Noted Hereon
e.aw�
5e Affect ntSper tepv0413
, � r____.-
E3
m ID em
10' Priwte St.0 Eoaeenl per Bahl 1011] P., 573, u It Hatband Ramon
�
and Dora 'Lear t he SvSkal Properly
.nun.-
pne�ri stee l«a:way.
H_
Preps<d 10 Private Water Ewemeet as Sham by Pvicel flap. Beat 60. Page II.
This Item B Palled Hereon and Dos Affect the SuSpct Pre,it,
Notes Corresponding to Schedule 'B'
I—I
1 I ti
A Perpetud AN or Flight Eosemul. Semsl'm5 Refuted to as ANat'cn Rights. It and to At
Records,
1_I
Dm Alr Spec, Reccr ad march p, 1964 in Beoi 6965, Page 731 al Official
ThH Item la a..at In Imere and Dos Affect the Subpel Proof,',
1^I�)
u
ins Rallen [onlaNed In a Document Entitled 'Perpeluel ANgotlon EOSemenl,' Recorded
Norcn p, 19Ii n Book 6065 Page 731 of OIOcm1 Records. Tnis so m is Bichsel In nature
and Bos Aned me Sabkcl Ptopul%
Covenant. Condtfuls and Restrictions as S•.I Forth In the Document Retarded In Beat 10011
Poge 66] Of Olfdq Records. Nedir- Hon(s) al Sa'd Coronanls. Conditions, and Rutlictbns.
Recorded In Haas II066 Page BH of Olf bl Record,. Tnis Item Is Slam t ha Ndure and
arch iteets
Dart Affect the s:skct Preperly
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
I�
An Lines Page 1408
enecoto, eaTn wd
r Olfeol S in. Is PO1 std Haeoo Dec. Alton The Sub)e4 Frailest
An Easement f 5l D nand Rights Imideral Hotel, Recorded In Boa. 11113, Page 1401
l_I
01 OPCd R d T II m 1 Patted Hereon and Date Affect the Subject Pmpvty.
An Eason 1 I g d Egress and Rights Inedonld Theres, Recorded flay 7. 1974
In a-, 111, P g 1026 L Ofic'e Rational. This Ilan Is Plotted Hereon aid Does Affect
t'ne SaSka Prapuly
o-
An Ememml for Neandvnq Ada.a c and Root T '1 and Right. Incidaht.1 Tnerat0 Rttwded
May J 1974 L BCCi 11 137 Page 1016 of Circlet ReaudA. This It m Is Plotted Harem aid
Oos Aaetil me SAkct Prapuly
o-
Cannonla Candtena and RusWctdm. as. set F m In the Dounment Retarded in Beo.
11137 Page 1016 of OuOa Records. Tnis Item It 8r corkat In Nature and Dees Affect the
Sulkct Preperly
An Easement for undugromal nacmed Supply Systems and Commudeatmn systems and Right
Incidental noted, Recorded l Back 11444 Page 496 of Oucld Rumcdl This lem It Platted
Huean aid Dec. Affect the Sub}t Praperty.
GRY
o-ncE R Ml °_ PRES - 011lca Buffeting
(`efER.'raJ_ 4310 Von Kerman Avenue
=
Newport Beach, CA 82680
I — (v) 8 '. O4 9l 51< 1 Sg q 9 A3C0 = one nxaavaur ce.n. u\e•,
3b Y
Mating e ROVIOw Os c8
0]40.00 agent n
) cAent Review as OS
0143.07 cff..k DK c8
client 00.13.07 CEenl RevView OK CB
001807 Went Review OR 08
I _ 034408 VE ROVUIOne cs CS
104008 Bldg Cade Review DK c3
-- - - 1 — 12.0808 (HR ... I PleO DK. M 08
I I I I o I APA Rch, l
030608 E.. ril Pitons DK as
OB 0808 Oenerel Plen as 09
EncOlesure O O O OI I JI J I�' I I Oa.l >.OB OPA dreaton0 08 JB
0713.09 ORA RevlelOns C3 Je
Line al Bitter 9 6.uho, 04.07.10 ORA Revlebn0 CS Ce
C=
(E) Innh Encmenre la be Reaceled
Lot Site = 55,779.18 of
I I lolol�lololololololo�T I I
o
1
f I_1
El
OO
�
�
A.101
I
e.aw�
, � r____.-
nnrv.ar•aa
�
.nun.-
pne�ri stee l«a:way.
Bwb VM•. f -0'
2
K300
]5' -x
12'-3'
75'-2'
A.20o
00.3to7
Cloot Review
ca
i
070.07
27'-4'
2.-
I
0728.07
..
C1. Review
8X-8,
C a
a .
C9.: R .
A]01
2
i
0:U07 .28.07
Met RoAdw
130%
2
--Zj— i
51.-V
1 Lower Level Plan
YS R.vIsl..
^ V8' - T-01
08
Parking Level Plan
EHdg Code Review DK
m
ILMS
2.08.08
Oenelel P1.
DK. JW CO
Aun.ndoo.et
7
WA Rovislons
DK
CS
08.08.09
Cenerel plea
ca
CS
Amendment
0a".09
GPA R W:3
CS
JB
07M.09
:v
GPA R..
�
is
04.07A
OPA RoAM...
CS
ca
MIS
MIR
3-8
009
111111
75'-2'
oil
A.20o
00.3to7
Cloot Review
ca
i
070.07
27'-4'
2.-
I
0728.07
..
C1. Review
8X-8,
C a
a .
C9.: R .
A]01
2
i
0:U07 .28.07
Met RoAdw
130%
2
--Zj— i
51.-V
1 Lower Level Plan
YS R.vIsl..
^ V8' - T-01
08
Parking Level Plan
EHdg Code Review DK
ca
ILMS
2.08.08
Oenelel P1.
DK. JW CO
Aun.ndoo.et
7
WA Rovislons
DK
CS
08.08.09
Cenerel plea
ca
CS
Amendment
0a".09
GPA R W:3
CS
JB
07M.09
:v
GPA R..
CS
is
04.07A
OPA RoAM...
CS
ca
3-8
009
oil
LSF.Irchitects
LAIDLAWSCHULTZ
—.1
PRES - Office adding
4310 Van Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 928e0
P.1
--.— 11
n
A.20o
00.3to7
Cloot Review
ca
i
070.07
27'-4'
2.-
I
0728.07
..
C1. Review
8X-8,
C a
a .
C9.: R .
A]01
2
i
0:U07 .28.07
Met RoAdw
130%
2
12
1 Lower Level Plan
YS R.vIsl..
^ V8' - T-01
08
Parking Level Plan
EHdg Code Review DK
LSF.Irchitects
LAIDLAWSCHULTZ
—.1
PRES - Office adding
4310 Van Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 928e0
P.1
--.— 11
n
-07
A.20o
00.3to7
Cloot Review
ca
CS
070.07
Offent Review
CS
CS
0728.07
..
C1. Review
0 �
C a
a .
C9.: R .
OK
Gs
0:U07 .28.07
Met RoAdw
OK
CS
03.24.08
YS R.vIsl..
CS
08
EHdg Code Review DK
ca
ILMS
2.08.08
Oenelel P1.
DK. JW CO
Aun.ndoo.et
03.06.09
WA Rovislons
DK
CS
08.08.09
Cenerel plea
ca
CS
Amendment
0a".09
GPA R W:3
CS
JB
07M.09
:v
GPA R..
CS
is
04.07A
OPA RoAM...
CS
ca
-07
A.20o
-a
2
A.J00
0
17 -n}. -1-. -1 JY -OZ' 6' -6' I5' -a'10'
® LJ —
L r ,
I- 7
I J 1.J
I
v
i
I i
F-I —
-J I
I
_J
yip r j
Elevator Stair el LV'
L
Jaz JDI I LJ 'I
1 0 al
i
�a z
2
0
2. -10{ 10._3. 6. -0. 1 I I'_`3 6. -6. Z)'_63 11 -13 _6 f._0.
]' -f 5' -11• 60' -5' 1' -J' 6' -6' 11' -9'
I I
36 ' -J� I I
N -e• I i
o I�
I Q o A.hll
z : I
I a
2 Roof Level Plan ew>ue •7a• f Upper Level Plan a wVs. •7b'
L SEI.rchitects
LAI CLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82880
F100r PW av
91.07
A.201
�C8
0e
WA Review
09
0720.07
Client Review
C8 c9
0].23.0]
"M Review
DK CB
03.13.0]
CAenl Review
OK CB
03.28.07
Client Review
OK Ca
032600
VE RevW.
Cant r
IL2too
Bldg Code Review OR 08
12.00.08
Gee ... I Plen
OK, JW 08
I
Amendment
209 -
OPA Revisions
OK OR
ceos OR
';
OR ca
I
Amendment
00.17.09
WA Revisions
08 JB
0723.00
WA RevUl0ne
CS Ja
0607.10
WA Revisions
CB C3
Deck �pR
212 x10 I I
one. 011ice
Tel0�0ete
WOmO -
I
211 pi,
06
' 1 C7 .� " '
lair 2
- - Elevator Lobbv
—
202 01
8
i
_ CD
LT
I
I
P
I
_ zN
0
1
open Offle
2H
i
fi
COnlerence
011'ce
I
YI
2. -10{ 10._3. 6. -0. 1 I I'_`3 6. -6. Z)'_63 11 -13 _6 f._0.
]' -f 5' -11• 60' -5' 1' -J' 6' -6' 11' -9'
I I
36 ' -J� I I
N -e• I i
o I�
I Q o A.hll
z : I
I a
2 Roof Level Plan ew>ue •7a• f Upper Level Plan a wVs. •7b'
L SEI.rchitects
LAI CLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82880
F100r PW av
91.07
A.201
�C8
0e
WA Review
09
0720.07
Client Review
C8 c9
0].23.0]
"M Review
DK CB
03.13.0]
CAenl Review
OK CB
03.28.07
Client Review
OK Ca
032600
VE RevW.
OR OR
IL2too
Bldg Code Review OR 08
12.00.08
Gee ... I Plen
OK, JW 08
Amendment
03.06.03
OPA Revisions
OK OR
ceos OR
Oenelal Plan
OR ca
Amendment
00.17.09
WA Revisions
08 JB
0723.00
WA RevUl0ne
CS Ja
0607.10
WA Revisions
CB C3
-07
A.201
LsF rchitects
LAIOLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92880
Ar[e Gak v.
D<nmea w•ece of Ploe`e.n„aea Gem lafcl
Nel Nea m2uloGan - ent aF.allz. [Invler
shalla. 5lsnoi'z, e.krlcr corRacrz or
balconies, ra a nla�t o n a1.1 J
mrua encqbi- .
c2enl Review
as
as
01.20.07
mtl 1 —e e r
Re e01M k;tl ah ct z cM P or
CS
Ce
07.20.07
Grant Review
®WON Poma� 1r Plan [e„m[3 .M.,
lolel Fel Nea of U< pmposotl bb-d.
08
00.13.01
COW Revew
DK
GS
08.20.07
C2en1 Review
OK
2
Legend
O
CS
I5' -0 12' -10 11' -9'
It tos
18
DK
OS
12.00.00
1
DK. M CS
{,
l /
20'-7'
¢o' -a.
6' -6' 11' -1
/
4 z 300.8 sq. ft.
03.06.00
GPA Revlsione
DK
I
/ /
3 e s
14 /
6 6 7
3
Lower Level Area Summary - Net 8.wVB'• *'^'
1
TParking Level Area Summary - Net °w*V °'•[ "'
LsF rchitects
LAIOLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92880
Ar[e Gak v.
���7 A.202
08.3L07
c2enl Review
as
as
01.20.07
CDenl RaVIOW
CS
Ce
07.20.07
Grant Review
DK
08
00.13.01
COW Revew
DK
GS
08.20.07
C2en1 Review
OK
C9
03.24.00
VE flevlelona
CS
GS
It tos
BICO C 4. Revew
DK
OS
12.00.00
Oenerel Plen
DK. M CS
Ann M .nl
03.06.00
GPA Revlsione
DK
CS
00 '08.09
Oenerel Plen
08
GS
Amen0menl
06.9.00
'PA Revisions
GS
JB
01.23.00
WA Revblene
08
JS
04.07.10
WA Hevlelans
as
08
���7 A.202
L S❑Ichitects
LAI DLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 92880
Are. Cak,detlo,u
«C8 K08
00.311.07
Don Nee uti.. ogn - m, deed f m toWt
Net le p-- of plen,e.1 she' . 1r ble,
emcee, e,00-.on, even- .. ,den or
W,-c as, roe contolning[ on meci,s iof
O7.2aO7
Cgent Review
ce C8
one electrcm ryelpman a I 01
me building. m:wry xneas gna sell Ke
Met Review
ON 08
00.13.W
Cgent Review
®too. l plea of peen proposed le,ema
bbl l lea of me prcposep Nllaing.
OB2 &07
Cgent Review
OK CS
03.2108
VE Rev0lan
CS C8
Me LOB
Bids Code RavIgw OK C3
2
Legend
OK. Jw CS
15' -0, 12._10. 11• -9. 19. -7.
AmepJnent
e� ]
03.05.09
of
DK CS
ne
apparel plan
CS CS
Amendment
0 sq. ft.
0<Cnm rt<pCwe far
ben }el 9ulpment
/
WA R.Api
g 15
073309
WA Revision,
CS JB
I
if
WA R.Aslons
5
2
Roof Level Area Summary - Net °Wr °0' • "'
1
Upper Level Area Summary - Net
L S❑Ichitects
LAI DLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 92880
Are. Cak,detlo,u
��7 A.203
snw
�:_
«C8 K08
00.311.07
Met Review
O7.2aO7
Cgent Review
ce C8
07.28.07
Met Review
ON 08
00.13.W
Cgent Review
OR L9
OB2 &07
Cgent Review
OK CS
03.2108
VE Rev0lan
CS C8
Me LOB
Bids Code RavIgw OK C3
12.08.08
Omelet pipe
OK. Jw CS
AmepJnent
03.05.09
OPA Revision,
DK CS
00.08.09
apparel plan
CS CS
Amendment
00.17.09
WA R.Api
CB JB
073309
WA Revision,
CS JB
Oa.07.10
WA R.Aslons
as CS
��7 A.203
snw
�:_
O
L SFrch itects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92680
Aa.o� 3�
Fc
0 @ 31.07
C6en1 ROV10w
08 N
01.140 a. portlon
app of Flan m<IWed from 'Clol
Lmv r rn app .!.Va. - a nayV and
m ma<
...I r faoue nti<h tul s
Pa ooe er.<
C60nt ROView
C3 cS
W2e07
Cabal Review
OK OB
08.13.07
,a . 1 1 .0
mku!aGan an ene Iriel <nl'.
OK C3
06.¢8.01
C0an1 ROVIew
OK CB
0324.03
VE Revlelons
®m-p ea 00,40, m --pal m.ame
total .oaa dno al 11. e dnq
11-2108
aide Dada Review DK on
12.08.08
Oemmel Plan
OK• JW on
Afrana l
03.06.06
SPA Revlalona
2
Legend
Oenerel Plan
39' -7'
Amendment
N.V."
WA Rovinlons
C3 JB
oa
OPA flevl4one
CB in
04.07.10
or
08 N
or
O
849.64 sq. ft.
�j .
a
jj/
j
6
a
it
/
n
8
t' -3' 9' -4' 6' -e'
1.._y.
m' -2'
2
Lower Level Area Summary Gross (Measure S)
8n Va. 7 -0•
1
Parking Level Area Summary - Gross (Measure S)
O
L SFrch itects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92680
Aa.o� 3�
-1. —
,,�,?` A.204
Fc
0 @ 31.07
C6en1 ROV10w
08 N
07.20.07
C60nt ROView
C3 cS
W2e07
Cabal Review
OK OB
08.13.07
01.1 Review
OK C3
06.¢8.01
C0an1 ROVIew
OK CB
0324.03
VE Revlelons
CS C3
11-2108
aide Dada Review DK on
12.08.08
Oemmel Plan
OK• JW on
Afrana l
03.06.06
SPA Revlalona
DK C3
08.08.09
Oenerel Plan
CB C8
Amendment
N.V."
WA Rovinlons
C3 JB
0723.09
OPA flevl4one
CB in
04.07.10
WA R.AW..
08 N
-1. —
,,�,?` A.204
LSD alrchitects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82660
Ate. eUCWUO.V
0e3077
Client Ravlew
DPhmn aoryan of wog- SI.T ea r `Cml
coma N h ,t .oche . sto1.. ao ona
Dr.Olet aMfla unim h
CS
07.40.01
CUent Review
CS
CB
07.20.07
C.<a ma ea:* ea_h heeee io r.ta
-%.rarhh h.. o,:. 1—. hmq.
DK
CS
0 &13.07
Client ROVIOw
DK
CS
o.�o1m notluh of Plan co.mea io.om.
rotor crass am of me P.oPOam eonerq.
C4emt Review
DK
CS
03.21.08
VE Revislom
CS
CS
11.2108
BI00 OOCe Revew DK
2
1 Legend
0eneia1 Plan
DK. M CS
AmenBment
38' —J'
03.06.00
OPA Revillons
DK
CS
00.08.00
j
CS
CS
Amendment
08.17.00
OPA R.WlIcae
CS
49
0723.oB
WA Rvklona
CS
]B
04.07.10
WA R:.11 na
CS
OS
7
3
9 J
19 -10
�
/ •�, /
/
g
2
Roof Level Area Summary Gross (Measure S)
a n. va• - ra.
1
Upper Level Area Summary - Gross (Measure S)
Sattlo V0'- M.
LSD alrchitects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82660
Ate. eUCWUO.V
07A.205
,.y1.
0e3077
Client Ravlew
Ca
CS
07.40.01
CUent Review
CS
CB
07.20.07
CYenl Review
DK
CS
0 &13.07
Client ROVIOw
DK
CS
00.28.07
C4emt Review
DK
CS
03.21.08
VE Revislom
CS
CS
11.2108
BI00 OOCe Revew DK
OS
12.08.08
0eneia1 Plan
DK. M CS
AmenBment
03.06.00
OPA Revillons
DK
CS
00.08.00
Oeneml Plan
CS
CS
Amendment
08.17.00
OPA R.WlIcae
CS
49
0723.oB
WA Rvklona
CS
]B
04.07.10
WA R:.11 na
CS
OS
07A.205
,.y1.
LS[architacts
LAIDLAw SCNIILTz
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82060
Ams CIXWtlem
u"
was
08.31L02
Met Rever
Glass Nw or lc - Sclududy from (alai
Glass A ea "'ca'-se, or P'ao_ Waea arm
02.20.07
C2enl Revler
Cs
c6
07.20.07
eemlcr she's WNc4 o a
ie:e:a call l seen added to tne`es
oa,cafaran an one level day.
0K
C o
08.13.07
Olen) Rever
DK
Cs'
Denoted adman or Alen aaaated pears,
total Grass bed of the proposed euamng.
chrnt Rev]er
OK
CB
03.2108
Va Revlslolu
CB
CB
IL2I00
BMe Cal Revler, OK
2
Legend
Gene..I Men
2l' -10 11' -9 15 -7,
AmenN110nt
03.06.00
3
DX
as
00.00.08
Oenerel Plan
as
Cs
AmesMment
0 &12.00
as 'f
C9
JB
02.23.00
WA Ravlslolle
C3
4 �
0607.10
OPA Revisions
C3
Cs
300.8 sq. ft.
�
^
•
. -6. 6' -6'
1I'- 1'
4 wsr, _
1
3 6
s -6'`"
V -G'
1
m
40
,a— 02 M71111112"M
5 8
7
I. -3. 7 6. -1 1. 60. -5.
1 -]
2
1 Lower Level Area Summary - Gross (General Plan Amendment)
°aal"Vse M.
1
Parking Level Area Summary - Gross (General Plan Amendment)
Da'• * -0'
LS[architacts
LAIDLAw SCNIILTz
PRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 82060
Ams CIXWtlem
07A.206
.t'
(n'1lastiml.` al
u"
was
08.31L02
Met Rever
02.20.07
C2enl Revler
Cs
c6
07.20.07
CBent Revler
0K
C o
08.13.07
Olen) Rever
DK
Cs'
00.20.02
chrnt Rev]er
OK
CB
03.2108
Va Revlslolu
CB
CB
IL2I00
BMe Cal Revler, OK
as
12.00.00
Gene..I Men
DK. M Cs
AmenN110nt
03.06.00
GPA Revielons
DX
as
00.00.08
Oenerel Plan
as
Cs
AmesMment
0 &12.00
WA Revlelons
C9
JB
02.23.00
WA Ravlslolle
C3
JB
0607.10
OPA Revisions
C3
Cs
07A.206
.t'
(n'1lastiml.` al
LSD architects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92880
Dv,niee aenron of a'oo e p
total - Sl.' ,r a m
El" alole"valla seen Ih o a ch e,ea ^
Client Revl<W
CS
CS
07.20.01
e:e me her, seen mega m 1.
,a <movoo 0o no lead( dory.
CS
CS
01.20.07
Co.
Dmrn lm r of p'oe -potse m-mo
total ,asa Aa o of the proposed .
07
COenl FevlOw
0K
C9
00.2 &el
Client flevl0w
OK
2
1 Legend
VE ReWlone
4)' -10' I1• -S• I6' -7•
CS
2
9199 Coee Review
DK
CS
12.0 1.08
j
DK, ew C9
Amendment
03.08.09
GPA Revlalone
DK
CS
00.58.00
General Plan
C9
CS
4
AmeMment
0e.11.00
GPA Revl> lone
n
JS
0133.0D
GPA Revlelom
08
ta
01.01.10
OPA Reviflane
CB
09
7 /
j
6 -111 ..-S. e5-T
9'
2
Roof Level Area Summary - Gross (General Plan Amendment) a sVe' * -0'
1
Upper Level Area Summary - Gross (General Plan Amendment) llpedle� Ifs' -M'
LSD architects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92880
��'7 A.207
08.3W1
Client Revl<W
CS
CS
07.20.01
Client RevlaW
CS
CS
01.20.07
Co.
07
COenl FevlOw
0K
C9
00.2 &el
Client flevl0w
OK
CS
0311.08
VE ReWlone
CS
CS
it2108
9199 Coee Review
DK
CS
12.0 1.08
General Plan
DK, ew C9
Amendment
03.08.09
GPA Revlalone
DK
CS
00.58.00
General Plan
C9
CS
AmeMment
0e.11.00
GPA Revl> lone
CS
JS
0133.0D
GPA Revlelom
08
]e
01.01.10
OPA Reviflane
CB
09
��'7 A.207
8!ack CaP
Smcoln Steel )re... Integal
Ce.r Pneter
Zell, Steel Trolel Inle9•al
C..•., Plaster
Stainless Steel ne.".
TO P+ t
ca A
El, MID
Po1-t
Av
RSV +e:e A
Der, B).a)' Y
—I G'a<4 Cop
Slane Vener
—� Smeatn Steel Tre.el lel,rel
_— 'eW Porter
J_I Srraatn Steel Tronel Inle9•ol
'flf ^I
Cob, P1.11.1
FtA
Bock Cap
Seeona a {gI
159.80'
_ _ Slane 1'eneer
4 aryl. Met, —$
Steel ironal Integral
Co
CeF, Peelle'
Oaahad Cra Netlea E. ;e @g G,.,
2 West Elevation settle Us' T-01
Snmth Steel Tronel Integral
We, Poster al V ree. ' Se,een
Staln%es Steel nagpo!
Week Cap
Slone Veneer
T O pa...I
�'
•� i 0 Parsee
Elr:. 191.0)' Y
flea! Levu
lev. 1 a
Smealh Sleet ironal Integral
reeLl We, Planer
I
nl ln'ua Le':el A
Fie.. +'T 0
0!.0 CaP
Slone Veneer
Stone venee,
no. i59.80' y
Calais, Plaster woler Ratere
I
Fie A
— E e: ;19.90•
Mack Po.der— Caotea Steel Trema
Calvin, Plaster Meet.,
D.Ihed Line Dee.tla Eenling Gmde
1 South Elevation Got1i Oa.-i9
LSCI rch itects
LAIDLAW SCHIILTZ
FIRES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman
Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 82880
➢�,
pevelbn�
ACS
�0S
08.31.07
Client Review
0).20.0)
Cleat Review
CS CS
0)58.0)
Client Review
OK CS
08.13.0)
Coen: ReNew
DK CS
00.29.07
Coenl ReNew
OK CS
03.24.08
YE Revlalona
CS as
IL2108
BldO Code Revew
OK C8
I2.OB.08
General Plan
OK, M 08
Amendment
03.08.08
OPA RePSlone
OK CS
06. 8.09
Oenerel Plan
C8 C8
Ameldnenl
0.1)00
OPA
C JB
0423.08
GPA Rollout,.
Ce JB
04.W.10
OPA RevWOne
CS C8
,4.300
ry!ne s. m'u ryee es�.seu
eloc4 C.,
Slane Veneer
Metal lan'era
Smmth Steel Lraiel Inlegrol
Co'or Pbster of Vechoweol Screen
Bleak Cap
O Paieoet
Icr. i99.160 (i)
i0 Pirace J,,
Flev. 91d)' Y
i0 P +r o<1 A
Faol Le" I A
�515�Y
N17 LeiDe .s1 A
Smaolh Steel tia.el Inlegrol
Ceder Reef"
fieeone
�69.BS
Scone v.—I
Dev.fr
%%!S.
Smeelh Steel ira.el Integral
Color Pleeler
Dashed Lane Cenoles E.hVng Grade
I2 I East Elevation ea.. Va. •ee•
�
mloefMeel Screen
'Metal Cbdd:ng
SlIv Caa
7.0, Parooet
Elw: +99.10 Y
L.o v ravel A
LO�Paro� A
Elea. .91.1J Y
Roof Lcg$�� A
Smooth Steel ireael Inlegrol
Co!ar Plaaler
m:a Ln: A
a:.11 Coo
Saor4 L"
Elev..59.80 Y
SmooUt Steel ira.el Inlegrol
Color PbSler
(i-V Le: el 0
\ Slone Veneer
Selloff Line Cenalee UIVIg Gmde
1 I North Elevation Boater Va. r "'
LS[erchitects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 02000
FLr.6enswro
A.301
08.3 107
cleat Review
Be Ce Be
07.20.07
Meet Review
CS Be
0728.07
Cleat Review
DK C3
00.13.07
Cleat Review
OK CS
06.28.07
Chol Review
DK 03
0334.08
VE Reehlon
CS Be
IL2109
Bldg Code Review DK c3
1208.08
Oenered Plan
DK, M CS'
Amendment
03.06.00
WA Revisions
DK CS
06.00.06
Bettered Plan
C9 Be
Amendmenl
00.17.00
WA RZalone
G-
0733.06
BPA Rav[M..
CS JB
04.07.10
ORA Revlelone
CS' CS
�e =�
�
mloefMeel Screen
'Metal Cbdd:ng
SlIv Caa
7.0, Parooet
Elw: +99.10 Y
L.o v ravel A
LO�Paro� A
Elea. .91.1J Y
Roof Lcg$�� A
Smooth Steel ireael Inlegrol
Co!ar Plaaler
m:a Ln: A
a:.11 Coo
Saor4 L"
Elev..59.80 Y
SmooUt Steel ira.el Inlegrol
Color PbSler
(i-V Le: el 0
\ Slone Veneer
Selloff Line Cenalee UIVIg Gmde
1 I North Elevation Boater Va. r "'
LS[erchitects
LAIDLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Karmen Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 02000
FLr.6enswro
®e�
A.301
08.3 107
cleat Review
Be Ce Be
07.20.07
Meet Review
CS Be
0728.07
Cleat Review
DK C3
00.13.07
Cleat Review
OK CS
06.28.07
Chol Review
DK 03
0334.08
VE Reehlon
CS Be
IL2109
Bldg Code Review DK c3
1208.08
Oenered Plan
DK, M CS'
Amendment
03.06.00
WA Revisions
DK CS
06.00.06
Bettered Plan
C9 Be
Amendmenl
00.17.00
WA RZalone
Be J9
0733.06
BPA Rav[M..
CS JB
04.07.10
ORA Revlelone
CS' CS
®e�
A.301
e�a�
eub V6' • 7q'
/ i.0 Pom el A
Vech. E9u10.
Par
eoel.
"�a;s
EI r. +91.17
7=fl Ve
P
Raol Level A
Wootl Frame Rrol
L. s<C Slru<IVial D.gs.
seetl ruc o l DOr
Sl 1 D10•gs.
R"'. �i
1
ueq t�eu 8m<x CDD
® ® \ ® ® IeW. W3 Melel Beck
/ see
S trvcWra ".1-Do"'
\ Se<ontl Lnel�
Dev. +59.00
51ene Ven<er
e_
51tr V SG Cr Ee
eWr I D•9s.
Em'.
L<v <1 A
Elev.
1B11B'q B' G,.-d Beam
01e 5I —t ... I D.,.
0..0 F..V,
see 5la'ctvr l 0•ge.
1 Building Section Va. •
L SI airchitects
LAIOLAW SCHULTZ
PRIES - Office Building
4310 Von Kerman Avenue
Newport Beech, CA 02800
aiateq 6.mbm
0 e .3t07 e3t07
COW Review
CS CB
07
Gent PGAOW
CS CS
07.28.07
Cleel Rnvlew
DK CS
0B.t3.07
Clent Review
DK Cs
09.29.07
OBent ReNeW
DK 03
03 .24.03
VE Revtlone
CS CS
112108
Bldg Code Review DK Be
12.08.08
OenereI Plan
OK. JW 03
Amendment
03.06.09
OPA Revlelone
OK CB
oe.08.09
0emrel Plan
C3 C3
AmeMmenl
09.17.09
OPA Revlelone
08 JB
07.23.03
OPA Revlelgne
CS JB
04.07.10
OPA Revleloi3
CS Ce
Attachment No. PC 3
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
Document available at the City's Environmental Document
Download page located at:
http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =1347
Attachment No. PC 4
General Plan Land Use Element
Text Changes
Anomaly
Number
Statistical
Area
Land Use Development
Designation Limit (sO
Development Limit Other
Additional Information
1
L4
MU -H2
460,095
471 Hotel Rooms (not included
in total square footage)
2
L4
MU -H2
4TON 461071.690
3
L4
CO -G
734,641
4
L4
MU -H2
250,176
5
L4
MU -1-12
32,500
6
L4
MU -H2
34,500
7
L4
MU -H2
81,372
8
L4
MU -H2
442,775
9
L4
CG
120,000
164 Hotel Rooms (included in
total square footage)
10
L4
MU -H2
31,362
349 Hotel Rooms (not included
in total square footage)
11
L4
CG
11,950
12
L4
MU -1-12
457,880
13
L4
CO -G
288,264
14
L4
CO- GIMU -H2
860,884
15
L4
MU -1-12
228,214
16
L4
CO -G
344,231
17
L4
MU -H2
33,292
304 Hotel Rooms (not included
in total square footage)
18
L4
CG
225,280
19
L4
CG
228,530
21
J6
CO -G
687,000
Office: 660,000 sf
Retail: 27,000 sf
CV
300 Hotel Rooms
22
J6
CO -G
70,000
Restaurant: 8000 sf, or
Office: 70,000 sf
23
K2
PR
15,000
24
1.3
IG
89,624
25
L3
PI
84,585
26
L3
IG
33,940
27
L3
IG
86,000
28
L3
IG
110,600
29
L3
CG
47,500
30
M6
CG
54,000
31
L2
PR
75,000
32
L2
PI
34,000
Anomaly
Statistical
Land Use Development
Number
Area
Designation Limit (so
Development Limit Other
Additional Information
Administrative Office and
Support Facilitates:
30,000 sf
33
M3
PI
163,680
Community Mausoleum and
Garden Crypts: 121,680 sf
Family Mausoleums:
12,000 sf
34
L1
CO -R
484,348
35
L1
CO -R
199,095
36
L1
CO -R
227,797
2,050 Theater Seats (not
37
L1
CO -R
131,201
included in total square
footage)
38
L1
00 -M
443,627
39
L1
MU -H3
408,084
40
L1
MU -H3
1,426,634
425 Hotel Rooms (included in
total Square Footage)
41
L1
CO -R
327,671
42
L1
CO -R
286,166
43
1.1
CV
611 Hotel Rooms
1,700 Theater Seals (not
44
L1
CR
1,619,525
included in total square
footage)
45
L1
CO -G
162,364
46
L1
MU -H3 /PR
3,725
24 Tennis Courts
Residential permitted in
accordance with MU -1-13.
47
L1
CG
105,000
48
L1
MU -1-13
337,261
49
L1
PI
45,208
50
L1
CG
25,000
51
K1
PR
20,000
52
K1
CV
479 Hotel Rooms
53
K1
PR
567,500
See Settlement Agreement
54
it
CM
2,000
55
H3
PI
119,440
In no event shall the total
1,343,238
990,349 sf Upper Campus
combined gross floor area of
56
A3
PI
577,889 sf Lower Campus
both campuses exceed the
development limit of
1,343,238 sq. ft.
57
Intentionally Blank
58
J5
I PR 20,000
.. -
MW
Statistical
Area
Land Use
Designation
Development'
Limit (so
Development Limit (Other)
Anomaly
Number
`
Additional In formation
59
H4
MU -W1
487,402
157 Hotel Rooms and 144
Dwelling Units (included in total
square footage)
60
N
CV
2,660,000
2,150 Hotel Rooms (included in
total square footage)
61
N
CV
125,000
62
L2
CG
2,300
63
G1
CN
66,000
64
M3
CN
74,000
65
M5
CN
80,000
66
J2
CN
138,500
67
D2
PI
20,000
68
L3
PI
71,150
69
K2
CN
75,000
70
D2
RM -D
Parking Structure for Bay
Island (No Residential Units)
71
1-1
CO -G
11,630
72
L1
CO -G
8,000
73
A3
CO -M
350,000
74
1-1
PR
35,000
75
L1
PF
City Hall, and the
administrative offices of
the City of Newport
Beach, and related
parking, pursuant to
Section 425 of the City
Charter.
Attachment No. PC 5
Planned Community Text Changes
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 Site (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 (8)(10)(11)
B. Allowable Building Area
Office Acreage
3 0.93 9 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 967,80 square e q4 "`r' 6`(28)(30) 977,720 square feet (13)(16 (28a )(30)
Site C 674,800 square feet (10)(15)
Site D 240,149 square feet (8)(13)
Site E 32,500 square feet (4)
Site F 24,300 square feet (4)
Site G 45,000 square feet (8)
2,350,699 square feet_(15)( *)
*(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)
2. Site B
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.
Allowable Building Area
Site Area
I
b.
Building Hem
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
Parkine
1,2263259 cars
......... 967,803 square feet (13,16,28,30)
......... 43.703 acres (4) (11)
C. Landscaped Open Snace (11)
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
Land Coverage (16,28,30)
............... 444411.22 acres
............... 7- 47.48 acres
............... 5359.61 acres
............... 4:444.49 acres
............... 3:703,74 acres
............... 3-. P3.21 acres
....... 2- 782.81 acres
............... 2 472.49 acres
....... I....... 2:22224 acres
............... 2:022.04 acres
............... 4- :851.87 acres
Land Coverage (11,13,16,28,30)
............... 26- .U2716 acres
Land Coverage (11,13,16,28,30)
............... 5- 715.32 acres
............... 4:49.06 acres
............... d 1.2710_93 acres
............... 12,3812_05 acres
............... 43. 1212_80 acres
............... 13-.6r513.33 acres
I .............. 14.0413.73 acres
............... M. acres
............... 4-4.6014.30 acres
............... 44:8014.50 acres
............... 14.9 14.67 acres
Attachment No. PC 6
Comment Letters
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
DRANGE COUNTY
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.S170 fax: 949.252.6012
June 7, 2010
RECEIVED BY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Janet Johnson Brown, Associate Planner JUN 1.6 2010
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663 CT ry , JF p\'Fz rPOP.�T BFAQJ
Subject: NOI to Adopt MND for PRES Office Building B Project
Dear Ms. Brown:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Initial Study for the proposed PRES Office
Building B Project in the context of the Airport Land Use Commission's Airport
Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (JWA AELUP). The proposed project
includes a division of the existing parcel into two separate parcels and the preparation of
a parcel map. Parcel One would include the existing office building and surface parking
spaces, and Parcel Two would include the proposed office building and surface parking
spaces located at 4300 Von Karman :Avenue, Newport.Beach, California. We wish to
offer the following comments and respectfully request consideration of these comments
as you proceed with preparation of your Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
As discussed in the initial study, the proposed project is located within the Federal
Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Notification Area for JWA. The initial study states
that the proposed project.does not require the filing of Form 7460 -1 with the FAA. We
suggest that the MND discuss the height at which the notification surface would be
penetrated compared to the proposed building heights. We also recommend that the
MND include a discussion of the proposed project's location within the FAR Part 77
Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces for JWA.
With respect to noise, the initial study states that the proposed project is located outside
of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour for JWA. However, the initial study should also
discuss whether the project falls within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour for J A A. Per
the AELUP for JWA, noise impact within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour is sufficient to
require sound attenuation as set forth in the California Noise Insulation Standards, Title
25, California Code of Regulations. The MND should discuss whether the project falls
within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour for JWA and include evidence that the proposed
structure will be sufficiently sound attenuated to allow normal work activities to be
conducted.
ALUC Comments -City of Newport Beach
PRES Office Building B Project
June 7, 2010
Page 2 .
In addition, we recommend the AND discuss whether the development of heliports will
be part of the proposed project. Should the development of heliports occur within your
jurisdiction, proposals to develop new heliports must be submitted through the City to the
ALUC for review and action pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5.
Proposed heliport projects must comply fully with the State permit procedure provided by
law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA, by the
ALUC for Orange County, and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics.
A referral by the City to the ALUC may be required for this project due to the location of
the proposal within an AELUP Planning Area and due to the nature of the required City
approvals (i.e. General Plan Amendment) under PUC Section 21676(b). In this regard,
please note that the Commission suggests such referrals to be submitted and agendized by
the ALUC staff between the Local Agency's expected Planning Commission and City
Council hearings. Since the ALUC meets on the third Thursday afternoon of each month,
submittals must be received in the ALUC office by the first of the month to ensure
sufficient time for review, analysis, and agendizing.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this initial study. Please contact Lea
Umnas at (949) 252 -5123 or via email at lumnasQocair.com if you need any additional
details or information regarding the future referral of your project.
Sincerely,
Kari A. Figoni
Executive Officer
Southern
California
Gas Company
A Sempra Energy utility-
May 27, 2010
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Attention: Janet Johnson
OCBr'TBD BY
PLNIVVGDEPARTMBNT
JUN 0 2 2010
150150,C11 Cii'Y OF Olt �
1919 S. State College Blvd.
Anahelm, CA 92806-6114
Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration for PRES Office Building B Project.
PA2007 -213
This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed
project but only as an information service. Its intent is to notify you that the Southern
California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is
proposed, Gas facilities within the service area of the project could be altered or
abandoned as necessary without any significant impact on the environment.
Information regarding construction particulars and any costs associated with initiating
service may be obtained by contacting the Planning Associate for your area, Dave
Baldwin, (714)634 -3267.
Sincerely,
AOL-
Paul Simonoff
Technical Supervisor
Orange Coast Region - Anaheim
Pshm
mitnegde.doc
STATE OF CALIFORMA— nUSMSS TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHIAAP.72NEGGEP. Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
District 12
3337 Michelson Drive, Suite 380
Irvine, CA 92612 -8894
Tel: 949 724 -2267
Fw(949 724 -2592 Ftnergyeporver%
� � RECEIVED BY ,� Be energy efficient.
June 7, 2010
PLANNING I7.EP A R. TAA-mT
JUN 10 X010
Janet Johnson Brown File: TGR/CEQA
City of Newport Beach CITE' OF NEWPORT BEACH SCH #: None
3300 Newport Boulevard Log #: 2534
Newport Beach, CA 92658 SR -73, SR- 55,SR -1, and I -405
Subject: PRES Office Building B General Plan and Planned Community Text Amendments
Dear Ms.Brown,
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
PRES Office Building B General Plan and Planned Community Text Amendments project. The
project involves a General Plan Amendment and an amendment to the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community text, as well as, development of a 11,960 - gross- square -foot single tenant office building
proposed for construction. The nearest State route to the project site is SR -73, SR -55, SR -1, and I -405.
The California Department of Transportation (Department), District 12 is a commenting agency on this
project and we have no comment at this time. However, in the event of any activity within the
Department's right -of -way, an encroachment permit will be required.
Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could
potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please
do not hesitate to call Damon Davis at (949) 440 -3487.
Sin rely,
is Herr e, Branc hief
Local Development/Intergovernmental Review
C: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research
"Callrans improves inability across California
LAW OFFICES
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
A UMREO LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
ANGELO J. PALMIERI (1826 -1995)
ROBERT F. WALDRON (1927 -1998)
ALAN H. WIENER'
ROBERT C. IHRKE'
JAMES E. WILHELM'
DENNIS G. TYLER'
MICHAEL J. GREENS'
DENNIS W. GHAN'
DAVID D. PARR'
CHARLES M. KANTER'
PATRICK A HENNESSEY
DON FISHER
GREGORY N. WEILER
WARREN A WILLIAMS
JOHN R. LISTER
CYNTHIA M. WOLCOTT
GARY C. WEISBERG
MICHAEL H. LEIFER
SCOTT R. CARPENTER
RICHARD A SALUS
NORMAN J. RODICH
RONALD M. COLE
MICHAEL L WANOELO
STEPHEN A SCHECK
DONNA L SNOW
RYAN M. EASTER
ELISE M. KERN
MELISA R. PEREZ
ELIZARETH VALADEZ
ANISH J. BANKER
MICHAEL 1. KEHOE
ROBERT H. GARRETSON
RYAN M. TRACER
CHADWICK C. BUNCH
ANNIE C. CHU
JERAD BELTZ
HEATHER H. WHITEHEAD
ERIN BALSARA NADERI
DEREK M. OEHANKE
F. JULIAN FREEMAN 111
ERICA M. SOROSKY
CASEY W. BOURKE
KIMBERLY C. LUDWIN
'A PRORSSIONA CONPOWTON
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Attn: Janet Johnson Brown,
Associate Planner
2603 MAIN STREET
EAST TOWER - SUITE 1300
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614-1281
(949) 851 -9400
www.ptwww.com
June 7, 2010
I
P.O. BOX 19712
IRVINE, CA 92623-9712
WRITER'S DIRECT
DIAL NUMBER
(949) 851 -7340
WRITER'S DIRECT
FACSIMILE NUMBER
(949) 825 -5404
FIRMS DIRECT
FACSIMILE NUMBERS
1949) 651-1654
(949) 757 -1225
reaster@ptwww.com
REFER TO FILE NO.
Re: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the PRES Office
Building B Project; General Plan and Planned Community Text
Amendments
Dear Ms. Brown:
This office represents Meyer Properties Corp., a California corporation ( "Meyer "),
which owns that certain office building located at 4320 Von Karman Avenue, in the Koll
Center Newport Planned Community, City of Newport Beach, California (the "Meyer
Building ").
The Meyer Building is contiguous to the proposed project development of a 50
foot high, 11,960- gross - square feet single- tenant office building (the "Project ") at 4300
Von Karman Avenue, in the Kell Center Newport Planned Community, in the City of
Newport Beach (the "City"). Accordingly, the Meyer Building will be directly affected
by many of the adverse environmental impacts identified in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the PRES Office Building B General Plan and Planned Community Text
Amendments (the "Study ") for the Project.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 2
We have reviewed the Study and are submitting this comment letter to inform the
City that the Study is inadequate to serve as the environmental document for the Project
under the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ").
Based on the information provided in the Study, it is apparent that there is a fair
argument on the basis of substantial evidence that the Project will result in significant
adverse environmental impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, an Environmental
Impact Report ( "BIR ") must be prepared for the Project.
I. AN EIR MUST BE PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT.
A. Preparation ofEIR Pursuant to CEQA.
CEQA requires the preparation of an EIR whenever it can be fairly argued on the
basis of substantial evidence that the project may have a significant environmental
impact. No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal. 3d, 68, 75. "If there is
substantial evidence of a significant environmental impact, evidence to the contrary does
not dispense with the need for an EIR when it can still be "fairly argued" that the project
may have a significant impact." Oro Fino Gold Mining Corporation v. County of El
Dorado, (3d Dist. 1990) 225 Cal. App. 3d 872, 881 -885.
CEQA Guidelines §15384 defines "substantial evidence" as:
"[E]nough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this
information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even
though other conclusions might also be reached. Whether a fair argument
can be made that the project may have a significant effect on the
environment is to be determined by examining the whole record before the
lead agency."
The "fair argument" standard creates a "low threshold" for requiring
preparation of an EIR. Citizens Action to Serve All Students v. Thornley (1st Dist.
1990) 222 Cal. App. 3d 748, 754. The standard is founded upon the principle that,
because adopting a negative declaration has a "terminal effect on the environmental
review process" (Citizens of Lake Murray Area Assn. v. City Council (4th Dist.
1982) 129 Cal. App. 3d 436), an EIR is necessary to "substitute some degree of
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILE ELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
,Tune 7, 2010
Page 3
factual certainty for tentative opinion and speculation" and to resolve "uncertainty
created by conflicting assertions." (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13
Cal. 3d, 68, 75). As one court put it, "[t]hese legal standards reflect a preference
for requiring an EIR to be prepared." Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2d Dist. 2005)
130 Cal. App. 4th 322, 332.
There is certainly a fair argument based on substantial evidence that the Project
will have significant environmental impacts. The Study provides ample relevant
information to support reasonable inferences that the Project will cause significant
environmental impacts, and these inferences support a fair argument that the Project will
have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, CEQA requires that an EIR be
prepared for the Project.
B. Sigtn cant Impacts Identified in the Study.
The significant impacts identified in the Study that trigger the requirement that an
EIR be prepared for the Project include, without limitation, the following:
General Plan Amendment.
Section X(b) of the Study addresses whether the Project will "[c]onflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect."
This section briefly mentions that the City of Newport Beach General Plan
(the "General Plan ") must be amended to increase the allowable development square
footage on the project site (the "General Plan Amendment "), The General Plan
Amendment would increase the development limit in General Plan Anomaly Location 2,
where the Project is located, by 11,452 gross square feet. Without the General Plan
Amendment, the Project would exceed the maximum development limit set forth in the
General Plan.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 4
a. History and Purpose of the General Plan.
The Introduction of the General Plan sets forth the history and purpose of the
General Plan, and the efforts that led to its adoption on July 25, 2006. Specifically, the
Introduction describes how thirty-eight residents representing all segments of the
community (the "Committee ") developed the General Plan, after thorough study of input
of thousands of residents.
According to p. 1 -2 of the General Plan, the Committee spent more than four years
"during the most extensive public outreach in the City's history" preparing the General
Plan. Indeed, the Introduction celebrates the General Plan and the process by which the
Committee and the City's residents participated to have their input incorporated into the
document.
The General Plan includes a "Vision Statement" that describes "what the residents
want the City to be now and in 2025." Specifically, the Introduction states on p. 1 -2 that
the General Plan was developed to ensure that the City achieves its Vision Statement by,
inter alia, "[r]educing potential new commercial, office, and industrial space by 1.45
million square feet." The Introduction further states on p. 1 -9 that "the General Plan is
also a tool to help City staff, City Commissions, and the City Council make land use and
public investment decisions" and that "[fluture development decisions must be
consistent with the Plan." [Emphasis added].
b. Analysis of Impact to General Plan.
The General Plan sets forth the maximum development limit square footage in
specific areas of the City. This limit is consistent with the City's Vision Statement and
the City's express stated goal to reduce potential new commercial and office space by
1.45 million square feet. Despite this limitation, the Project proposes to increase square
footage limitations, in direct conflict with the General Plan's Vision Statement and stated
goals.
Although the Project is in direct conflict with the General Plan's Vision Statement
and stated goals, the Study inexplicably concludes that the impacts relating to the
amendment of the General Plan will be less- than - significant. Even worse, the Study
provides no analysis of any environmental impacts associated with the General Plan
Amendment in the body of the Study, and simply concludes on p. 3 -44 that the
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
.Tune 7, 2010
Page 5
amendment is "consistent with all General Plan Policies." As stated above, the General
Plan Amendment is clearly not consistent with the General Plan's Vision Statement and
stated goals.
Please note that although Exhibit C to the Study provides some analysis of the
consistency of the General Plan Amendment and the General Plan, Exhibit C fails to
discuss the inconsistency between the General Plan Amendment and the General Plan's
Vision Statement, stated goals, and the significant environmental impacts related thereto.
The develop limitations in the General Plan are intended to guide the City staff,
City Commissions, and the City Council when making land use decisions. These
limitations, and the purpose of the General Plan, were completely ignored in the Study.
This omission undermines the General Plan, and the work of the Committee and the
residents of the City that expressed their interest in reducing commercial and office
square footage in the City.
Moreover, the failure to identify and analyze the significant environmental
impacts, associated with amending the General Plan, that are inconsistent with the
General Plan's Vision Statement and stated goals, challenges the foundation of the entire
Study. The purpose of the Study is to determine the environmental impacts associated
with the amendment of the General Plan and the Koll Center Newport Planned
Community Text. Ironically, the Study fails to identify and analyze the environmental
impacts that are associated with the subject of the Study.
Adopting the Amended General Plan, which is in direct conflict with the General
Plan, will cause significant environmental impacts that are required by CEQA to be
identified and addressed in an EIR. Furthermore, these impacts may not be mitigated to a
level below significance because the General Plan Amendment irreparably changes the
limitations that were established as permanent restrictions in the General Plan.
Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the significant environmental impacts relating to the
adoption of the Amended General Plan must be addressed in an EIR.
Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development
Standards.
Again, Section X(b) of the Study addresses whether the Project will "[ c]onflict
with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 6
over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect."
This section briefly mentions that the Koll Center Newport Planned Community
Development Standards (the "Koll Standards ") must be amended to increase the
allowable development square footage on the project site (the "Koll Standards
Amendment "). The Koll Standards Amendment would increase the development limit
for Site B of the Koll Center, where the Project is located, by 9,917 net square feet.
Without the Koll Standards Amendment, the Project would exceed the maximum
development limit set forth in the Koll Standards.
a. Purpose of the Koll Standards,
The Preface of the Koll Standards describes the zoning of the entire Koll Center
property, and specifically identifies land uses within the property. For example, the
Preface states that the Koll Center shall include a hotel with banquet and convention
facilities, a small retail and service center, service stations, and restaurants. Additionally,
the Preface states that planned within the Koll Center property is "a business and
professional office park emphasizing open space." [Emphasis added]. Presumptive in
this context is the preservation of view corridors softly enhanced with landscaping.
b. Analysis of Impact to Koll Standards.
The Koll Standards specifically limits the allowable building area on Site B to
967,803 square feet. One purpose for limiting the allowable building area on sites within
the Koll Center, including on Site B, is to maintain the integrity of the Koll Standards'
stated purpose to emphasize open space within the business and professional office park.
Expanding the allowable building area on Site B directly conflicts with the Koll
Standards. Furthermore, expanding the allowable building area for the purpose of
building an additional building, where only open space, landscaping and a parking lot
currently exists, undermines the stated policy of the Koll Standards to emphasize open
space.
As stated above, the purpose of the Study is to identify and analyze the
environmental impacts associated with amending the Koll Center Standards. Without
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 7
providing any analysis, the Study in Section X(b) simply concludes that the amendment
of the Koll Center Standards is consistent with the land use designation and zoning of the
site and the surrounding area.
Expanding the allowable building area beyond the restrictions set forth in the Koll
Center Standards is clearly not consistent with the land use designation and zoning of Site
B. This is a significant environmental impact that is required by CEQA to be identified
and addressed in an EIR. Furthermore, this impact may not be mitigated to a level below
significance because the Koll Standards Amendment irreparably changes the limitations
that were established as permanent restrictions in the Koll Standards. Accordingly,
pursuant to CEQA, the significant environmental impacts relating to the adoption of the
Koll Standards Amendment must be addressed in an EIR.
Riparian Habitat.
Contiguous to the project site is a lake (the "Lake ") that serves as a habitat for
several species of birds. In particular, there is an abundance of the great white egret, a
large, white, slender bird that commonly lives in coastal lakes, lagoons, and marshes.
Many other birds frequent the Lake and surrounding areas, including but not limited to
the brown pelican, the great blue heron, and the mallard duck.
The Lake is in the immediate vicinity of local bird estuaries, such as the San
Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary and the Upper Newport Bay. These bird estuaries serve as
habitat to over 200 bird species, including protected species. Although the Lake is a
man -made lake that is not a natural occurring part of the landscape, birds still utilize the
Lake as habitat and move freely between the local estuaries, the Lake, and other local
bodies of water.
One of the birds observed at the Lake or waterways nearby, the brown pelican, is a
fully protected bird pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 3511. Disturbing
the proposed project site, which is in the immediate vicinity of the Lake, may have an
adverse effect on the birds that frequent the Lake, including the brown pelican.
Furthermore, a 50 foot high barrier so close to the Lake effectively closes the avian flight
path corridor.
Despite the potential to adversely affect the bird species that use the Lake as their
habitat, the Study fails to address these potential impacts. Indeed, the Study merely states
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 8
in Section IV(b) that there will be no impact to any riparian habitat. Furthermore, the
Study states that field surveys indicate that the project is void of any riparian habitat. To
the contrary, the Lake is home to dozens of birds at any given time, and this Study should
have provided further analysis of these bird species.
The Study also states in Section IV(d) that there will be less -than- significant
impact with mitigation incorporated to the movement of any native resident or migratory
wildlife species. The proposed mitigation measures merely address environmental
impacts associated with birds nesting in ornamental trees. There is no analysis or
discussion in this section of the Study regarding any affects to birds using the Lake as a
habitat.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts on the habitat of several bird
species, including the fully protected brown pelican. The Study failed to identify and
address these impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the significant environmental
impacts relating to bird species that utilize the Lake as their habitat must be addressed in
an EIR.
4. Aesthetics.
The Koll Center is designed in an aesthetically pleasing fashion, with open grassy
areas, and walkways throughout connecting the Lake and the buildings. As noted in the
Koll Standards, the Koll Center was purposefully designed to be spacious and open. In
addition, the Lake and its fountains serve as a centerpiece for the surrounding buildings,
and contribute to the peaceful, park -like atmosphere of the Koll Center.
a. Scenic Resources.
Section I(b) of the Study addresses whether there will be any impact to scenic
resources. The Study concludes that there will be no impact. However, this section
provides no analysis of the potential impact to the Lake. To the contrary, this Section
merely states, arbitrarily, that no impact will occur because the project site does not have
any rock outcroppings, historic buildings, or designated scenic highways in the vicinity.
Scenic resources are not limited to rock outcroppings, historic buildings, or
designated scenic highways. The Initial Study Environmental Checklist merely lists
these three scenic resources as examples. Limiting the scope of the analysis to these
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 9
three resources, which are only three examples amongst many others, inadequately
analyzes the potential impacts to scenic resources. Frankly, the Study completely ignores
any other potential scenic resources, such as the Lake, that may be affected by the
Proj ect.
Moreover, the Study minimizes the Lake's value as a scenic resource throughout
the Study by referring to the Lake as a "retarding basin." Although the Lake provides
certain water retention functions, it is designed as a scenic resource, complete with
fountains and landscaped areas located in the Lake itself. A casual observer of the Lake
may not be able to notice that it provides water retention functions, but he will certainly
notice the Lake's scenic features, such as its fountains.
Likewise, the Study fails to mention that a 36 ft. tall mature tree that has been a
fixture at the Koll Center would be cut down if the proposed building is constructed at the
proposed location. Mature trees are important landmarks that characterize the area and
the Koll Center, and the removal of mature trees is a significant adverse environmental
impact.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts to the Lake and mature trees,
scenic resources at the Koll Center. The Study failed to identify and address these
impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the significant environmental impacts relating
to the Lake and mature trees as scenic resources must be addressed in an EIR.
b. Visual Character of the Project Site.
Section I(c) of the Study addresses whether there will be any impacts that will
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings. This section concludes that there will be a less- than - significant impact.
However, like Section I(b), this section again ignores any impacts to the Lake,
Furthermore, this section fails to recognize that the Project will alter the open and
spacious character of the business park. Indeed, the Study admits, in this section, that
"the project site is located in a fully developed planned community." Despite this
admission, the Study fails to analyze the impact to the visual character of the Project site,
which is already fully developed. Expanding development square footage beyond the
maximum established in the Koll Standards, in a fully developed planned community that
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 10
was purposefully designed to be open and spacious, will certainly change the visual
character of the Koll Center.
In addition to changing the visual character of the Koll Center by eliminating open
space, the Project will also change the visual character of the Koll Center by eliminating
aerial space. The Project proposes constructing effectively a four - story, 50 ft. high
building directly between the existing PRES building and the Meyer Building. The
existing PRES building and the Meyer Building are both low, single -story buildings that
intelligently blend into the landscaping and that have been methodically planned to have
minimal impact on the open space, view corridors, and avian pathways. The proposed
Building B will be approximately four times the height of the buildings around it.
Therefore, the Project will result not only in a significant decrease to open space, but also
a significant decrease in aerial space in the Project area.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts to visual character of the Project
site. The Study failed to identify and address these impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to
CEQA, the significant environmental impacts relating to the visual character of the
Project site must be addressed in an EIR.
5. Water Quality.
The proposed project is located in the San Diego Creek Watershed. San Diego
Creek is the main tributary to Newport Bay, and drains all or portions of the City.
Additionally, the Lake also serves as a retarding basin that serves to reduce the flow rate
generated by upstream development, and to aid in efficiently controlling the flow rate to
smaller, older drainage systems downstream.
The Study correctly identifies that there may be adverse environmental impacts to
waste discharge requirements, drainage patterns, excessive runoff water that would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, water quality,
and erosion or siltation. However, the Study does not provide analysis of these impacts.
To the contrary, the Study skips any analysis of these impacts, and instead only discusses
potential mitigation measures.
Mitigation measures are indeed necessary to reduce potential impacts to water
quality; however, such measures may be ineffective if they are not narrowly tailored to
prevent specific, delineated impacts. The construction of a building next to the Lake, and
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 11
the addition of new landscaped areas, presents a significant risk of environmental impacts
to water quality, stormwater drainage, excessive runoff water, water contamination, and
erosion or siltation that must be fully analyzed. Once these impacts have been analyzed,
appropriate mitigation measures may be recommended and implemented to address
specific impacts.
The Lake is circumvented by a berm that appears to be a design element for the
beauty and benefit of the Koll Center that also effectively funnels water from surrounding
areas into the Lake. Given the way the Lake is uniquely situated in the Koll Center,
general mitigation measures, such as those listed in the Study, may not be effective in
preventing significant environmental impacts to the Lake.
Additionally, the Study does not identify and analyze the requirement to obtain a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( "NPDES ") permit. An NPDES permit
may be required for this Project because of the proposed building's proximity to the Lake,
and the potential for discharge of pollutants into the Lake. Recent changes to the law
have established more stringent standards that govern the discharge of pollutants and the
issuance of NPDES permits. Accordingly, an analysis of the potential impacts relating to
discharge of pollutants should have been identified and analyzed in the Study.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts to the Lake that affect the many
impacts related to water quality identified in the Study, as well as the impacts related to
discharge of pollutants. The Study failed to adequately analyze these impacts.
Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the potentially significant environmental impacts
relating to water quality of the Lake must be addressed in an EIR.
6. Fire Protection/Public Services.
Section XIV of the Study addresses potential impacts to fire protection and other
public services in the project area. This section correctly recognizes that the Project will
result in additional fire and public service impacts relating to the addition of a new
building and additional employees to the Project area.
When discussing impacts relating to fire safety, this section omits any discussion
of the spacing and location of the buildings, and whether the spacing is adequate and
compliant with relevant fire and safety codes. Additionally, this section does not analyze
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 12
whether there is adequate hydrant coverage in the project vicinity with the addition of the
proposed building.
Furthermore, this Section recognizes that there will be an increase to the
population at the project site by approximately 53 employees. However, the Study
provides no analysis supporting its assertion that the population at the project site will
increase by 53 employees. Nor does the Study recognize that the population increase will
also include visitors that are not employees, such as vendors, customers, and clients.
Inclusive of the population other than employees, the total population increase may be
much greater than estimated in the Study.
The Study also does not support its assertion regarding the origination of the
additional population. Indeed, the Study arbitrarily concludes that the population
increase will come from the local population, and therefore have no effect on public
services, such as fire protection and police protection. The Newport/Irvine business
district attracts workers from all areas of Orange County, as well as some from Los
Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego Counties. There is no justifiable
reason to assume that these employees will come from the local population, especially
considering that homes in the immediate vicinity are priced significantly higher than the
Orange County median. Moreover, a population increase of 53 employees (or more),
even from the local community, has the potential to adversely impact public services.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts to fire protection, police
protection, and other vital public services. The Study fails to identify and address these
impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the significant environmental impacts relating
to public services must be addressed in an EIR.
Traffic.
Section XVI of the Study identifies impacts related to transportation and traffic.
The Study concludes that the project will have no impacts to transportation and traffic
that are not less- than - significant.
Specifically, the Study states that the impacts to intersection level of service
standards will be less- than - significant. Section XVI(b), on p. 3 -63, discusses level of
service for Congestion Management Program intersections within the vicinity of the
proposed project, as follows: "All intersections are operating at LOS C or worse.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
.Tune 7, 2010
Page 13
Therefore, the addition of the proposed project's AM peak hour trips would not
downgrade the existing LOS at the intersections described above to LOS D or worse."
This section states further that, "the addition of the proposed project's PM peak hour trips
would not downgrade the existing LOS at the intersections described above to LOS E."
The conclusions reached in this section are contradicted by the facts and analysis
set forth in Section XVI(b). It is axiomatic that if the Congestion Management Program
intersections within the vicinity of the proposed project are currently operating at LOS C
or worse, the addition of AM and PM peak hour trips may downgrade the existing LOS
from LOS C or worse to LOS D or worse. The Study curiously fails to reach the correct
conclusion and effectively disregards its own findings.
Furthermore, the Study fails to address any impacts associated with the
construction staging area, which will eliminate access from the Project site to the office
buildings to the east, and which will reduce access to and from the Project site to only the
Von Karman access point. Eliminating an access point will clearly have an impact on
traffic, and this impact was not analyzed in the Study.
The Project may have significant adverse impacts to traffic and transportation, and
specifically to the level of service at intersections in the vicinity of the proposed project
and elimination of access points to the Koll Center, The Study fails to adequately
identify and address these impacts. Accordingly, pursuant to CEQA, the significant
environmental impacts relating to traffic and transportation must be addressed in an EIR.
As evidenced by the litany of impacts associated with the Project, to traffic and
transportation, public services, and otherwise, the General Plan and the Koll Standards
were drafted with allowable development square footage limitations to prevent and avoid
the specific impacts discussed in this comment letter. Expanding the development
limitations established in the General Plan and the Koll Standards triggers a domino
effect of adverse environmental impacts that these documents were drafted to prevent.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 14
II. Additional Considerations Relating to the Proiect.
In addition to the environmental concerns relating to the Project discussed above,
there are several other concerns relating to the Project and its impacts to the Koll Center,
and the property owners located therein, as follows:
A. Restaurant Building Located in Koll Center.
A restaurant occupied the building directly adjacent to the proposed Project site,
located at 4300 Von Karman Avenue, until the restaurant closed in 2004 (the "Restaurant
Building "). Since the restaurant closed, the Restaurant Building in which it was located
has been provisionally operated as an office building. The Restaurant Building was
planned and designed for use as a restaurant, and its plan and design remains the same
today. Therefore, it is reasonably foreseeable that the Restaurant Building will be
converted back to use as a restaurant.
When the Restaurant Building operated as a restaurant, it required many more
parking spaces then will be available after the existing parking lot is removed, and the
Project is built -out. In order to accommodate customers to the restaurant, supplementary
parking must.be added to the Koll Center, further developing a "fully developed planned
community." Additional projects in the Koll Center, such as the construction of
additional parking areas for the Restaurant Building, may be required to be analyzed in
the Study if they are reasonably foreseeable. Failure to analyze such projects may
amount to unlawful piecemealing, as further described below.
Section 15378(a) of the CEQA Guidelines defines "Project" to mean the "whole of
an action" that may result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical
change in the environment. "Project is given a broad interpretation in order to maximize
protection of the environment." McQueen v. Board of Directors of Midpennsulia Region
Open Space District (1988) 202 Cal. App. 3rd 1136. Accordingly, to the extent
additional development in the Koll Center is reasonably foreseeable, such as the
development of additional parking areas to accommodate customers at the Restaurant
Building, these additional developments must be analyzed together with the Project.
Prior to approving and proceeding with the Project, the City should carefully
consider all impacts to the Koll Center that are associated with the reconversion of the
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 15
Restaurant Building to use as a restaurant, including analyzing parking impacts
associated therewith.
B. Future Development in the Koll Center.
This Project may set a regrettable precedent for expanding development in the
Koll Center. As the City correctly identifies on p. 3 -5, the Koll Center is a "fully
developed planned community." Despite this admission, the City is still considering
expanding the allowable development square footage in a business center that is fully
developed.
If the City proceeds with the Project, it is reasonably foreseeable that all other
open spaces within the Koll Center are subject to further development. Current and
future property owners will be unable to rely on the recorded documents that provide and
restrict the applicable land uses for their properties.
Furthermore, as discussed above, if the City intends to develop additional open
spaces in a similar fashion, it may be required to analyze these additional projects in an
EIR, along with analysis of the Project. Failure to include an analysis in an EIR of all
reasonably foreseeable projects in the Koll Center may amount to unlawful piecemealing
in violation of CEQA.
Considering the City's position in City of Newport Beach v. City of Irvine (Orange
County Superior Court Case No. 30- 2008 - 00228855- CU- WM -CXC), the City should
understand the inherent "unfairness" of this Project as it relates to other owners in the
Koll Center.
C. Violation of the Koll Center CC&Rs.
The Koll Center is a master planned business park and is subject to and restricted
by that certain Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Koll Center
Newport Beach, recorded July 20, 1973 (the "CC &Rs "). The CC &Rs reference the Koll
Standards and apply the same allowable building area limitations. Accordingly,
amending the Koll Standards also directly conflicts with the allowable building area
limitations set forth in the CC &Rs.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 16
Purpose of the CC &Rs.
The purpose of the CC &Rs, as stated on pp. 3 -4 therein, inter alia, "is to insure
proper development, use and maintenance of the Property, to protect each Owner of
any portion of the Property against improper development and use of other portions
of the Property which will depreciate the value of such Owner's portion," "to
encourage the erection of attractive Improvements at appropriate locations," "to prevent
haphazard and inharmonious Improvements," and "to provide adequately for a high type
and quality of development of the Property in accordance with the [Koll] Standards."
[Emphasis added].
2. Analysis of Impact to CC &Rs.
The CC &Rs apply the same allowable building area limitations to Site B that are
set forth in the Koll Standards, limiting development to 967,803 square feet. The
allowable building area limitations are established to preserve and maintain the stated
purpose of the CC &Rs.
Increasing the allowable building area limitations for the purpose of building an
additional building on Site B will violate the purpose of the CC &Rs. Specifically, this
increase violates all of the purposes of the CC &Rs listed above: (1) to protect each owner
of any portion of the property near the Project, including Meyer, against improper
development and use of other portions of the Koll Center property which will depreciate
the value of such owner's portion; (2) to encourage the erection of attractive
improvements at appropriate locations, such as locations that provide for the requisite
allowable building area; (3) to prevent inharmonious improvements, such as the Project,
that will diminish the open and spacious character of the Koll Center at Site B; and (4) to
provide for development in accordance with the Koll Standards, including the allowable
building area limitations.
The surrounding property owners, including Meyer, will be negatively affected by
the Project, in violation of their property rights established in the CC &Rs. The open and
spacious character of the Koll Center will be diminished, along with the property values
of the neighboring properties. Site B currently boasts attractive open space with ample
common areas surrounding the Lake. Increasing development density beyond the
maximum allowable building area will eliminate open area and diminish the spacious
character of Site B.
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM & WALDRON LLP
City of Newport Beach
June 7, 2010
Page 17
The City should carefully consider the consequences to other property owners in
the Koll Center prior to approving and proceeding with the Project. In addition to the
negative environmental impacts, the Project takes private property rights from Meyer and
the other owners of property in the Koll Center. Accordingly, expanding the allowable
building area in the Kell Center, and therefore taking private property rights of owners of
property in the Koll Center, is a drastic measure that should not proceed without full
consideration of the consequences to all property owners in the Koll Center.
III. Conclusion,
The Study has identified many significant adverse environmental impacts
associated with the Project. A fair argument can clearly be made that based on
substantial evidence, the Project may result in significant environmental impacts.
Furthermore, these impacts cannot be mitigated to a level below significance. In
addition, this Project is inconsistent with the City's General Plan, the Koll Standards, the
CC &Rs, and may be a part of other reasonably foreseeable projects that must be analyzed
together with the Project in an EIR. Accordingly, the City must prepare an EIR to
adequately analyze and address the significant adverse environmental impacts identified
in the Study and this comment letter.
Very truly yours,
an M. Easter
RME:fjf
cc: Michael H. Leifer, Esq.