Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacific View_UP, DA_3500 Pacific View Dr (PA2006-282)Pr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 2 August 9, 2007 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner rungCg city.newport- beach.ca.us (949) 644 -3208 SUBJECT: Pacific View Memorial Park 3500 Pacific View Dr. Amendment to Use Permit No. 3518 & Development Agreement No. 7 (UP No. 2006 -040 & DA No. 2006 -001) (PA2006 -282) APPLICANT: SCI California Funeral Services Inc. PROJECT SUMMARY The project consists of the development of six (6) family mausolea and estate gardens in Building Site "H" of Area 8 at the Pacific View Memorial Park. The following discretionary approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: An amendment to Use Permit No. 3518; and 2. An amendment to Development Agreement No. 7 to allow the Pack View Memorial Park (Pacific View) to amend the development allocations within Building Site "H° of Area 8. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: Adopt attached draft resolution (Exhibit 1) recommending adoption of Negative Declaration No. 2007 -001 and approval of Use Permit No. 2006 -040 and Development Agreement No. 2006 -001 to the City Council. Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 2 of 14 3500 Pacific View Dr. Use Permit No. 2006 -040 & Development Agreement No. 2006 -001 Current Development: Pacific View Memorial Park To the north: Sin ledami residential To the east Single-farnity residential To the south: Sinqle-family residential across San Joaquin Hilts Road To the west Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School R Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 3 of 14 Existina General Plan Land Use Designations ■ Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 4 of 14 PROJECT INFORMATION Project Description The applicant is proposing to develop six (6) family mausolea in Building Site "H" of Area 8, for a total of 2,024 square feet in lieu of a single 7,200 square foot (60'x120') community mausoleum. Two (2) of the six (6) family mausoleum building envelopes (H.5 and H.6) would be at 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 12 feet in depth. The four (4) remaining building envelopes (H.1, H.2, H.3 & H.4) would be at 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 17 feet in depth. The development of ground burial terraced estate gardens within Building Site "H" is also proposed. The project requires the approval of an amendment to Use Permit No. 3518 (by approving Use Permit No. 2006 -040) pursuant to Section 20.25.020(D) of the Municipal Code (GEIF District: Additional Land Use Regulations). This section states that an approval of a use permit pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 20.91 is required for any changes in the operational characteristics of an existing use within this zoning district. The project also requires the approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. 7 (by approving Development Agreement No. 2006 -001) pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.45.060 of the Municipal Code (Development Agreements: Amend ment/Cancellation). This section states a development agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, by mutual consent of the parties to the agreement or their successors in interest and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code. The parties, in this case, would be the applicant and the Newport Beach City Council. Decision - making authority for use permits is assigned to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 20.91.015 of the Municipal Code (Use Permit and Variance to Other Permits) or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review. The Planning Commission, in this particular case, would review and forward their recommendation to the City Council for their final decision due to the Development Agreement amendment request. Background Pacific View began its operation as a cemetery in 1958 under the County of Orange jurisdiction. In 1969 the City of Newport Beach began the phased annexation and in 1973 the entire property was annexed into the City. On July 10, 1995, the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration and approved an amendment made to the General Plan Land Use Element to establish maximum permitted development allocation for Pacific View of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 121,680 square feet of community mausolea and 12,000 square feet of garden crypts including family mausolea. The City Pacific View Memorial Paris August 9, 2007 Page 5 of 14 Council also approved Use Permit No. 3518, Site Plan Review No. 69 and Development Agreement No. 7 attached as Exhibit 2, which grants Pacific View statutory vested rights to develop the subject property in accordance with the terms, conditions and exhibits contained in the agreement for the ultimate build -out of the entire cemetery. On December 20, 2006, the applicant submitted an application package requesting the development of nine (9) family mausolea in Building Site "H" of Area 8 in lieu of a 7,200 square foot (60'x120') community mausoleum. The maximum allowable building envelope for each structure would be at 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in depth. The request also includes the development of estate gardens within Building Site "H ". Concerns of Residents The Planning Department received several letters (Exhibit 3) from the Spyglass Hill residents during the application review process. They collectively expressed their opposition to the proposed application on the following points: 1. The intent and purpose of the Development Agreement would be violated if the Agreement is amended. 2. The nine (9) family mausoleum structures and estate gardens will negatively impact views and the aesthetic of the park by changing the park -like character of the Pacific View to more of the "Eastern" style cemetery. 3. The nine (9) family mausolea versus the community mausoleum would generate more construction activity, noise and traffic. 4. The above - ground monuments and markers would have the characteristics of an "Eastern" style cemetery and could attach a stigma to the otherwise park -like setting and will have a negative impact on the property values in the area. In response to the above - stated concerns, Pacific View held several meetings with representatives of the Spyglass Hill Homeowners Association board of directors. On August 1, 2007, the applicant revised their application (Exhibit 4) reflecting the current request in response to the concerns raised by the Spyglass Hills residents. The following changes have been included in the submitted plans and are a part of Pacific View application: 1. Within Building Site "H ", there shall be no more than six (6) family mausolea. Two (2) building envelopes (H.5 & H.6) shall not exceed a maximum of 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth, and four (4) building envelopes (H.1, H.2, H.3 & H.4) may be a maximum of 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 17 feet in depth. �1 Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 6 of 14 2. Religious, ornamental and other vertical objects shall not be permitted on the roof or protrude above the roofline of the family mausolea. 3. Construction of a community mausoleum and crypt wall within Building Site "E" shall not commence prior to January 1, 2014. 4. Estate gardens shall be constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls consistent with the visual simulations prepared by the City of Newport Beach and as shown on Exhibit "F" of the draft First Amendment. No monuments, fences, gates or other elements except plant material shall exceed the top height of the estate garden walls. 5. Pacific View agrees to extend the term of the Development Agreement for eighteen (18) years from the effective date of the Development Agreement Amendment plus the seven (7) year automatic extension. The Development Agreement will, therefore, be in force for approximately twenty -five (25) years from the effective date of the First Amendment. 6. Pacific View would not seek to amend the Development Agreement for a period of not less than fifteen (15) years from the effective date of the First Amendment. 7. Minor adjustments necessary for safety, maintenance, slope engineering, landscaping, the engineering of building pads, and the reorientation of structures within existing building envelopes, given the extended period of years over which the property will be developed, shall be allowed with the approval of the Planning Director, so long as such minor adjustments are consistent with the building envelopes and at or below the building height limits shown on Exhibit "C' of the First Amendment (Technical Site Plan), and do not involve changes or additions to the number, type, height, or placement of structures (other than changes in the orientation of structures within building envelopes specified in accordance with Exhibit "C" of the First Amendment in Area 8, 9, 10 and 11. 8. The 430 -foot mean sea level elevation landscape restriction would be extended to encompass the entire boundaries of Building Sites "E ", "F" and "G ". 9. At the time of construction of any individual family mausoleum in Building Site "H ", one (1) 48 -inch box tree shall be planted at side or rear elevation and one additional 36 -inch box size tree shall be planted adjacent to the front elevation of the structure as indicated in Exhibit "D" of the draft First Amendment. 10. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy of any individual family mausoleum, additional trees, if needed, would be planted to screen the constructed family mausolea in Building Site "H" from the ground floor views of the residential properties immediately adjacent to the subject site. A letter of support from the Spyglass Hill HOA is attached as Exhibit 5. W Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 7 of 14 Existinq Approval The 45 -acre Pacific View is divided into 11 areas (Area 1 through 11). A majority of these areas contain precise building sites (Building Site A through H) where above- ground structures such as community mausolea, family mausolea, columbaria and/or estate gardens with above -grade memorials and garden walls could be built. Area 8, the subject of this application, is approximately 2 acres in size, undeveloped and located in the southeast portion of the cemetery which is directly adjacent to the intersection of Vista del Mar Drive and Palm Canyon Drive. Within Area 8 is Building Site "H ". Per the Development Agreement, Building Site "H" is approved to be developed with a 7,200 square -foot community mausoleum of 24 feet maximum in building height. The rest of Area 8 is to be developed with ground burials. DISCUSSION Analysis General Plan — Land Use Element The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, which designates the property as Private Institutional (PI) with development limit of 30,000 square -feet for administrative office and support facilities, 121,680 square -feet for mausolea and 12,000 square -feet for garden crypts. The PI designation is intended to provide for privately -owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, healthcare facilities, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes and comparable facilities. The existing Pacific View Memorial Park is a privately -owned cemetery with no changes proposed to the land use designation. The proposed project is site specific and only applicable to Building Site "H ", Area 8 and does not include the introduction of new uses that are inconsistent with the land use designation of the General Plan nor does it change the diversity of uses. The proposed project would result in a decrease of the Pacific View's overall community mausoleum development limit of 7,200 square foot community mausoleum. There would be no increase to the family mausoleum allotment as the applicant is proposing to extract the square footage from the approved family mausoleum development limit of 12,000 square feet. The proposed estate gardens are ground burials with no development limitation and therefore would not affect the approved development limits. Visual Simulations Visual simulations were prepared to represent views to the previously- approved community mausoleum and the proposed family mausolea with and without landscape 10 Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 8 of 14 screening. These viewing stations for the simulations are at two (2) different locations: at the subject property lines adjacent to the residential properties of 5 Monterey Circle (Exhibit 6) and at 1 Little River Circle (Exhibit 7). The simulations indicate the proposed family mausolea would not be visible to the residents residing along the cemetary's northeast and southeast properties. Given the distance from the nearby residences and with proposed landscape screening, the view to the proposed family mausolea does not represent a negative impact. In addition to the visual simulations, pictures were taken from the residences of 1, 2, 3,& 4 Twin Lakes Circle and 1, 3, 7, 9 & 11 Monterey Circle looking straight to Building "H ", Area 8 of the Pacific View (Exhibit 8). Zoning Code The subject property is located within the Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities (GEIF) District. The existing Pacific View Memorial Park is a permitted use in this district. Required findings for approval of the Use Permit must be made in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.91 of the Municipal Code. All development regulations of the GEIF Zoning District and conditions of approval of the Use Permit would be met. The applicant is proposing following proposed changes to Building Site "H" of Area 8: Building Site "H" Allowed Under Current Use Permit & Development Proposed Changes Agreement Estate 1 Community Mausoleum 6 Family Mausolea Gardens (Ground Burials Garden walls Maximum Height 24 feet 15 and 17 feet & memorials - 3 feet 2 @ 264 s.f. (12x22) each Maximum Floor Area Allowed 7,200 square feet (60x120) 4 @ 374 s.f. NIA (17x22) each 2,024 s.f. total Pacific View Memorial Paris August 9, 2007 Page 9 of 14 Use Permit Findings Section 20.91.035(A) of the Zoning Code requires the Planning Commission to make certain mandatory findings for the approval of a use permit. These findings are listed and discussed below. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The existing Pacific View Memorial Park is a privately owned cemetery which is a permitted use in the Private Institutional (PI) General Plan Land Use Element designation and consistent with the purpose of the GEIF Zoning District. An approval of a use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.91 is required since Pacific View is proposing to change the development allocations within Building Site "H" of Area 8. The proposed changes are site - specific, within the existing cemetery and, therefore, would not cause any land use conflict or inconsistency with the surrounding area. 2. That the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the District in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City. The proposed Project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, with a maximum, permitted development allocation for Pacific View of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 121,680 square feet of community mausolea and 12,000 square feet of family mausolea. The PI designation is intended to provide for privately -owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, healthcare facilities, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. The proposed project presents no conflict with the policies of the General Plan. All development regulations of the GEIF District would be met, including structure height limitations and development limits. It is staffs opinion that the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City due to the following: • The overall building mass and the total building floor area for Building Site "H" would be reduced from 7,200 square feet to 2,024 square feet, a 72 percent reduction in floor area. Q Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 10 of 14 • The overall structure building height would be reduced from 24 to 17 feet. • By reducing the total number of casket spaces available from approximately 1,200 in the community mausoleum structure to approximately 280 for six (6) family mausolea and for estate gardens, funeral services and related activities would be reduced significantly. • The family mausoleum building envelopes would spread across an area larger than the current Building Site "H ". This would allow for additional landscaping around each building envelope to integrate and buffer each from surrounding views. • Additional landscaping would be provided within Building Site "H ". Two (2) 36 -inch trees would be planted on the slope around each of the family mausoleum building envelopes. The trees would be planted within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the project approval or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first structure, whichever is earlier. At the time of construction of any family mausoleum, one (1) 48 -inch box tree would be planted at side or rear elevation and one additional 36 -inch box tree would be planted adjacent to the front elevation of the structure. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any individual family mausoleum, additional trees, if needed, would be planted to screen the subject structure from the ground floor views of the residential properties immediately adjacent to the subject site. • The family mausolea would be constructed in a considerably shorter time frame than the community mausoleum construction period. Since the family mausolea are mostly prefabricated, there would be more of an assembly operation rather than the on -site community mausoleum construction which consists of concrete forming, pouring and stripping operation, including the use of concrete pumps and booms that have more construction impacts to the nearby residents. • The estate gardens are ground burials similar to other areas in the cemetery with stone walls and above -grade memorials not exceeding 3 feet in height. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The Use Permit presently entitles the applicant to develop the cemetery consistent with the approved development plans attached to the Development Agreement. Mausoleum structures housing crypts and estate gardens are currently allowed on -site and have been constructed in areas adjacent to the project building site. Pacific View has developed the cemetery in a manner to satisfy mitigation measures and has implemented conditions of approval as adopted in the Use Permit and Development Agreement. The Use Permit and Development Agreement currently allow for a maximum 7,200 square -foot (60'x120') community mausoleum with maximum building 13 Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 11 of 14 height of 24 feet in Building Site "H ", and for Area 8 to be improved with ground burials, in a manner consistent with a cemetery. The nearest proposed family mausoleum building envelope would be located a minimum of 190 feet from the southeast property line of the nearest residences and 390 feet from the easterly property line of the nearest residences. The finished floor elevation would be approximately 80 feet below the nearest residence to the southeast and approximately 70 feet below the easterly residences. The current maximum family mausoleum structure allowed by the Use Permit and Development Agreement in other areas of the cemetery is 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 12 feet in depth. For Building Site "H" only, the applicant proposes four (4) building envelopes to be at 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in depth and two smaller structures at 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 12 feet in depth. The proposed project, if approved, would be included with specific conditions for the development of Building Site "H ", Area 8. Development Agreement Amendment The purpose of the Development Agreement is to enable Pacific View Memorial Park to Master Plan the build -out of the property based on internment and funeral service needs of the community, while minimizing the impact of the build -out on the adjoining residences. The Development Agreement contains comprehensive provisions setting forth the timing for development phasing, construction scheduling, the height and design of structures, landscaping, and the maintenance of a buffer landscape area in perpetuity between the Park and the nearby residents. The term of the existing Development Agreement is for a period of twenty (20) years with an automatic 10 -year extension if at the expiration of the initial 20 -year term Pacific View has not completed all of the development authorized in the Development Agreement and is in the 12th year of the 20 -year term. To date, the Park has made the following improvements: Total Built to Allowed Remaining Date Administration Building 30,000 s.f. 10,317 s.f. 19,683 s.f. Community Mausoleum 121,680 s.f. 9 1, 174 s.f. 30,506 s.f. Garden Crypts & Family Mausoleum 12,000 s.f. 11,412 s.f. 588 s.f. The existing Development Agreement requires that Area 8 be developed with flat marker ground burial and be maintained in a manner consistent with the existing "park like" development. Building Site "H" is to be developed with a 7,200 square -foot community mausoleum. If approved, the overall square footage allowance for community mausolea will be reduced from 121,680 to 114,480 square feet. There would be no increase to the family mausoleum allotment as the applicant is proposing /V Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 12 of 14 to extract the square footage from the approved family mausoleum development limit of 12,000 square feet. Attached with the staff report for Planning Commission consideration is the proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement (Exhibit 9), which includes proposed changes to the applicable sections and added language for the proposed landscaping. This document has been reviewed by the City Attorney's Office for code compliance and accuracy. Environmental Review An Initial Study /Negative Declaration (ND) has been prepared by Dudek for the project as originally submitted by the applicant in compliance with the implementing guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The document is attached as Exhibit 10 and identifies ten (10) issue areas with "less than significant impact" determinations. Those issues are: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology & Water Quality, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Services Systems. No significant impacts are identified based upon a comparison of the proposed project with the established thresholds of significant. As result, no new mitigation measures have been identified. Those mitigation measures from the 1995 adopted Initial Study /Negative Declaration (Exhibit 11) which are applicable to this project are referenced in the ND as part of the environmental analysis. The ND was circulated for a 20-day public review, between April 6 and April 26, 2007. Staff received comments from the nearby residents but none were environment impact - related. The residents' concerns have been discussed under the Concerns of Residents Section. The modifications to the submitted application requested by Pacific View address the concerns raised by the nearby residents and are consistent with the project characteristics analyzed in the ND. As a result, no further review or amendment to the ND is necessary. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website. CONCLUSION Staff believes that findings necessary for project approval can be made. The Use Permit application does not include the introduction of new uses inconsistent with the /5 Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 13 of 14 land use designation of the site. The request to develop six (6) family mausolea within Building Site "H ", Area 8 in lieu of a larger community mausoleum should not prove detrimental to the adjacent residential properties given the smaller building mass and size of the proposed six (6) family mausolea, the placement of these structures which is considerably below the existing established grade of the adjacent residents, the proposed setbacks of these structures, and the additional landscaping to screen these structures from the ground floor views of the nearby residential properties. The estate gardens would be adequately screened from the nearby residents by virtue being constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls with no monuments, fences, gates or other elements exceeding the top height of the estate garden walls. In conclusion, staff believes that the project implementation as described will be adequately controlled through the conditions of approval stated in the Use Permit and First Agreement, such that the project will not be detrimental to the neighborhood of the City. ALTERNATIVES 1. If the Planning Commission determines that not all the facts in support of the findings can be made for the applicant's requests, the Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare findings and a resolution denying the requests and return at the next Planning Commission meeting date with such resolution for adoption; or 2. The Planning Commission may suggest specific project modifications that are needed for approval. If this is done, the item should be continued if the changes are reasonable and easy to incorporate. If substantial changes are directed, the item should be removed from calendar to allow redesign of the project. Prepared bv: Exhibits Submitted by: FWA 1. Draft Resolution No. 2007 - ; findings and conditions of approval 2. Development Agreement No. 7' 3. Letters of concerns from residents 4. Revised application letter dated August 1, 2007 5. Letter of support from Spyglass Hill HOA 6. View Simulation Photos from 5 Monterey Circle 7. View Simulation Photos from 1 Little River Circle 8. Pictures taken from adjacent residences lb Pacific View Memorial Park August 9, 2007 Page 14 of 14 9. Draft First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 7 10. Draft Initial Study /Negative Declaration' 11. 1995 Adopted Initial Study /Negative Declaration' 12. Submitted Plans dated July 27, 2007 'Distributed separately due to bulk. The entire document is available in Planning Department. /7 EXHIBIT 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION ty RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2007 -001 AND APPROVE USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -040 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2006- 001 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIX (6) FAMILY MAUSOLEA AND ESTATE GARDENS WITHIN BUILDING SITE "H ", AREA 8 OF THE PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK LOCATED AT 3500 PACIFIC VIEW DRIVE (PA2006 -282) WHEREAS, an application was filed by Pacific View Memorial Park with respect to property located at 3500 Pacific View Drive, and legally described as Portions of Blocks 96 & 97 of Irvine's Subdivision as shown in Book 1, Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps, requesting approval of amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and to Development Agreement No. 7 to allow Pacific View Memorial Park to develop six (6) family mausolea comprising of 2,024 square -feet and ground burial estate gardens within Building Site "H ", Area 8 (the "Project") in lieu of a 7,200 square foot community mausoleum; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on August 9, 2007, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 1995, the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration, approved Use Permit No. 3518, General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1(F), Site Plan Review No. 69 and Development Agreement No. 7 to establish maximum permitted development allocation for Pacific View Memorial Park of 30,000 square -feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 121,680 square -feet of community mausolea and 12,000 square -feet of family mausolea and granted Pacific View Memorial Park statutory vested rights to develop the subject property in accordance with the terms and conditions for the ultimate build -out of the entire cemetery property; and WHEREAS, a use permit for the proposed Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 20.91.035 of the Municipal Code based on the following findings and facts in support of such findings: 1. Finding: That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. Facts in Support of Finding: The existing Pacific View Memorial Park is a privately owned cemetery which is a permitted use in the Private Institutional (PI) General Plan Land Use Element designation and consistent with the purpose of the GEIF Zoning District. An approval of a use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.91 is required since Pacific View is proposing to change the Z1 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 2 of 8 development allocations within Building Site "H" of Area 8. The proposed changes are site - specific, within the existing cemetery and, therefore, would not cause any land use conflict or inconsistency with the surrounding area. 2. Finding: That the proposed location of the Use Permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city. Facts in Support of Finding: A. The proposed Project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, which designates the property as Private Institutional (PI) with a maximum, permitted development allocation for Pacific View of 30,000 square -feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 121,680 square -feet of community mausolea and 12,000 square -feet of family mausolea. The PI designation is intended to provide for privately -owned facilities that serve the public, including places for religious assembly, private schools, healthcare facilities, cultural institutions, museums, yacht clubs, congregate homes, and comparable facilities. The proposed Project presents no conflict with the policies of the General Plan. All development regulations of the GEIF District would be met, including structure height limitations and development limits B. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City due to the following: 1. The overall building mass and the total building floor area for Building Site "H° would be reduced from 7,200 square feet to 2,024 square feet, a 72% reduction in floor area. 2. The overall structure building height would be reduced from 24 to 17 feet. 3. By reducing the total number of casket spaces available from approximately 1,200 in the community mausoleum structure to approximately 280 for six (6) family mausolea and for estate gardens, funeral services and related activities would be reduced significantly. 4. The family mausoleum building envelopes would spread across an area larger than the current community mausoleum in Building Site "H ". This would allow for additional landscaping around each family 2Z City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 3 of 8 mausoleum building envelope to integrate and buffer each structure from surrounding views. 5. Additional landscaping would be provided within Building Site "H ". Two (2) 36 -inch box trees would be planted on the slope around each of the family mausoleum building envelopes. The trees would be planted within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the Project approval or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first structure, whichever is earlier. Additionally, at the time of construction of any family mausoleum, one additional 48 -inch box tree would be planted at side or rear elevation and one additional 36 -inch box tree would be planted adjacent to the front elevation of the structure. Prior to the issuance for a certificate of occupancy of any individual family mausoleum, additional trees, if needed, would be planted to screen the subject structure from the ground floor views of the residential properties immediately adjacent to the subject site. 6. Each family mausolea would be constructed in a considerably shorter time frame than the community mausoleum construction period. Since the family mausolea are mostly prefabricated, there would be more of an assembly operation rather than the on -site community mausoleum construction which consists of concrete forming, pouring and stripping operation, including the use of concrete pumps and booms that have more construction impacts to the nearby residents. 7. The estate gardens are ground burials similar to other areas in the cemetery with stone walls and above -grade memorials not exceeding 3 feet in height. 3. Finding: That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including specific conditions for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. Facts in Support of Finding: The Use Permit presently entitles the applicant to develop the cemetery consistent with the approved development plans attached to the Development Agreement. Mausoleum structures housing crypts and estate gardens are currently allowed on -site and have been constructed in areas adjacent to the project building site. Pacific View has developed the cemetery in a manner to satisfy mitigation measures and has implemented conditions of approval as adopted in the Use Permit and Development Agreement. The Use Permit and Development Agreement currently allow for a maximum 7,200 square -foot (60'x120') community mausoleum with maximum building height of 24 feet in Building Site "H ", and for Area 8 to be improved with ground burials, in a manner consistent with a cemetery. The nearest proposed family mausoleum building envelope would be located a minimum of 190 feet from the southeast property line of the nearest residences and 390 feet from the easterly property line of the nearest residences. The finished floor �3 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Paqe 4 of 8 elevation would be approximately 80 feet below the nearest residence to the southeast and approximately 70 feet below the easterly residences. The current maximum family mausoleum structure allowed by the Use Permit and Development Agreement in other areas of the cemetery is 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 12 feet in depth. For Building Site "H" only, the applicant proposes four (4) building envelopes to be at 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in depth and two smaller structures at 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width, and 12 feet in depth. The proposed project, if approved, would be included with specific conditions for the development of Building Site "H ", Area 8; and WHEREAS, the Project also requires the approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. 7 pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.45.060 of the Municipal Code (Development Agreements: Amend ment/Cancellation). This section states a development agreement may be amended in whole or in part, by mutual consent of the parties to the agreement or their successors in interest and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code. The parties, in this case, would be the applicant and the Newport Beach City Council; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) for the Project have been prepared in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K -3. The Draft ND was circulated for public comment between April 6 and April 26, 2007; and WHEREAS, on the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed Project 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. No significant impacts are identified based upon a comparison of the proposed Project with the established thresholds of signifcant. Additionally, there are no long -term environmental goals that would be compromised by the Project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in connection with the Project. As result, no new mitigation measures identified. Those mitigation measures from the 1995 adopted Initial Study /Negative Declaration which are applicable to this Project are referenced in the ND as part of the environmental analysis; and WHEREAS, 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, attorney's fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger; and zy City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Page 5 of 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1. 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 Negative Declaration reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt and certify Negative Declaration No. 2007 -001 included therewith. 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. Section 2. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Negative Declaration No. 2007 -001 and approve Use Permit No. 2006 -040 subject to the conditions of approval attached as Exhibit A and Development Agreement No. 2006 -001 as attached as Exhibit B. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9th DAY OF AUGUST 2007. M IM Robert Hawkins, Chairman Bradley Hillgren, Secretary AYES: ;Z!5 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -040 Conditions in bold - italics are project specific conditions. All others are standard conditions. Planning Department The development shall be in substantial conformance with the following approved plans dated July 27, 2007: Technical Site Plan - Exhibit "C ", Preliminary Landscape Plan - Exhibit "D ", Building Site "E" and "H" Section Diagrams - Exhibit "F; and Visual Simulations - Exhibit "J" of the Development Agreement Amendment (First Amendment). 2. The visual simulations dated July 10, 2007 shall be attached to the First Amendment and labeled as Exhibit "J". 3. The term of the Development Agreement shall be extended for eighteen (18) years from the effective date of the First Amendment plus the seven (7) year automatic extension. The Development Agreement shall, therefore, be in force for approximately twenty-ive (25) years from the effective date of the First Amendment 4. Use Permit No. 2006 -040 shall expire unless exercised within the term of Development Agreement Rights granted by Use Permit No. 2006 -040 may continue to be exercised after the expiration of Development Agreement in accordance with the terms of the Zoning Code. 5. The Project is subject to Development Agreement No. 7, First Amendment and all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 6. Within Building Site "H'; Area 8, there shall be no more than six (6) family mausolea in lieu of a 7,200 square foot community mausoleum. Building Envelope Nos. H.5 and H.6 shall not exceed a maximum of 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth, and Building Envelope Nos. H.1, H.$ 14.3, and 14.4 may be a maximum of 17 feet in height; 22 feet in width and 17 in depth. 7. The roof elevations of the six (6) new family mausolea in Building Site "H" shall not exceed the heights indicated on Exhibit "D" and "F" of the First Amendment 8. The pad elevations of the six (6) new family mausolea in Building Site "H" shall comply with the pad elevations indicated on Exhibit "D" and "F" of the First Amendment Z� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 7 of 8 9. Religious, ornamental and other vertical objects shall not be permitted on the roof or protrude above the roofline of the family mausolea in Building Site "H ", Area 8. 10. Construction of a community mausoleum and crypt wall within Building Site "E" shall not commence prior to January 1, 2014. 11. Estate gardens shall be allowed within Building Site "H ". Estate gardens shall be constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls consistent with the visual simulations prepared by the City of Newport Beach and as shown on Exhibit "F" of the First Amendment. No monuments, fences, gates or other elements except plant material shall exceed the top height of the estate garden walls. 12. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 65868 of the California Government Code, Pacific View waives any right it may have, now or in the future to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement and shall not amend, change or modify, or request, or otherwise seek to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement for a period of not less than fifteen (15) years from the effective date of the First Amendment. In the event there is a conflict between this provision agreeing not to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement and any other provision of the Development Agreement, statute, ordinance, regulation, or law governing the Development Agreement, this provision and intent shall govern. 13. The 430 -foot mean sea level elevation landscape restriction shall be extended to encompass the entire boundaries of Building Sites "E ", "F" and "G" as shown on Exhibit "C" of the First Amendment. 14. Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the First Amendment or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the First structure, whichever is earlier, Pacific View shall plant landscape buffering consisting of a total of two (2) 36 -inch box trees on the slope around each of family mausoleum building envelope as shown on Exhibits "D" and "F" of the First Amendment. 15. At the time of construction of any individual family mausoleum in Building Site "H ", one (1) 48 -inch box size tree shall be planted at the side or rear elevation and one 36 -inch box tree shall be planted adjacent to the front elevation of the structure as depicted on Exhibit "D" of the First Amendment. 16. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any individual family mausoleum, Pacific View shall plant all trees determined by the City, in its sole discretion, to be necessary to screen the constructed family mausoleum in Building Site "H" from the ground floor views of the Z� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 8 of 8 residential properties as depicted in the computer visual simulations attached and marked Exhibit "J" and shown on Exhibits "D" and "F" of the First Amendment 17. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first family mausoleum in Building Site "H'; Pacific View shall submit a Final Landscape Plan, to be approved by the Planning Department that depicts location, type and size of all plantings so that, in comparison with the revised Preliminary Landscape Plan (Exhibit "D" of the First Amendment), there would be the same amount of screening of family mausolea and estate gardens in Building Site "H'; Area 8 as in the Preliminary Landscape Plan. 18. The development limit for community mausolea for the entire cemetery shall be reduced from 121,680 to 114,480 square feet. 19. Minor adjustments necessary for safety, maintenance, slope engineering, landscaping, the engineering of building pads, and the reorientation of structures within existing building envelopes, given the extended period of years over which the property will be developed, shall be allowed with the approval of the Planning Director, so long as such minor adjustments are consistent with the building envelopes and at or below the building height limits shown on Exhibit "C" of the First Amendment (Technical Site Plan), and do not involve changes or additions to the number, type, height, or placement of structures (other than changes in the orientation of structures within building envelopes specified in accordance with Exhibit "C" of the First Amendment in Area 8, 9, 10 and 11. 20. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the 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 Use Permit; and/or the City's related California Environmental Quality Act determinations. Building Departments 21. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire Departments. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City- adopted version of the California Building Code. z EXHIBIT 2 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 7 Distributed separately due to bulk. The entire document is available in Planning Department 3J mm 1 .i m Mw= Cm 6103 Recording Requested By and When Recorded Return to: City Clerk City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659 -1768 BSHZOBD4.WP .04 DA *n ng_gEn_ioa5, ij- -7 &ii Recorded in Official Records of Drame County: California Gary L. Granville, GIer'c- Retarder Page 1 of 55 Fees: S 0.0t DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND PACIFIC VIER* MEMORIAL PARK Approved July 10 . 1995 Ordinance No. 45_ Z6 1 M EN& SEP M 1995 CR1' ftERK �'' HEWPORt BEACH ..11 r � di DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT f ,y�R�I9 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement ") is enterecl into between the City of Newport Beach (the "City "), and Pierce Brothers, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park ( "Pacific View ") with respect to the updated master plan for development of Pacific View Memorial Park. 1. RECITALS. This Agreement relates to the following: 1.1 Purpose of Agreement. This Agreement is intended to: (a) Enable Pacific View to update its master plan for the buildout of the Property by obtaining the City's review and approval of updated design parameters for new or additional facilities at Pacific'View Memorial Park consistent with the currently anticipated interment and funeral service needs of community members, which have changed over the years. (b) Minimize the impact of the buildout on adjoining residents by establishing strict, binding limits on the amount, height and location of permitted development as well as ensure compliance with numerous conditions on the timing of construction, the design of structures, and landscaping of the property. (c) Benefit the parties, nearby residents and the general public by serving as the primary legal means of vesting Pacific View's right to develop the property ensuring continued compliance with conditions on development that are intended to mitigate the impact of construction on nearby residents and doing so with a level of certainty that will minimize the potential for disputes in the future. 1.2 Authorization. This Agreement is authorized by, and is consistent with, the provisions of Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California, and Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 1 C -3oSe t d.� 1.3 Interest of Pacific View. Pacific View is the owner of approximately forty five (45) acres of real property located in the City and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" (the "Property "). 1.4 Development of the Property. This Agreement grants Pacific View the statutory and contractual vested right to develop the Property during the Term of this Agreement consistent with the Pacific View Memorial Park's technical site plan (the "Technical Site Plan) attached as Exhibit "C ", subject to compliance with the conditions and mitigation measures set forth in Section 3 with respect to Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Negative Declaration "), General Plan Amendment No. 94- 1(F) ( "General Plan Amendment "), and Use Permit No. 3518 ( "UP "), Site Plan Review ( #69) (collectively, the "Discretionary Approvals "), as well as the additional conditions relating to public benefit set forth in Section 4 and other portions of this Agreement. 1.5 Planning Commission /City Council Hearincrs. The Planning Commission, after giving appropriate notice, held public hearings to consider the Discretionary Approvals on February 23 and March 9. The hearings were continued to April 20 to enable the circulation of an additional Negative Declaration and supplemental public notice regarding potential changes to Pacific View's Technical Site Plan requested by the Planning Commission, as well as notice regarding the potential Development Agreement which the Commission desired to consider. On April 20, after conducting further hearings regarding the Discretionary Approvals and the draft Development Agreement, and after further conditioning and modifying the Technical Site Plan, the Discretionary Approvals and the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission directed the preparation of approval resolutions, findings, conditions, and documents in accordance with the revised Technical Site Plan prepared by Pacific View to be prepared for its May 4 meeting. On May 4, after conducting further hearings, and after further conditioning and modifying the Technical Site Plan, the Discretionary Approvals and the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the same. The City Council conducted public hearings on the Technical Site Plan, Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement on u� pA 2. June 12 and 26, 1995. The City Council approved this Agreement on July 10, 1995. 1.6 CQnsistencv. This Agreement is consistent with the various elements of the Newport Beach General Plan (as amended by the General Plan Amendment), and other applicable ordinances, plans, and policies of the City. This Agreement is also consistent with the purpose and intent of state and local laws authorizing development agreements in that it represents comprehensive planning, provides certainty in the approval of subsequent construction subject to compliance with conditions, reduces the economic costs of development by providing assurance to Pacific View that it may use and develop the Property in accordance with the Discretionary Approvals subject to compliance with the terms and conditions hereof, and provides assurance to adjoining property owners that restrictions and conditions designed to mitigate the impact of development, such as restrictions on the height, location and number of building envelopes will remain in full force during the term of this Agreement or, in the case of the prohibition against interments in, and the landscaping and maintenance of, the buffer zone, survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 1.7 Police Power. The City Council has determined that this Agreement is in the best interests of the health, safety and general welfare of the City, its residents and the public, was entered into pursuant to, and represents a valid exercise of, the City's police power, and has been approved in accordance with the provisions of state and local law that establish procedures for the approval of development agreements. 1.8 City Ordinance. On July 10, 1995, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 95 -26 approving this Agreement and authorizing the City to enter into this Agreement. The Adopting Ordinance will become effective on August 9, 1995. 2.1 The "Adopting Ordinance" refers to City .. Ordinance No. 95 -26, adopted on July 10, 1995 by the City Council, which approved and authorized the City to enter into this Agreement. 2.2 "Agreement° refers to this Development Agreement between the City and Pacific View. 2.3 "Periodic Review" refers to the review of Pacific View's good faith compliance with this Agreement and conditions on development as set forth in Section 6. 2.4 The "Approval Date" means the date on which the City Council voted to adopt the Adopting Ordinance. 2.5 All forms of use of the verb "assign" and the nouns "assignment" and "assignee" shall include all contexts of hypothecations, sales, conveyances, transfers, leases, and assignments. 2.6 "CEOA" and the °CEOA Guidelines" refers to the California Environmental Quality Act and the CEQA Guidelines promulgated by the Secretary of Resources of the State of California, including any amendments adopted subsequent to the Effective Date. 2.7 "City Council" refers to the City Council of the City. 2.8 "Cure Period" refers to the period of time during which Default may be cured pursuant to Section 9.1. 2.9 A "day" or "days" refers to a calendar day, unless expressly stated to be a business day. 2.10 A "Default" refers to any material default, breach, or violation of the provisions of this Agreement. A "City Default" refers to a Default by the City, while a "Pacific View Default" refers to a default by Pacific View. 2.11 "Discretionary Approvals" shall collectively mean the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Use Permit, and Site Plan Review. 2.12 The "Effective Date" refers to the effective date of the Adopting ordinance and is the effective date of this Agreement. 2.13 An "Estoppel Certificate" refers to the document certifying the status of this Agreement required by Section 6.5 in the form of Exhibit "G". 4 V* 2.14 An "Exhibit" refers to an exhibit to this Agreement. All Exhibits are incorporated as a substantive part of this Agreement. The Exhibits to this Agreement are: Exhibit A: Legal Description of the Property Map Exhibit B: Map of Property Exhibit C: The Technical Site Plan Dated July 10, 1995. Exhibit D: Preliminary Landscape Plan Dated July 10, 1995. Exhibit E: Building Site G Section Diagrams Dated July 10, 1995. (Reference points: Lots 19, 21, 23 & 28) Exhibit F: Building Site E & H Section Diagram Dated July 10, 1995. (Reference point: Lot 7) Exhibit G: Estoppel Certificate Exhibit H: Restrictive Covenant Exhibit 2: Garden of Valor Improvement Plans Dated July 10, 1995. 2.15 "Existing General Regulations" means those General Regulations approved by the City on or before the Approval Date (irrespective of their effective date) and not rescinded or superseded by City action taken on or before the Approval Date. 2.16 "Future General Regulations" means those General Regulations adopted by the City after the Approval Date. 2.17 "General Regulations" means those ordinances, rules, regulations, policies, and guidelines of the City, which are generally applicable to the use of land and /or construction within the City and include, Uniform Building Codes and water and sewer connection and fee ordinances. 2.18 "General Plan" refers to the City's General Plan (as amended by the General Plan Amendment), plus all amendments to the General Plan adopted by the City on or before the Approval Date and effective prior to'the Effective Date. 5 0 2.19 "Includes" and all contexts and forms of the words "includes" and "including" shall be interpreted to also state "but not limited to." 2.20 "Mortgagee" refers to the holder of a beneficial interest under any mortgage, deed of trust, sale - leaseback agreement, or other transaction whereby the property is used as security for a loan. 2.21 "Notice" refers to any written notice or demand between the parties required or permitted by this Agreement. 2.22 The "Parties" refers to the City and Pacific View and "Party" refers to either of the Parties. 2.23 "Planning Commission" refers to the Planning Commission of the City. 2.24 "Proiect Specific Approvals" includes, but is not limited to all specific permits, approvals, subdivisions maps, authorizations and licenses which are required by the Existing General Regulations and which may be requested by Pacific View in order to enable Pacific View tc alter, improve, develop, and utilize the Property in accordance with the Technical Site Plan and the Discretionary Approvals and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 3. UNDERLYING DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS. The City Council's approval of the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement is subject to compliance with the numerous conditions and mitigation measures contained in the Discretionary Approvals which are designed to mitigate (to less- than - significant - levels) or eliminate potentially significant adverse effects of the complete development in accordance with the Technical Site Plan, and which ensure the health, safety, and welfare of nearby residents as well as Pacific View's patrons, visitors and employees. The conditions and mitigation measures imposed in conjunction with the discretionary approvals are described in Sections 3.1 through and including 3.3. 3.1 -Negative Declaration Mitigation Measures Buffer Area Requirements. a. Provision of Buffer Area. A landscaped buffer area (the "Buffer Area ") shall be provided as depicted on Exhibit C and Exhibit D along the eastern property line � V l� adjacent to residential properties. No structures, public roads, walkways, walls (other than retaining walls and existing underground utilities), ground internments 2 other form of burial, preservation of remains, plaques, memorials or monuments of any kind shall be permitted within the Buffer Area. b. Covenant and Agreement. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit for any development permitted by this Agreement (except any permit required to complete the improvements required by Section 4.4) Pacific View shall execute and record the covenant attached as Exhibit H, which ensures that the Buffer Area required by this Agreement shall be maintained in perpetuity subject to Pacific View's right to encroach into the Buffer Area, and to remove and /or disturb Buffer Area landscaping and irrigation. Pacific View's right to encroach into, or remove and /or disturb a portion of, the Buffer Area is subject to the following: c. 1. The encroachment, disturbance, or removal shall only be to the extent reasonably necessary to accommodate construction within Building Sites E and G; and 2. Pacific View is required to restore the Buffer Area, including landscaping and irrigation, to its condition prior to the encroachment, disturbance or removal as soon as possible after the encroachment is no longer necessary to accommodate construction activities. Pacific View shall have the right to enter onto the Buffer Area as necessary or appropriate to repair or maintain the integrity of any slope. The Buffer Area shall be landscaped and improved with an irrigation system. Except for slope areas, the Buffer Area shall be provided with a below ground permanent irrigation system. Slope areas shall be improved with an above - ground irrigation system consisting of U.V. resistant PVC MA piping. The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with a final landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect which has been approved by the Planning Director and which fully complies with the preliminary landscape plan attached as Exhibit D (the "Final Landscape Plan "). The Final Landscape Plan submitted by Pacific View shall depict location of planting, the minimum number of planting required, and the type and size of plantings such that, in comparison with the Preliminary Landscape Plan, there will be the same screening of Community Mausolea and Building Sites E, D, F, G and H from the perspective of ground floor views from existing residences adjacent to the eastern property line consistent with the 430 foot mean sea level elevation limitation in the "Height Limitation Area" designated on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). d. Installation of Landscaoina and Irrigation. The installation of all required Buffer Area landscaping and related irrigation shall be initiated as described by Section 4.6 of this Agreement, but prior to issuance of building permits for the construction of the remaining phase of Sunset Court in Building Site G. Except as provided in Section 4.6 of this Agreement, the remainder of landscaping and related irrigation shall be installed during the individual Community Mausolea projects. All landscaping within the "Height Limitation Area" designated on Exhibit C of this Agreement shall be maintained by Pacific View at or below 430 feet elevation above mean sea level in such a way so as to preserve night light, water and mountain views from existing residences. e. Slopes. (1) Slopes within the Buffer Area behind Building Site G shall conform to the sections depicted in Exhibit E to this Agreement. n 13b (2) Slopes within the Buffer Area behind Building Site E adjacent to Lots 6, 7, and 8 shall conform to the sections depicted in Exhibit F to this Agreement. (3) Slopes behind the new Community Mausolea in Building Site H shall conform to the sections depicted in Exhibit F to this Development Agreement. 2. Height Limit. All structures shall comply with the 28/32 -foot height limitation measured from the elevations set forth in Exhibit C of this Agreement. In addition, no structure or landscaping shall exceed 430 feet elevation mean sea level in the "Height Limitation Area" designated on Exhibit C of the Development Agreement. 5. Temporary Screening. All construction sites shall be screened from view from adjacent residential areas for the duration of construction activities to the extent reasonably feasible. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit the Planning Department shall verify that appropriate screening requirements have been provided on the construction plans. Mausoleum Design. All roofs, eaves and facias of new garden crypts and community mausolea shall be constructed of material, color, texture, thickness and pitch to blend with, and complement, the architectural style of the original structures within the park (e.g., Lagunita and Palm Courts). Blank walls of Community Mausolea in Building Sites E, G, and H shall be screened in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan. All landscaping currently installed, or to be installed, on the property shall be irrigated and maintained. Maintenance of Undeveloped Areas. The undeveloped areas of the Property shall be maintained free and clear of trash and debris. Grass and weeds shall be mowed no less than semi - annually, 7. Reclaimed Water Connecti2n. All existing and proposed irrigation systems shall be connected 13► to the City's reclaimed water system as soon as it is practical (i.e., when a reclaimed water connection is available at the property line) and economically feasible. 8. Light and Glare. The Building Director shall not issue any permit authorizing the installation of any lighting system unless the system is designed, directed and maintained to conceal the light source from, and to minimize light spillage and glare to, the adjacent residential uses to the extent reasonably feasible. The Building Director's determination of feasibility shall be based upon plans prepared and signed by a licensed architect or electrical engineer accompanied by a report explaining why any remaining glare or light spillage cannot feasibly be eliminated or further reduced. 9. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the project will comply with Council Policies K -5 and K -6 regarding archaeological and paleontological resource investigation, surveillance and recovery. 10. Drilling and Engraving. All drilling and engraving of crypt markers shall be done in enclosed areas or at a sufficient distance from residential properties so as to cause no discernible increase (any increase in noise levels of 3 DBA or more shall be considered discernible) in ambient noise levels at any residential property line. 3.2 Use Permit No 18 Conditions. 1. Exhibit C depicts the.approximate size, configuration and location of building envelopes for future Community Mausolea to be constructed within the Property. Community Mausoleum shall mean any mausoleum building or crypt wall structure containing interment spaces capable of accommodating casketed remains, and which are available to the public at large. Future Community Mausolea shall be permitted only in Building Sites A, C, E, G & H and within the Building Envelopes specified on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). 2. The plan also depicts Building Sites within which Family Mausolea or Columbaria may be developed. "Family Mausolea" shall mean a LU 1- �a mausoleum building or above ground crypt containing casketed remains which are owned and privately used by any individual or family. Columbaria shall mean any building or structure used or intended to be used for the interment of cremated human remains. Pacific View's ability to construct Family Mausolea or Columbaria on the Property shall be limited as follows: a. Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall not exceed 12 feet in depth, 22 feet in width and 15 feet in height; provided, however, in Building Site G, Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall not exceed 14 feet in height. , b. Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall be permitted in Building Site D. C. Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall be permitted in Building Sites F and G provided they are contiguous and adjacent to a Community Mausoleum and are located within the westerly projections of the Community Mausoleum (as opposed to crypt walls) building envelopes depicted on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). d. The Columbaria and related construction, including flag poles and flat work depicted on Exhibit I to this Agreement shall be permitted in the Garden of Valor subject to compliance with, and the payment of the penalty provided in, the Uniform Building Code. The improvements described in Exhibit I are the only improvements permitted in the Garden of Valor. Pacific View shall plant box trees to provide screening of Garden of Valor improvements from residences adjacent to the eastern and southern boundaries of the property. e. Family Mausolea and Columbaria are prohibited on the Property except in those areas expressly permitted pursuant to this Section (3.2 a - c) . 3. The General Plan Amendment and Technical Site Plan provides for a maximum of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 121,680 square feet of Community Mausolea, and 12,000 square feet of Family Mausolea. Square footage for Columbaria, if 11 �3� any, shall be deducted from Community or Family Mausolea allotments at Pacific View's option. The allotments described in this subsection include development on -site as of the date of this Agreement. As described in Section 4.1, overhangs, eaves, walkways, and similar architectural features and improvements shall not be counted against permitted square footage. 4. No roads or driveways shall be located closer to adjoining residential areas than depicted on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). The existing extension of Pacific View Drive adjacent to the southerly side of Area 12 (contiguous and adjacent to the south side of Building Site F) shall be removed prior to the commencement of construction in Building Site G. 5. Except as provided in Section 4.8, the operation of all construction and maintenance equipment shall be in conformance with the provisions of Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 6. All improvements shall be constructed in accordance with all applicable city ordinances relating to grading and building code requirements, including any such requirements of the Public Works Department. 7. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, Pacific View shall submit a hydraulic study for review and approval by the Public Works Director. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain system shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of, and constructed by, Pacific View. Drainage facilities required of Pacific View must be approved by the Public Works Department and must be designed so as to not cause flooding of, or drainage of water onto, the adjacent City Reservoir Site. 8• The temporary building currently used as a sales office shall be allowed for a period of two (2) years from the Effective Date, unless otherwise extended by the Modifications Committee. At such time as the applicant's use of the temporary building ceases, the building shall be removed from the site... 12 13� 9. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any Community Mausoleum, Family Mausoleum, Family Mausolea, or Columbaria, the location of such structures shall be reviewed with the Planning Director or his /her designee, to ensure compliance with the approved plans. 10. Minor Adjustments. Given the extended period of years over which the Property will be developed, it is understood that minor adjustments in the location or configuration of the Community Mausoleum, Family Mausolea or Columbaria may occur, end that other minor adjustments (e.g. to accommodate slope engineering or the engineering of building pads) may be necessary to address site considerations. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Discretionary Approvals or this Agreement, such minor adjustments shall be permitted with the approval of the Planning Director provided that they are substantially consistent with the building envelopes, and at or below the building height limits, shown on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). 3.3 Site Plan Review Condition That the proposed development shall be constructed in substantial accordance with the pad elevations specified in the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). 4. PUBLIC BENEFITS CONDITIONS. In addition to the conditions and mitigations in Section 3 of this Agreement, Pacific View has agreed to the following conditions and restrictions contained in this Section (4) in exchange for the vested rights conferred by this Agreement. Pacific View's agreement to implement and abide by the additional conditions specified in this Section (4) during the Term of this Agreement will confer substantial public benefits. Specifically, Pacific's View's agreement to develop the Property in accordance with the following additional conditions will provide: (a) long -term certainty regarding Pacific View's development plans; (b) design controls over the cemetery which may not be otherwise available under Existing General Regulations and which are anticipated to result in the substantial screening of mausolea from the ground floor views of residences adjacent to the eastern and southern Property lines; (c) long -term development phasing which will reduce construction disturbances to nearby residences; (d) increased screening of, and roof treatment to, past development to improve its compatibility with nearby residences; (e) commitments with respect to improvement and maintenance of certain developed and undeveloped areas; and (f) release of potential monetary claims against the City of Newport Beach related to the 13 121, 13� 1988 General Plan Update (as set forth in Section 10 below) and subsequent acts or omissions of the City and its officers, employees and representatives prior to the Effective Date. To the extent of any inconsistency between the conditions set forth in this Section (4) and the conditions and mitigations contained in the Discretionary Approvals (as specified in Section (3)) the conditions specified in this Section (4) shall control. 1. Building Bulk. New Community Mausolea shall be constructed in compliance with the envelopes depicted in the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) . The building envelopes do not depict the number or design of individual structures. In addition, the envelopes do not depict overhangs, eaves, walkways, and similar architectural features and improvements, which shall be constructed to screen Community Mausolea and are permitted to extend beyond the building envelopes shown in the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C), provided, however eaves shall not exceed a depth of eight (8) feet and eaves on gable ends shall not exceed a depth of four (4) feet. Building Height. (a) Roof elevations of new Community Mausolea in Building Site G shall not exceed the heights indicated on Exhibit C. (b) Pad elevations of new Community Mausolea in Building Site G shall comply with the pad elevations indicated on Exhibits C and E. (c) Roof elevations of new Community Mausolea Building Site E shall not exceed the heights indicated on Exhibits C and F. (d) Pad elevations of new Community Mausolea in Building Site E shall comply with the pad elevations indicated on Exhibits C and F. (e) Roof elevations of new Community Mausolea in Building Site H shall not exceed the heights indicated on Exhibits C and F. (f) Pad elevations of new Community Mausolea in Building Site H shall comply with the pad elevations indicated on Exhibits C and F. Architectural Character. The architectural character, roof - treatment and finishes of new Community Mausolea shall be generally consistent 14 11�� with the architectural character, roof treatment and finishes of the existing Lagunita and Palm Courts Community Mausoleum. 4. Increased Screening of Sunset Court. Within sixty days after the expiration of the Statute of Limitations for any challenge to this Agreement or the Discretionary Approvals, and assuming no legal challenge has been filed, Pacific View shall commence, and thereafter diligently pursue to completion, the following landscaping and roof treatment for the existing Sunset Court Community Mausolea: a. Installation of thirty (30) fifteen - gallon shrubs to be added to the existing slopes surrounding the Sunset Court Community Mausoleum; b. Ten (10) thirty -six inch box size trees shall be planted in the turf courtyard of the Sunset Court Addition (the trees selected shall be of a species not expected to exceed the 430 foot mean sea level height limitation restriction); and C. The Sunset Court Addition roof will be enhanced with colored ornamental rock which complements the color of the structure. 5. Phasing. Pacific View may develop the Community Mausolea in Building Sites E, G, and H in one or more phases. For the purposes of this Agreement a "phase" shall mean the construction of one or more Community Mausolea structure(s) within one or more of the Building Envelopes shown on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C). The first phase shall include the completion of Sunset Court within Building Site G (but may, in Pacific Views discretion, also include one or more additional Community Mausolea in Building Site G). A minimum period of thirty (30) months shall be required to have elapsed between the completion of construction of any phase and the initiation of construction of any subsequent phase. Construction of each phase shall be completed within nine months of the commencement of construction. Subject to the requirement that Pacific View commence the additional screening of Sunset Court required by Section 4.4 and issuance of 15 131 appropriate permits, construction of the first phase authorized by this Agreement may commence upon the Effective Date. The phasing requirements in this Agreement pertain exclusively to the grading and site preparation for, and construction of, new Community Mausolea and do not apply to any Family Mausolea, Columbaria or other improvement, structure, or appurtenance of the Property. The additional screening to Sunset Court required by Section 4.4 shall not be considered a "phase" for purposes of this Agreement. 6. Buffer zone Grading—and Landscapinq. Pacific View shall commence study and analysis of the grading and landscaping for the Buffer area and Building Sites E & G within sixty days after expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations, assuming no legal challenge has been filed to this Agreement or the Discretionary Approvals, and thereafter apply for all necessary permits. Grading for the Buffer Area and Building Sites E & G shall be completed within six (6) months after commencement of construction of the remainder of the Sunset Court Mausoleum in Building Site G. Pacific View shall also complete the installation of landscaping and irrigation systems in the entire Buffer Area as specified in the Final Landscape Plan within this six (6) month period. Pacific View shall be permitted to subsequently encroach into, remove a portion of or otherwise disturb Buffer Area landscaping and irrigation as specified in Section 3.1.1(B). Within six (6) months of the Effective Date, Pacific View shall plant twenty -six (26) fifteen - gallon trees within Area 8 (as shown on Exhibit C and D) designated on Exhibit C hereto. Pacific View shall not commence the construction of any Community Mausolea in Building Site H prior to four (4) years after the planting of such trees; provided, however, that Pacific View may elect to commence construction sooner than four (4) years by increasing the box -size of such trees or replacing such trees with larger box sizes as follows: Less than 3 years = 36" box Less than 2 years = 48" box Less than 1 year = 60" box Within six (6) months of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Pacific View shall also plant five (5) twenty four inch box trees along the 16 [-y� northeasterly boundary of Building Site D as shown in the Preliminary Landscape Plan. 7. Offsite Landscaping. Provided that the conditions in this Section 4.7 are met, Pacific View shall reimburse the Spyglass Hill Homeowner Association's ( "Association ") the actual and reasonable cost of: (a) purchasing and planting forty (40) fifteen - gallon shrub /trees within the common homeowner's association landscape area along the southeast boundary of Building Site E; and (b) repairing the existing irrigation system in such area as necessary consistent with the original operating characteristics of such irrigation system. Pacific View's obligation to reimburse the Association is contingent upon the Association's submittal of three bids consistent with the foregoing work description within six (6) months of the Effective Date of this Agreement. In the event the Association fails to submit the bids within the time required, Pacific View shall have no reimbursement obligation pursuant to this Section (4.7). Within ten (10) business days of receiving such bids, Pacific View shall approve one of the bids provided that all of the bids are consistent with such work description. The total cost set forth in the approved bid shall constitute Pacific View's maximum reimbursement obligation to Association regardless of whether Association accepts the bid approved by Pacific View; but in no event shall Pacific View be obligated to reimburse more than Association's actual cost of conducting such work. In the event that Association fails to complete the work described in this Section 4.7 within twelve (12) months of Pacific View's bid approval, Pacific View shall have no reimbursement obligation under this Section 4.7; however, in the event such work is completed within the time required, Pacific View shall promptly reimburse Association the amount provided herein. S. Mausolea Construction Hours. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Discretionary Approvals, this Agreement, or the Existing General Regulations, Community and Family Mausolea construction activity shall not commence before 5:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and no construction shall be permitted on Sundays or national holidays. Construction activity shall cease before 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. These 17 1� 1 1. restrictions shall not apply to any other aspect of Pacific View's operations. 9. Aa0' Covenant. In the event that all of those property owners who are the beneficiaries of the 430 foot mean sea level covenant of light and air which burdens a portion of the Property effectuate a legally enforceable extinguishment and release of such covenant, or in the event that all of such property owners effectuate a legally enforceable modification of such covenant to permit landscaping to exceed the 430 foot mean sea level elevation in the area burdened, then Pacific View shall not oppose and will consent to a modification of this Agreement initiated by the City for the sole and exclusive purpose of allowing the landscaping which is presently restricted to the 430 foot mean sea level elevation by virtue of this Agreement to grow to such greater elevation as permitted by the covenant modification agreed to by all of the benefitted property homeowners. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Pacific View shall be under no obligation whatsoever to seek or procure the consent of any property owner to the extinguishment or modification of the covenant, or to incur any cost or expense to obtain any required consent. Further, Pacific View shall be under no obligation whatsoever to consent to any modification of this Agreement consistent with any extinguishment or modification unless: (a) such extinguishment or modification (including, but not limited to a modification of the Development Agreement) does not seek to impose any additional conditions, obligations, restrictions, costs and /or expenses upon Pacific View other than to allow the landscaping in the burdened area of Pacific View ownership's to grow to such greater elevation as permitted by the covenant modification agreed to by all of the benefitted property owners and thereafter be maintained at such elevation; and (b) Pacific View is able to obtain an updated policy of title insurance or an endorsement to its existing policy insuring Pacific View's title consistent with the extinguished or modified covenant, and consistent with the modified Development Agreement. W. t -11 10. Ground Burial (a) Building Site E Except for the Community Mausoleum and Crypt Wall, Pacific View is permitted only below ground interment and the installation of plaques or memorials at or below grade in Building Site E. Pacific View shall not install pillow blocks, benches, memorials or other above grade objects (exclusive of landscaping as provided in the Final Landscape Plan and trash receptacles only as necessary). (b) Building Sites (other than Building Site E) Those portions of Building Sites which do not consist of building envelopes, or Within which Family Mausolea or Columbaria are not permitted by this Agreement, or if permitted, the Family Mausolea or Columbaria are not constructed, shall be used only for ground burial provided Pacific View may install in such areas: (1) Aesthetically pleasing walls not exceeding three (3) feet in height measured from the highest adjacent finished grade; (2) Above grade memorials such as benches and pillow bl6cks, provided the memorial does not exceed three (3) feet in height; (3) Gardens and Landscaping; (4) Complementary memorials and related architectural features which do not contain human remains and which do not exceed eight feet in height (measured from grade) subject to Building Code compliance. C. Ground Burial Outside of Building Sites (1) Developed Areas (Areas 1 -10) Those portions of the Property currently developed with ground burials (Areas 1 -10 on the Technical Site Plan - Exhibit C shall be maintained in a manner consistent 19 144 5 l with a lawn cemetery to preserve the existing "park like" environment of the Property. (2) Undeveloped Areas (Area 11) Area 11 as shown on the Technical Site Plan may be developed in a manner complementary to the existing improvements in that portion of Area 1 between San Joaquin Hills Road and Vista Del Mar Drive and between Building Sites C and D. VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP. 5.1 Compliance with Existing General Regulations. Pacific View is required to comply with the Existing General Regulations. City acknowledges and agrees that the Discretionary Approvals constitute all of the discretionary entitlements, approvals and permits required by the City for Pacific View to complete the full extent of development envisioned by the Technical Site Plan and Discretionary Approvals, and that the conditions and mitigation measures set forth in Section 3 and 4 constitute all of the conditions and mitigations to be imposed by the City in association therewith in the exercise of its discretionary authority under the Existing General Regulations. Subject to Pacific View's compliance with this Agreement, City shall process and approve applications for Project Specific Approvals consistent with the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement in a timely manner without the imposition of additional conditions other than standard conditions and fees which are: (a) not in conflict with this Agreement; and (b) which are routinely imposed or assessed in conjunction with non - discretionary permits and approvals. As to those Existing General Regulations which require the payment of fees, costs, and expenses, Pacific View shall pay the fee, cost, or expense required as of the date on which Pacific View submits the application for Project Specific Approval. City acknowledges and agrees that no development impact fees (including, but traffic impact fees but ex permit fees, plan check fees services) shall be required i any development authorized by any use of the property that i s NE not limited to, cluding building or other fees for n connection with this Agreement or not inconsistent iq with this Agreement. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, no dedications or reservations of the Property shall be required of Pacific View in conjunction with the application or issuance of any Project Specific Approvals. Pacific View shall also comply with all provisions of the Uniform Building Code, whether adopted before or after the Approval Date, which are in effect at the time applications for Project Specific Approvals are submitted. Except as provided in this section (5.1), Pacific View shall not be obligated to comply with Future General Regulations, except as expressly required (as opposed to permitted) by state or federal law. 5.2 Vested Right to Develop. During the Term of this Agreement, Pacific View shall have a contractual and statutory vested right to develop the Property to the full extent permitted by this Agreement and the Discretionary Approvals and to receive all Project Specific Approvals to alter, improve and develop the Property in accordance therewith. Subject to the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of this Agreement, City shall only take action which complies and is consistent with this Agreement unless Pacific View otherwise delivers prior written consent to the City. Subject to the limitations on development hereunder, nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit the interment activities conducted by Pacific View. Nothing in this Agreement shall restrict Pacific View's right to perform ground interments anywhere within the Property, except within the Buffer Area, or, unless expressly restricted by this Agreement, to develop and use the Property in any manner consistent with the Existing General Regulations. 5.3 Conflicting Measures. Except as required by statutory or decisional law, the City shall not apply or enforce, as to the Property, any ordinance or initiative (including, any ordinance adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 8115), moratorium, referendum, resolution, statute, regulation, policy or other provision of law which in any way delay, limits, or restricts development of the Property to the full extent permitted by this Agreement. 5.4 Justifiable Reliance. City acknowledges that in reasonable and justifiable reliance upon City's representations and commitments herein (in addition to City's contractual commitments 21 1�3 hereunder and the provisions of the Development Agreement Act) to permit Pacific View's completion of the development in accordance with the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Pacific View: (a) has invested, and will invest substantial sums of money and planning effort in developing the Property in accordance with the Technical Plan (Exhibit C); and (b) has agreed to change the land use entitlements for the Property, which enable the Property to be developed in accordance with the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) to be developed, but which preclude other and profitable uses that Pacific View contends would be permissible in the absence of the contractual commitments contained in this Agreement. 5.5 Construction Timing. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement and the Discretionary Approvals, Pacific View shall have the right to decide the timing, phasing, and sequencing of construction and development on the Property in its sole and absolute discretion. Pacific View shall be entitled to apply for, and receive approval of, Project Specific Approvals in a timely manner by the City. Nothing in this Agreement shall require Pacific View to complete any or all of the development authorized by the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement within the Term of this Agreement. 5.6 Existing Mausoleum Complex in Buildin4 Site F. Nothing in the Discretionary Approvals or this Development Agreement shall effect the right of Pacific View to maintain, and in the event of damage or destruction (whether partial or complete) , to repair and /or replace the existing mausoleum structures and other improvements located in Building Site F. 6. PERIODIC REVIEW. 6.1 Citv and Pacific View Responsibilities. Without limiting the right of the City to set a public hearing in accordance with Section 9, at least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement, the City shall review Pacific View's good faith substantial compliance with this Agreement (the "Periodic Review ") . After the Periodic Review, the City's finding of good faith compliance by Pacific View shall be conclusive for the purposes of future Periodic Reviews or legal action between the Parties. Either Party may address any requirements of the 22 J rI L Agreement during the Periodic Review. However, fifteen (15) days' written Notice of any requirement which one Party intends to address shall be provided to the other Party. If, at the time of the review, an issue not previously identified in writing is addressed or is required to be addressed, then the review shall be continued at the request of either Party for a period of no more than 60 days to afford sufficient time for analysis and preparation of a response. 6.2 Public Hearing. The Periodic Review shall be conducted at a public hearing noticed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 6.3 Information to be Provided to Pacific View. The City shall mail to Pacific View a copy of the staff report and related exhibits concerning compliance with this Agreement a minimum of ten (10) days before the Periodic Review. 6.4 Mitigation Review. The periodic review shall include a report prepared by the Planning Director regarding Pacific View's compliance with the various conditions and mitigation measures contained within the mitigation monitoring plan adopted in connection with the Negative Declaration. Pacific View shall be found in compliance with this Agreement and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan unless the City Council determines, based upon substantial evidence presented at the Periodic Review, that Pacific View has not complied with one, or more, of the mitigation measures or the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 6.5 Estoppel Certificate. Either Party may at any time deliver written Notice to the other Party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate ") stating: (a) The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the Parties. (b) The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. (c) The non - requesting party has no knowledge of any default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement or, if a Default does exist, the nature and amount of any Default. 23 1:15 A Party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting Party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The Planning Director may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of the city. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and Mortgagees. The Estoppel Certificate shall be substantially in the same form as Exhibit G. 6.6 Failure to Conduct Periodic Review. The City's failure to conduct a Periodic Review shall not constitute or be asserted by the City as Pacific View's Default, or asserted by Pacific View as a waiver of a Pacific View Default. 7. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 7.1 Effective Date. This Agreement and the obligations of the Parties shall be effective as of the Effective Date. However, this Agreement shall bind the Parties as of the Approval Date, subject only to the Adopting Ordinance becoming effective pursuant to California law and /or the Newport Beach City Charter. 7.2 Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement (the "Term ") shall begin on the Effective Date and continue for twenty (20) years unless otherwise terminated or modified pursuant to this Agreement (including, but not limited to, the extension provisions of Section 11.16 hereof). In addition, the term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended for an additional ten (10) year term if, at the expiration of the initial twenty (20) year term, Pacific View has not completed all of the development authorized by this Agreement. 7.3 Assignment. Pacific View has the absolute right to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement as part of an assignment or transfer of all of the Property. 7.4 Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended from time to time by the written mutual consent of the Parties, or their successors in interest, but only at a noticed public hearing and in the manner provided by the Government Code and this Agreement. 7.5 Enforcement. This Agreement is enforceable by each of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns. 24 tO 7.6 Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Expiration of the twenty (20) year term (including any extension pursuant to Section 7.2 hereof); (b) Entry, after all appeals have been exhausted, of a final judgment or issuance of a final order by a court of competent jurisdiction directing the City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the City's approval of this Agreement, or any of the Discretionary Approvals, unless otherwise authorized or permitted by the court, or, (c) The effective date of a Party's election to terminate the Agreement as provided in Section 9.3 of this Agreement; provided that the validity of the same is upheld by final and non - appealable judicial review. 7.7 Effect of Termination. In no event shall this Agreement be construed to limit Pacific View's right to continue to develop and utilize the Property, or construed to create any contractual or statutory vested right (as opposed to common law vested rights) to continue to develop and utilize the Property, subsequent to the termination of this Agreement (whether voluntary, involuntary, or by operation of this Agreement) subject to compliance with the Discretionary Approvals. However, to the extent Pacific View has completed the development envisioned by the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement in any particular Building Site designated by the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C), the conditions and restrictions of this Agreement relating to such Building Site shall survive the termination of this Agreement and Pacific View shall continue to be obligated to maintain the Buffer Area pursuant to the restrictive covenant (Exhibit 3.1.1(B). 8. CONFLICTS OF LAW. 8.1 Conflict with State and Federal Laws and Recr lations. Where state or federal laws or regulations prevent compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, those provisions shall be modified, through revision or suspension, to the extent necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations 25 1� 1 E] and the modified Agreement shall remain in effect, subject to the following: (a) the City shall not request modification of this Agreement pursuant to this provision unless and until the City Council makes a finding that such modification is required (as opposed to permitted) by state and federal laws or regulations; (b) the modifications must be limited to those required (as opposed to permitted) by the state or federal laws; (c) the modified Agreement must be consistent with the state or federal laws or regulations which required modification or suspension; (d) the intended material benefits of this Agreement must still be received by each of the Parties after modification; (e) neither the modification nor any applicable local, state, or federal laws or regulations, may render the modified Agreement impractical to enforce; and (f) Pacific View consents in writing to the modification. Pacific View shall have the right to seek judicial review of any proposed modification to ensure compliance with this Section. DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND TERMINATION. 9.1 General Provisions. In the event of a Default, the Party alleging a Default shall give the other Party a written Notice of Default. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the alleged Default, and a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (not less than thirty (30) days) in which the Default must be cured (the "Cure Period "). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in Default for the purposes of termination of the Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. If the alleged Default is cured within the Cure Period, then a Default shall be deemed not to exist. 9.2 Option to Institute Lecral Proceedings or to Terminate. If an alleged Default is not cured within the Cure Period, the noticing Party must 26 i, {� give the defaulting Party a Notice of intent to terminate the Agreement. Within thirty (30) days after giving of the Notice, the City Council shall hold a public hearing in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65865, 65867, and 65868, as amended, to consider and review the matter. 9.3 Notice of Termination. After considering the evidence presented to the City Council, the Party alleging the Default, at its option, may give written Notice of termination of the Agreement to the other Party and the Agreement shall be terminated immediately upon giving the Notice. A termination shall be valid only if good cause exists and substantial evidence was presented to the City Council to establish the existence of a Default. The findings of the City Council as to the existence of a Default shall have no weight in any legal proceeding brought to determine the existence of a Default. The validity of any termination may be challenged pursuant to Section 11.15, in which case the court shall render an independent judgment as to the existence of a Default and good cause for termination. Termination may result only from a material Default of a material provision of this Agreement. 9.4 Waiver. Failure or delay in giving Notice of Default shall not waive a Party's right to give future Notice of the same or any other Default. 9.5 Default by Pacific View. Subject to compliance with Sections 9.1 through 9.3, in the event of a Pacific View default, City shall have no obligation to perform any of City's obligations pursuant to this Agreement (as opposed to the City's obligations pursuant to Discretionary Approvals). Upon a Pacific View default, any resulting delays in City's performance shall neither be City's default nor constitute grounds for termination or cancellation of the Agreement by Pacific View. 9.6 Default by the City. Subject to compliance with Sections 9.1 through 9.3, in the event of a City Default, Pacific View, without limiting any of its other remedies, shall not be obligated to proceed with this Agreement or complete the development envisioned thereby, nor to perform any further obligations under_ the Agreement. Upon a City Default, any resulting delays in Pacific View's performance shall neither be Pacific View's Default nor constitute grounds 27 a `� for termination or cancellation of the Agreement by the City. 9.7 Availability of SiDecific Perf rmance. Both parties agree and recognize that it will not be possible to restore the land use entitlements for the Property to their state prior to this Agreement's approval, and that it will not be physically, financially, or practically possible as a matter of land use planning to restore the Property to its prior state once the Project is commenced. For these reasons, it may not be possible to determine an amount of monetary damages which would adequately compensate Pacific View in the event Pacific View is prevented from completing the development envisioned by the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Therefore, without limiting any remedy available to Pacific View because of a City Default, the parties agree that: (a) monetary damages would not be an adequate remedy for Pacific View if Pacific View is prevented from completing the development envisioned by the Discretionary Approvals, the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) and in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof; and (b) that specific performance and /or injunctive relief shall be available to Pacific View to enforce City's obligations hereunder. Similarly, the City has relied on Pacific View's obligations pursuant to this Agreement in granting approval of the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit C) and Discretionary Approvals. It will not be possible to determine an amount of monetary damages which would adequately compensate the City in the event of a Pacific View Default. Therefore, without limiting any remedy available to the City because of a Pacific View Default, the parties agree that: (a) monetary damages would not be an adequate remedy for the City in the event of a Pacific View Default; and (b) that specific performance and /or injunctive relief shall be available to City to enforce Pacific View's obligations hereunder. 10. GENERAL RELEASE. In consideration of the terms and provisions of this Development Agreement, City and Pacific View agree that upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, Pacific View shall, and hereby does, forever relieve, release, and discharge City of and from any and all known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, contingent or fixed, and existing or potential claims, complaints, grievances, 28 A -9 allegations, demands, liabilities, losses, obligations, damages, costs, expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees), lawsuits, actions (in law, equity, or otherwise), causes of action and disputes (collectively, "Claims ") that arise out of, or are in any way related, to any act or omission by any City official, employee, representative or agent at any time prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. Pacific View expressly understands that California Civil Code Section 1542 ( "Section 154211) provides as follows: A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. Pacific View knowingly, voluntarily, intentionally, and expressly waives any and all rights and benefits conferred by Section 1542 or any law of any state or territory of the United States or any foreign country, principle of common law, or other law that is similar to Section 1542, and agree and acknowledge that this waiver is an essential term of this Agreement, without which the consideration given herein would not have been given. Notwithstanding the foregoing general release, nothing in the Discretionary Approvals, this Agreement, Pacific View's consent to this Agreement, or Pacific View's acquiescence in the Discretionary Approvals, shall be construed as any admission or agreement on the part of Pacific View that, in the absence of Pacific View's voluntary agreement to this Development Agreement, the City had any legal authority to limit the development of mausolea at Pacific View, withhold building Permits from Pacific View, or otherwise impose additional regulatory burdens upon Pacific View's operations and development of the cemetery under the use permit issued by the County of Orange. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as any admission or agreement on the part of the City that any act, or any failure to act, on the part of the City or any of its officials, officers, employees, or representatives was contrary to, or inconsistent with, any provision of law, ordinance, resolution or policy or would subject the City to any liability or adverse court ruling. 11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 11.1 Notices. All Notices shall be written and delivered by personal delivery (including Federal Express and other commercial express -4a c5+ delivery services providing acknowledgments or receipt), registered, certified, or express mail, or telegram to the addresses set forth below. Receipt shall be deemed complete as follows: (a) For personal delivery, upon actual receipt; (b) For registered, certified, or express mail, upon the delivery date or attempted delivery date as shown on the return receipt; and (c) For telegram, upon the transmission of the telegram. Notices shall be addressed as follows: To the City: City Clerk City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 With a copy to: With a copy to: The City Attorney The City Manager To Pacific View: Pacific View Memorial Park 3500 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attention: Mr. Steve Schacht With a copy to: Allan J. Abshez, Esq. Irell & Manella 1880 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90067 -4276 The addresses to which Notices shall be sent may be changed by giving Notice of a new address. 11.2 Force Majeure: Extension of Time of Performance. Neither Party shall be deemed to be in Default where delays or nonperformance are due to war, insurrection, strikes, walkouts, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, oil spills, casualties, acts of nature, unavailability of materials, governmental restrictions imposed or mandated by governmental entities, or similar bases for excused performance. If written Notice of such delay is given to the other Party within thirty (30) days after such delay begins an extension of time for performance shall be granted in writing for.the period of the delay, or longer 30 t5 a as may be mutually agreed upon. Delays and extensions associated with litigation shall be governed by Section 11.16 hereof. 11.3 Severability. If any material part of the Agreement is found by a court to be invalid, void, or illegal, the Parties shall modify the Agreement to implement the original intent of the Parties. These steps may include the waiver by either of the Parties of their right under the unenforceable provision. If, however, the Agreement objectively cannot be modified to implement the original intent of the Parties and the Party substantially benefitted by the material provision does not waive its rights under the unenforceable provision, the entire Agreement shall become void. For purposes of this Section, and without excluding the possible materiality of .other provisions of this Agreement, all provisions of Sections 3, 4 and 5 are deemed "material." 11.4 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and Agreement of the Parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations and previous agreements between the Parties regarding that subject matter. 11.5 Waivers. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the Party making the waiver. 11.6 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Neither Party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the other Party to receive the benefits of this Agreement. 11.7 Further Actions and Instruments. Upon the request of either Party, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 11.8 Successors and Assigns. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Agreement shall inure to, all .._. successors -in- interest and assigns of the Parties; provided, however, that in no event shall the obligations of Pacific View hereunder 31 t5 S3 be deemed to inure to the benefit of, or bind, any member of the general public that has purchased or holds title to any interment space at the Property. Further, this Agreement is made exclusively by and between the City and Pacific View, and notwithstanding any provision hereof (including, but not limited to, Section 4.7 and references to off -site properties), it is the intent of the parties that there are no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement; and no provision of this Agreement shall confer any enforcement rights upon any party other than Pacific View and the City. The parties also acknowledge and agree 'that, consistent with general legal principles, this Agreement does not effect or alter the legal rights of any person or entity not a party to the Agreement. 11.9 Construction of Agreement. This Agreement has been the subject of extensive negotiations between the parties and therefore no presumption for or against any party arising out of drafting all or any part of this Agreement will be applied in any action relating to, connected with or involving this Agreement. All language in all parts of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole and given its fair meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of construction. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. This Agreement is not intended to impermissibly contract away the legislative and governmental functions of the City, and in particular, the City's police powers or to surrender or abrogate the city's governmental powers over the Property. 11.10 Authority to Execute. The person executing this Agreement on behalf of Pacific View warrants and represents that he /she has the authority to do so and the authority to bind Pacific View to the performance of Pacific View's obligations under this Agreement. 11.11 Consent. Any consent required by the Parties in carrying out the terms of this Agreement shall not unreasonably be withheld. 11.12 Effect on Title. Subject to the requirement that Pacific View record a covenant as specified in Section 3.1.1(B), this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion 32 (6)1 of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 11.13 Recording. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Agreement to be executed by the City and submit the same for recordation in the Official Records of Orange County no later than ten (10) days after the Effective Date. The recordation of this Agreement is deemed a ministerial act and the failure of the City to record the Agreement as required by this Section and Government Code Section 65868.5 does not make the Agreement void or ineffective. 11.14 Institution of Leqal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, either Party may institute legal action to cure, correct, or remedy any Default, to enforce any provision of this Agreement, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation of this Agreement, to recover damages for any Default, or to obtain any remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Legal actions may be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, or in the Federal District Court in the Central District of California. 11.15 Attornevs' Fees. In any arbitration, quasi - judicial, administrative, or judicial proceeding between the Parties initiated with respect to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and all costs, expenses, and disbursements in connection with such action. 11.16 Conditions- P ecedent to Effectiveness. In the event this Agreement or any of the Discretionary Approvals are overturned or ruled invalid by a final non - appealable judgment of court of competent jurisdiction, then all of Pacific View's obligations hereunder (including, but not limited to, Pacific View's obligations under Sections 4.7 and 10 hereof) shall be deemed null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. Further, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, during any pending litigation filed to challenge, review, enjoin, set - aside, modify, or overturn the Technical Site Plan, the Discretionary Approvals, Development Agreement, environmental review in connection therewith, or any of the rights of the Parties pursuant thereto, all of Pacific View's obligations hereunder (including, but not limited to, Pacific View's obligations under Sections 4.7 and 10 hereof) shall be suspended and tolled; 33 Jg5 provided, however, that if Pacific View elects to go forward under the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement during any pending litigation, then notwithstanding such litigation, the City shall cooperate and process and issue all Project Specific Approvals requested by Pacific View hereunder provided that Pacific View complies with the provisions of the Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement, At Pacific View's request, the period of any litigation not initiated by Pacific View (including all appeals) shall be added to the term of this Agreement. Date: —vise 1995 Date; *" .2 S� , vb \agr \Pao ier.agt 24 August 2995 1995 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By : ,\, „ t John Hedges, Mayor PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK By, Stephen Liz-Schacht General Manager WC 34 l 5(Q. State of California County of Orange On August 25, 1995 before me, Irene Bull -er. Notary Public, personally appeared John W. Hedges, Mayor and Stephen L. Schacht ❑ personally known to me - OR - © proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)xWare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that AWA:ts /they executed the same int *heir authorized capacity(ies), and that by I /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. W41AF-WE BUT LER Comm. t10088� = WITNESS my hand and official seal. M& W4M or. N. low + CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER(S) DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Development Agreement btw _ Individual City of Newport Beach & Pacific w_ Corporate Officer (Schacht for view Memorial Park _ Limited Partner Pacific. view) Title or Type of Document General Partner Attorney -in -Fact Trustee(s) _ Guardian/Conservator Mayor Other: John W. Hedges Signer is Representing: City of Newport Beach as Mayor Number of Pages August 25, 1995 Date of Document N/A Signer(s) Other Than Named Above 11 111` l LEGAL DESCRIPTION THOSE PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 96 AND 97 OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION,' AS..6AID IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION IS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED III BOOK 1, PAGE 88 pp MISCELLANEOUS RECORD MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 3EGINNING AT A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 48 DEGREES 22' 19" WEST 72.11 FEET FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN "RESERVOIR SITf?" DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1957 IN 'BOOK 4143, PAGE 395 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN. THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 48 DEGREES 22' 19" EAST ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID "RESERVOIR SITE" AND ITS SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION, 522.80 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN; THENCE NORTH 6 DEGREES 06' 36" EAST 1037.47 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 9260 AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 378, PAGES 32 THROUGH 37 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT AND ALONG. THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 9261 AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 380, PAGES 32 THROUGH 35 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, NORTH 73 DEGREES 19' 47" EAST 838.34 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7510 AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 292, PAGES 17 THROUGH 21 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE, ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, SOUTH 2 DEGREES 55' 15" EAST 55.91 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 5 DEGREES 43' 17" EAST 521.60 FEET; SOUTH 1 DEGREE 58' 54" EAST 289.,17 FEET; SOUTH 16 DEGREES 41' 57" WEST 278.65 FEET; SOUTH 1 DEGREE 16' 57" EAST 137.14 FEET; SOUTH 32 DEGREES 58' 52" EAST'224.12 FEET; SOUTH 38 DEGREES 45' 29" EAST 91.05 FEET; AND SOUTH 55 DEGREES 09' 15!' EAST 96.26 FEET; THENCE. SOUTH 17 DEGREES 59' 50" WEST ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 1-OF SAID TRACT NO. 7510 AND THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 12 OF TRACT NO. 7511 AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 292, PAGES 22 AND 23 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, 28.43 FEET-TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO. 7511; THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES. 36' 28!' WEST ALONG SAID BOUNDARY, 600.67 FEET, TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE IRVINE COMPANY, DATED- AUGUST 3, 1971, RECORDED IN BOOK 9745, PAGE 355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS -'OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGRERS 13' 50" WEST ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL, 228.39 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT-THEREIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 44' 43" WEST 129.98 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN LAUD DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK, RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1958 IN BOOK 4518, PAGE 207 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT SOUTH 84 DEGREES 18' 19" EAST 419.58 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST-SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 84 DEGREES 18' 19" WEST* ALONG LAST SAID LINE, 26.15 FEET! TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED AUGUST 3, 1971 IN BOOK 9745, -PAGE, 347. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY LINES OF SAID DEED, THE FOLLOWING COURSES: NORTH 88 DEGREES 03' 25" WEST 90.18 FEET; NORTH 88 DEGREES 03' 47" WEST 302.42 FEET, AND' NORTH 1 DEGREE 56' 50" EAST 25.78 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHWESTER Y CORNER OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED RECORDED I BOOK 4518, PAGE 207 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE, A' NG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL, NORTH 41 DEGREES 37' 41" WEST 5165.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. '' EXHIBIT A l5'� �9UL,JdOdd 3H1.10 ddl/V < c6 .IJN H VJJ l7J r i ipv.r l� a H H h c3;, Mali` a r U , a l 7Awls A SI ao liven C V F Vo b a J s X 3NOZ N a V d i �ldlwd do r \b'a 1 b d� do °a Yid A y N 3fi7B 3NNN �� "Vd a° IF I G 1 0 �0 N o 0 7 CL -.. 07 3 Po �.. =0;: \ V 0 r rn T s � 0 `p 6 q 4 1F a` S.n Fi • m n S m Km " •r{i Y � �� ~ D � L � K W 3�� m '¢ I 7]If!!.I 0 7 - e i S �e N 3 R:::�; • 1 3 J S F9 . �s O � 0 `p 6 q 4 1F a` S.n Fi • m n S m Km " •r{i Y � �� ~ D � L � K W 3�� m '¢ I 7]If!!.I 0 7 - e i S �e N 3 R:::�; • 1 ti � 1 c � F / \ � it •i a \ � � \ Mai\ ' � 1 � I r C7 rA /C) 5-51 I W M till `C \3 ` r 1 4'i 1 z�'w 1 C) a 1 ` tri 1 ` 1 tt tv Li 5. '' ;. -- till `C \3 ` r 11 \ E j a O IG Hill Jill It 3 1 � \ Building Sil-E)- & W PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK Precise Pre liming 3,500 Paci£m Vicw Drive F7 T7 l� I- Andsoepe Pion Newport Beach, CA 92663 1 4'i 1 z�'w 1 C) a 1 ` tri 1 ` 1 tt 11 \ E j a O IG Hill Jill It 3 1 � \ Building Sil-E)- & W PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK Precise Pre liming 3,500 Paci£m Vicw Drive F7 T7 l� I- Andsoepe Pion Newport Beach, CA 92663 7 / i � y �I �J I Jill \ \ @U ° %* Q L7 q 1 9 � j n 0 .yam • i o t "N; 3 t Si(ildwg Sim ^q' Praise Paliminary Plan �: � PACIFIC VIEW. MEMORIAL PARK 3590 Pacificl!iew.Drive - —_ Newpoif Beach.;CA 92663 � ' 1wML 7 / i � y �I �J I Jill \ \ @U ° %* Q L7 q 1 9 � j n 0 .yam • i o t "N; 3 t Si(ildwg Sim ^q' Praise Paliminary Plan �: � PACIFIC VIEW. MEMORIAL PARK 3590 Pacificl!iew.Drive - —_ Newpoif Beach.;CA 92663 � ' tir £Impgi c" 0 : a Y i x C � z / a t � � e + I a 3€ 1 f e Mew F I r�II I Q Fp '.S-/' 5 0111 Hit� MIN s 369 ���F [€€ lit gg gggg $ F� E F• Bodi4sx'G'r(. T350 ACIFIC VIEW MMMORIALrPARK . Nj` 1 f Pmeiae PF'ell�ioti�. 0 PacincNim Avaaw IZ Beach,:CA.42G63 ..,, iwaiti ^ uYUe L ` 'M �' "__ � '1%�'Ii4'ti::.i.1'�_ .. ., NC.L`... -•- .��.....�.� -. - w... v.. .�...... „....-- .- ..�...... -..r- 6 .J O 1 o [€€ e 4 F• Bodi4sx'G'r(. T350 ACIFIC VIEW MMMORIALrPARK . Nj` 1 f Pmeiae PF'ell�ioti�. 0 PacincNim Avaaw IZ Beach,:CA.42G63 ..,, iwaiti ^ uYUe L ` 'M �' "__ � '1%�'Ii4'ti::.i.1'�_ .. ., NC.L`... -•- .��.....�.� -. - w... v.. .�...... „....-- .- ..�...... -..r- 6 .J �C i l H: ggyy 'y{y I / MA gLpiL ggE SHEIaTw�i w � • �� � I � iC - I APO *� =��� � —Y E I •� ±• 1 Jt I .Q•. ••'• O� 1 Kn of � I z I I . 1 i 22 a� Es'1 1 Ir" Building sim.c• i'AC IC V .. . IF iew Drive IEiV•MSMORIAL PARK Precwe Prehminery; 35D0 Pacific: V %'/ !'Yeweo.:,3 ,.CA92663 . m x 0 J oil 1 . 101- Rgg 6 R t (�j � ' � Garden of valor Precl =e Ptd�minarY landscape Plan PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK 35 350U Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 _ M X _� 71 A s n � Y cSt n a q ti Faclfic Vlew Memorial ark g n Kg L� A= J n 6 i 5ctback pacific Vicw Memorial Park Section p -p T 71 I 11, t t t t � t Memorial Park 10 st, —,:: t, t -C, r k pacific View rl AY m 4CtIOM •D pacific Vices Mcm'oriall park ON .r 1 1 Df . �o *64-. 0 Attitµ' M A STER FLAI\) w_ iJ '. SL } 1, �i .i EXHIBIT G [Date] [Recipient] Re: Gentlemen: The (CERTIFYING PARTY] certifies as follows as of the date first set forth above: 1. The City of Newport Beach ( "City ") and Pierce Brothers, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park ( "Pacific View ") are parties to a Development Agreement dated (the "Development Agreement ") with respect to Pacific View Memorial Park, which is located in Newport Beach, California (the "Premises ") 2. The Development Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. Da. The Development Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing.] or [3b. The Development Agreement has been amended by mutual agreement of the parties. A copy of the Development Agreement as amended is attached as Exhibit 1.1 [4a. (CERTIFYING PARTY] has no knowledge of any default in the performance of the (REQUESTING PARTY'S] obligations under the Development Agreement.] [4b. (REQUESTING PARTY] is in default of its obligations under the Development Agreement as follows:] 4. (CERTIFYING PARTY] makes this certificate with the understanding that (Recipient] is contemplating acquiring the Premises, and that if (Recipient] acquires the Premises, (Recipient] will do so on material reliance on this certificate. Very Truly Yours, CERTIFYING PARTY cc: (REQUESTING PARTY] Mertif.doc sd EXHIBIT. G ��� RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Pacific View Memorial Park 3500 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attention: Steve Schacht COVENANT AND AGREEMENT This Covenant and Agreement ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into by and between Pierce Brothers, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park ( "Owner ") on the one hand and the City of Newport Beach ( "City ") on the other hand this 28th day of August, 1995. A. Owner is the owner of property described and depicted on Exhibit A (which is identical to the Technical Site Plan approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995) hereto, together with the improvements located thereon ( "Pacific View Memorial Park "). B. City has approved an updated master plan for Pacific View Memorial Park through the approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Negative Declaration "), General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1(F) ( "General Plan Amendment "), and Use Permit No. 3518 ( "UP "), Site Plan Review No. 69 and the Development Agreement dated July 10, 1995 between Owner and the City ( "Development Agreement ") (collectively, the "Approvals "). C. In connection with the Approvals, Owner has agreed to provide and maintain a permanent landscaped buffer area within the area described on Exhibit A within Pacific View Memorial Park (the "Buffer Area ") , and to record this covenant and agreement to ensure that the Buffer Area is maintained in perpetuity. AGREEMENT Now therefore in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived from the City's Approvals, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Buffer Area. Owner shall improve and maintain the area described in Exhibit A as a landscaped buffer area (the "Buffer Area ") in perpetuity. No structures, public access, roads, walkways, walls (other than retaining walls and existing underground utilities), ground interments or other form of burial, preservation of remains, plaques, memorials or monuments of any kind shall be permitted within the Buffer Area. �. EXHIBIT K 2. Encroachments Into Buffer Area. Owner shall have the right to encroach into the Buffer Area, and to remove and /or disturb Buffer Area landscaping and irrigation, subject to the following: a. The encroachment, disturbance, or removal shall only be to the minimum extent reasonably necessary to accommodate slope maintenance, slope repair or construction within Building Sites E and G (as defined by the Development Agreement); and b. Owner shall restore the Buffer Area, including landscaping and irrigation, to its condition prior to the encroachment, disturbance or removal as soon as possible after the encroachment is no longer necessary to accommodate slope maintenance, slope repair or construction activities. 3. Maintenance of Buffer Area Landscapina. Owner shall maintain the landscaping and irrigation system within the Buffer Area in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan approved by the City for the Buffer Area (as defined by the Development Agreement). 4. Conditions to Continued Effectiveness. In the event that any of the Approvals are overturned or ruled invalid by a final non - appealable judgment of court of competent jurisdiction as the result of litigation initiated by any third party then this Covenant and all of Owner's obligations hereunder shall automatically be deemed null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. City shall execute and deliver to Owner a release of this Covenant in recordable form in the event third party litigation results in a final non - appealable judgment or order invalidating any of the approvals. Except as provided in this Section, this Covenant shall remain in full force and effect in perpetuity. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement is a covenant and agreement running with Pacific View Memorial Park and shall be binding upon Owner and its successors and assigns. sa ��3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Covenant and Agreement has been executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH John W. Hedges By. Mayor PIERCE BROTHERS, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park Stephen L. Schacht By: /-? 7 //j4i Its:— Genera / ager `^- de \ag \PV0avAgt.doc 1� 111� State of California County of Orange On August 28, 1995 before me, Irene Butler. Notary Public, personally appeared John W. Hedges, Mayor and Stephen L. Schacht, Q4 Paci is View Memorial Park ❑ personally known to me - OR - 0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that -He%stmilhey executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by - faisAwAheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. 1&4t& CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Covenant Agreement Individual btw City /Pacific View Memorial 10M— Corporate Officer v ew Park eai ;jg1 > eRk Limited Partner Title or Type of Document _ _ General Partner _ Attorney -in -Fact Trustee(s) Guardian/Conservator Mayor Other:John W. Hedges Signer is Representing: Mayor of City of Newport Beach r �• Number of Pages August 28, 1995 Date of Document N/A Signer(s) Other Than Named Above 15 7- 01 -19% 12:17PM FROM W TMINSTER MEM PRK 714 897 5576 J(1_ -01 -1996 11:29 SCl LEGAL 713 525 4067 P.82/85 W d b Q aw 1a� 0 W W w G C' tin RECORDING REQVESTND BY Rec*rOw in Um Ownty of Grange Calilornis AM » R$CORAED RETQ:tN '1'O: ,y�' k, =1���erk/Recvr6er 3500 Pc view Memorial Park ®p ®ISSSR5632@ 55M ism /85 3500 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 e0s 0506a6 is 72 n912 Attention: Steve Schacht Ail 4 7.09 9'00 •.iQ •.ee 0.19 0.00 COVENANT AND AGREEMENT This Covenant and Agreement ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into by and between Pierce Brothers, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park ("Owner ") on the one hand and the City of Newport Beach ( "City ") on the other hand this 28th day 91 August, 1995. A. Owner is the owner of property described and depicted on Exhibit A (which is identical to the Technical Site plan approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995) hereto, together with the improvements located thereon ( "Pacific view Memorial Park "). B. City has approved an updated master plan for Pacific view Memorial Park through the approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "Negative Declaration "), General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1(F) ( "General plan Amendment "), and Use Permit No. 3518 ( "UP "), Site Plan Review No. 69 and the Development Agreement dated.July lo, 1995 between Owner and the City ( "Development Agreement ") (collectively, the "Approvals "). C. In connection with the Approvals, Owner has agreed to provide and maintain a permanent landscaped buffer area within the area described on Exhibit A within Pacific View Memorial Park (the "Buffer Area "), and to record this covenant and agreement to ensure that the Buffer Area is maintained in perpetuity. AGREEMENT Now therefore in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived from the City's Approvals, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby.agree as follows: 1. Huffer Area. Owner shall improve and maintain the area described in Exhibit A as a landscaped buffer area (the "Buffer Area ") in perpetuity. No structures, public access, roads, walkways, walls (other than retaining walls and existing underground utilities), ground interments or other form of burial, preservation of remains, plagues, memorials or monuments of any kind shall be permitted within the Buffer Area. EXHIBIT ; H P. 3 1'f i 7.01 -19% 12:17PM FRDM WF ^TMINSTER MEM PRK 71d 897 5576 P,d JUL 01 -199b 11 =30 SC. _EGIX 7�_ 525 9067 P.03i05 2. Encroachments Into Buffer Uya. Owner shall have the right to encroach into the Buffer Area, and to remove and /or disturb Buffer Area landscaping and irrigation, subject to the following: a. The encroachment, disturbance, or removal shall only be to the minimum extent reasonably necessary to accommodate slope maintenance, slope repair or construction within Building Sites ,E and G (as defined by the Development Agreement) ; and b. Owner shall restore the Buffer Area, including landscaping and irrigation, to its condition prior to the encroachment, disturbance or removal as soon as possible after the encroachment is no longer necessary to accommodate elope maintenance, slope repair or construction activities. 3. Maintenance of Buffer Area Landseapinw. Owner shall maintain the landscaping and irrigation system within the Buffer Area in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan approved by the City for the Buffer Area (as defined by the Development Agreement) . 4. Conditions to Continued Effectiventes, In the event that any of the Approvals are overturned or ruled invalid by a final non - appealable judgment of court of competent jurisdiction as the result of litigation initiated by any third party then this Covenant and all of Owner's obligations hereunder shall automatically be deemed null, void, and of no effect whatsoever. City shall execute and deliver to owner a release of this Covenant in recordable form in the event third party litigation results in a final non - appealable judgment or order invalidating any of the approvals. Except as provided in this Section, this Covenant shall remain in full force and effect in perpetuity. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement is a covenant and agreement running with Pacific View Memorial Park and shall be binding upon Owner and its successors and assigns. 7 -07 -1996 12:18PM FROM WF- TMINSTER MEM PRK 714 897 5576 P.5 AL- 01 -19% 11:30 SG. ..EGAL 7a— 525 9057 P.04MS l IN WITNESS WHEREOr, this Covenant and Agreement has been executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH John W. Hedge�sQ�� By, - J " Mayor PIERCE BROTHERS, a California corporation doing buminess as Pacific View Memorial Park Stephen L. Schacht $y: /,I %4 Coal /J �k9�i'�cowpt. doe `^ U �� 10 7- 01-1996 12:18PM J1�-01 -1496 1130 Stets of Catitormla County of orange FROM W�;TMINSTER MEM PRK 714 897 5576 A LEGAL i._ 525 9067 P.05/05 On August 28, 1995 before me. frene Butler. Notary P u li , personally appeared John W. Hedges, Mayor and Stephen L. Schacht, (M aci is view memorial Farx Ej personaly known to me • OR - E proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) ;slate subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to .me that4t*#JFre/they executed the same in hlsIber/theirauthorized capacity(ies), and that by-k+cAwAheir signatures) on the instrument the person(s), orthe entity upon behalf of which the persons) ailed. executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. CAPAUTY Ci FI) BY SIGNER DESCPJPnON OF ATTACH) DOCBMEttT Covenant Agreement Individual btv City /Pacific view Memorial t CWporale CBTICer p V Par _ _ 13r»ited Penrlef �T�Fi d k Title or Type 01 Docurent _ General Partner Attorney -irr -Fed Trustee(a) Number Of Pages Guam % n /conservator Mayor Me John N. Hedges August 28, 1995 Date of Document Slgrrer is Representing: Mayor of City of Newport Beach N/A Signe(s) Other Than Named Above 3r' TOTAL P.05 P. 6 0'\ R g 4 l'�ST. '�. .•h.i,^�K.��1�_�^4�0.T•/ ��il•�a�f n,':A- y�,+iSiQi�' .-�r1 Alt i- ■ r■ awdl � � i� � ���I�E C .r�'I� {flll - CONSTRUCTION. GARDEN OF VALOR LAYOUT PLAN . PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK EXHIBIT 3 LETTERS OF CONCERNS FROM RESIDENTS 33 LAW OFFICE OF FRANK W. BATTAILE 110 Newport Center Drive, Suite 200 Newport Beach, California 92660 February 5, 2007 Mr. David Lepo, Planning Director City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (949) 719 -1120 Pax(949)719 -1326 Email: bhlawQaearthlink.net RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAY 04 2007 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Re.: Pacific View Memorial Park: Proposed Amendment to Development Agreement Dear Mr. Lepo: I am writing on behalf of Dr. Sean Bahri who resides at 5 Monterey Circle in Newport Beach concerning a proposed amendment to the "Development Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Pacific View Memorial Park" ( "Agreement "), which was approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995 by Ordinance No. 95 -26. A Planning Commission hearing on the proposed amendment was set for May 17, 2007. Dr. Bahri and many other residents were prepared to attend. Then, the matter was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 7, 2007. Dr. Bahri has an out of state commitment on that date that he simply cannot change. It is extremely important to him to be able to attend the meeting and make his concerns know. As you know, if a lawyer appears to speak for him it will have little impact. It is imperative that he be able to attend personally. However, staff declined Dr. Bahri's request to continue the matter 2 weeks to the June 21, 2007 meeting. The purpose of this letter is to request your assistance in having the matter continued so that Dr. Bahri can exercise his right to be heard. I appreciate that your staff has to administer a large number of matters and keep them moving toward resolution. However, this matter is of extreme importance to Dr. Bahri and it is unlikely to be finally resolved anytime soon in any event, unless the developer withdraws the proposal. Also, the proposed amendment is NOT subject to any permit streamlining requirements or any time limitations at all. Therefore, a 2 week continuance is reasonable. The developer, a Texas corporation named Pacific View Memorial Park ( "PVMP "), proposes to change the Agreement to obtain approval for 9 family mausoleums in an area designated in the Agreement as Area 8. Pursuant to the Agreement, Area 8 is currently approved for landscaping surrounding a much smaller Area H. Area H is currently approved for a single community mausoleum. The proposed amendment would substantially expand Area H to accommodate the 9 family mausoleums. Maps of the Park showing these areas are available in the City's "Pacific View Memorial Park Initial Study/Negative Declaration" dated April, 2007. Dr. Bahri and a number of other residents who would be impacted by the proposed amendment are deeply opposed to this proposed change. A number of them met with Roz Ung 3,�; Page 2 of 3 and Patrick Alford to express their opposition to the proposed amendment. Dr. Bahri and several other residents submitted written statements in opposition to the proposed amendment. Twenty- nine neighboring residents signed a petition stating their opposition to the amendment. Opposition to the proposed amendment is broad and intense. I will provide a brief background of the issue. I do not think that any of the Planning Department staff who participated in the 1995 Agreement are still available. Robin Clausen participated. Perhaps she could give you the City's perspective on the details. Briefly, the Agreement was reached in 1995 after months of intense negotiations among PVMP, the City and neighboring residents. Dr. Bahri and many other persons were fully aware of the negotiations and the resulting Agreement. They either purchased property or invested heavily in upgrading property in reliance on the Agreement. Now, PVMP wants to change the Agreement. According to PVMP's own agents, the change is due exclusively to the fact that there is a surplus of individual crypts which are therefore difficult to sell. The currently approved community mausoleum would house individual crypts. On the other hand, family mausoleums are in demand and are selling at a premium. The Agreement already provides for construction of family mausoleums in other specified parts of the Park. Those areas have not been built out at all. There is plenty of space for the family mausoleums. But, according to PVMP, those sites do not have an ocean view. Family mausoleums with an ocean view are the easiest to sell at high prices. The proposed amendment is an attempt by PVMP to create an ideal sales situation for themselves with no compromise of any kind. The surrounding residents, who made substantial changes in position in reliance on the Agreement, are expected to forfeit everything. The Agreement says: "This Agreement is intended to:... (c) Benefit ... nearby residents and the general public by serving as the primary legal means of vesting Pacific View's right to develop the property ensuring continued compliance with conditions on development that are intended to mitigate the impact of construction on nearby residents and doing so with a level of certainty that will minimize the potential for disputes in the future." (Agreement, ¶ 1.1.) The current proposed amendment will completely frustrate those purposes. It will lead to long and bitter disputes including years of costly litigation. At a meeting between PVMP officials and nearby residents late last year, PVMP represented that if there were substantial neighborhood opposition they would abandon the proposed amendment. They were informed by the neighboring residents that there is and will continue to be substantial opposition. Nevertheless, PVMP obviously intends to proceed regardless of citizens' concerns. As for amendments, the Agreement says: "This Agreement may be amended from time to time by the written mutual consent of the Parties, or their successors in interest, but only at a noticed public hearing and in the manner provided by the Government Code and this Agreement." (Agreement, V 7.4.) The City is under no obligation whatsoever to agree to this amendment. Neither Dr. Bahri nor any other nearby resident can understand why the City should do so. As far as they can tell, there is no consideration of any kind to the City for this proposed amendment. Furthermore, the pure profit motives of an out of state corporation should not trump the legitimate concerns of � Page 3 of 3 tax - paying, voting citizens of Newport Beach. PVMP negotiated a perfectly reasonable Agreement that guarantees them development rights. The City and nearby residents made compromises over the course of a host of ad hoc meetings and at Planning Commission and City Council meetings. They reasonably believed that they had a deal on which they could rely to make substantial financial commitments. The City should simply say no to PVMP. At the very least, Dr. Bahri should have an opportunity to appear in person. The proposed amendment is NOT subject to any permit streamlining requirements or any timing requirements at all. Therefore, on Dr. Bahri's behalf I ask that you continue this matter to the June 21" Planning Commission meeting. Please call me so that we can discuss this matter. Dr. Bahri and numerous other nearby residents will be happy to come to your office and discuss this matter directly with you. Let me know if you want to meet with them, or if you have any questions. cc: Clients 37 April 27, 2007 To: Mr. David Lepo Planning Director City of Newport Beach, Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 From: Sean and Angela Bahri 5 Monterey Circle Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Dear Mr. Lepo, RECEIVED By PLANNING DEPAR M9W APR 30 2001 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH We received a letter from Ms. Rosalinh Ung regarding Notice of Availability of Initial Study /Negative Declaration. Date of Issue: April 6 2007. Project title: Pacific View Memorial Park - Amendments to Use Permit No.3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 (PA2006 -282) Project Location: 3500 Pacific View Drive, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 City of Newport Beach, County of Orange. Proposed Modification to Development with Area 8 and Building Site H. In that letter the Date, Time and Location of Public Hearing was tentatively scheduled for May 17, 2007, for which we made our plans based on that date. Unfortunately today we were informed by Ms. Ung that due to the schedule change the Public Hearing will be on June 07, 2007, which unfortunately we, along with some other neighbors who are very interested to attend this meeting, will be out of town and unable to change our schedules. We respectfully request that the Public Hearing be scheduled for June 21, 2007 to enable us, who are directly affected by this project, to give our opinions to the planning commission. Sincerely, i �� &� -- Sean and Angela Bahri 3y PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEWPORT BEACH G ATTN: ROSALINH UN ^ OBJECTION TO PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK'S REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT No. 95-26 (PA- 2006-282) AND AMENDMENTS TO USE PERMIT NO. 3518 , AND OPPOSITION TO THE INITIAL STUDY OF THE NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Re: ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT 3 U Submitted timely on April 27, 2007 with an extension from the Planning deparuneut THIS HARD FOUGHT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MAY NOT BE TAMPERED WITH IN ACCORD WITII TM SALES WK MS OF PACIFIC VIEW MMMMIAL PARK Thera may be few members of the Planning Department, The Planning Commission, or the City Council who remember the months of endless Ad Hoe committee meetings, Planning commission and oily council meetings between the residents of Spyglass Hill, The high priced attorneys, and landscape architects of Service Corporation International of Housto% Texas, the county's largest purveyor of burial plots and cremation services. The plaumng department staff should be reasonably aware, as they state they have reviewed all the minutes of those meetings. Yet the initial study takes as fact, without interviewing the most negatively effected parties, that there are no negative environmental impacts. The Dovelopmart abut itself, as cxalied by Bob Bmmham, then City Attorney, tad Pacific View Memorial Pads leaves no room for doubt that this Development Agreement waste d to 4 alt Fames to mffiM the naative im=d an the surrourAing residents. Pacific View Memorial Park wants an amendment, not because they have run out of the huge square footage of burial and mausolea space they were awarded at the time of Newport Beach's lest General Plan update, but as can be attested to by numerous residents who were invited to a PUMP presentation, their salesmen wanted Family Mwzolea to sell at over $1,00,000 each to benefit 4 families, rather than hundreds of families by a Community Mausolea as they origuoally demanded Pad were subsequently given in the captioned Develops t Agreement THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ITSELF MAKES IT CLEAR WHAT THE PARTIES AGREED TO ANA WHY On page 1 of the agreement 1.1 under: PIMMPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT it slates: This agreement is intended to: b) Minimize the impact of the build out on didimine residentts k% 990WAiae stria bindino faits on the amount height and location of aermitted develomnent as well as ensure compliance with numerous conditions on the timing of Construction, the design of structures, and the wAvaping of the properties. C) Benefit the parties, nearby residents and the general public by serving as the primary legal means of vesting Pacific View's tight to develop the property HU ?1 II H i f !I .il r1y 11 A 1 1 r1 1 1 I f 1' 1'[ 1 1 11 1 I A 1! F MIT 1! ' I _ 1 .1' .4MJ' MUST WE REFIGHT THLS RATTLE EVERY FEW YEARS? WHERE IS THE "CERTAIN'T'Y" THE AGREEMENT PROMISES? Both the residents who owned homes surrounding the memorial park in 1995, and still live there, as well as tens of new residents who purchased their homes bordering PVMP, have relied on the recorded Development Agreement in investing 10's of millions of dollars into their homes. Moreover the Board of Managers of the Spyglass hill Association has determined that any changes in the Development Agreement will NEGATIVELY IMPACT the quiet enjoyment, as well as value of the over 360 homeowners of Spyglass Hill which abut the cemetery . The homeowners are willing to uphold the agreement which was reached. To avoid holding the city liable first through endless new meetings, mass media attention and if all fails, litigation, this application by Service Corporation International's subsidiary must be denied PUMP failed to tell the truth to the Spyglass Bill homeowners when they stated politely in the beginning: "If there is major resistance to our plan, we will drop it." PVMP lmows well the position of the Spyglass Hill Homwwuers Association, has soon the homeowner's signed petition and yet is enlarging their disturbing request to open up this Pandora's Boxy once again. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND USE PERMIT SAYS WHAT IT MEANS AND MEANS WHAT IT SAYS Page I I (a) of the development agreement states: Pacific View's ability to construct Family Mausolea or Columbaria on the property shall be limited as follows: "Family Mausolea and Cohunbaria shall not exceed 121 in depth, 22 feet in width and 15 8_ia heigk (14' in buiidins site !0, (Emphasis added). It should be noted PVMP is requesting new I T heights to these ugly proposed Fancily Mausolea which the residents of Spyglass Hill have determined will change the feel of the memorial park to that of an Eastern United States classical cemetery. A change we do not accept in our collective back yard. PVMP HAS MANY PREVIOUSLY PERMIIM FAMILY MAUSOLEA SITES 2 N) STILL AVAILABLE THROUGHOUT THE MEMORIAL PARK While coming hat in hand to the City of Newport beach begging for Family Mauscim in an area forbiddna by the Development agreement they have still never availed themselves of the area they negotiated for and were given permission to build Family Mausolea in Building site "D ", and Building site "G ". Despite the agreement which specifically reads on page I I (e): Family Mausolea and Cohrmbaria are prohibited on the Property except in those areas expressly permitted pursuant to this section (3.2 a-c) Rather, the greedy PUMP and their Texas owners wish to stick nine (9) tinge Eask m Style Family Mausolea under the noses of the homeowners on the Eastern side of PVMP. 'these property owners had been guaranteed by the Development Agreement they were getting against PVMP changing the deal every few years to satisfy the sales commission desires of their avaricious sales force and owners. THIS IS NO "MINOR AD.NSTMENT", BY ANY STANDARD, BUII,DING SITE "E" MUST REMAIN PER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND SITE PLAN, SMUMV GROUND BURIAL On page 13, item 10 entitled KWOR ADJUSTMENTS, it states: Given the extended period of years over which the Property will be developed, it is understood that minor adjustmeuts hr the location or configuration of the Community Mausoleum, Family Mausolea or Cohmmbaria may occur, and that minor adjustments (I$,G. to aegopmolk abet tughttplgg or the mgInem ing of bu0mg padsl may be necessary to address site considerations. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Discretionary Approvals or this agreement, such minor Mudwoutz shall be Permitted with the approval of the Planning Director provided that they are substantially consistent with the building envelopes, and at or below the building height limits, shown on the techok*l site plau (unit Q. (emphasis added) 1)The Development agreement defines Minor adjustments in the above paragraph. The amendments are MAJOR amendments,. 2) Does the city and planning commission believe or tbWk a court would deflue replacing a 60' by 12W Community Mausolea housing hundreds of cremawd souls, with 9 Family Mausolea each IT X 22' as minor? 3 9Z PVMP HAS UPPED THEIR IMPROPER DEMANDS BY REQUESTING AREA 8 WITHIN BUE6DING STYE "E" BE CHANGED TO ALLOW USE CALLED OUT IN THE AGREEMENT AS "BUILDING STIES (OTEM II AN BUIIDING SITE Er SEE Page 19 of the Development Agreement 10 (a) Building site E for the Community Mausoleum and Crypt Wall, =�1 y:.' SG IN!: 1=57 :. 1' They are now asking area site 8 within building site E be consistent with area one which allows walls, fouataho and all sorts of above ground enhancements. That request must be denied as wholly inconsistent with the protections of the Development Agmment to the 360 plus SPYGLASS M I , community homeowners. The Planning Department has advised the writer of this submission that a oonsulting Sum put together the planning report foundation. To our knowledge no resident was ever caatach d by such a consultant, and we feel it is improper in this iostance to put any judgement off to a consultant. There are some who might find that a way to whitewash any findings of the Planning Depamtxxmeut It should be clear to all concerned that the hard fought Development Agreement accepted by the city and Spyglass Hill homeowners, should not be altered without their full consent. The facts are; Spyglass Bill residents are against any alterations to change the existing clear rules regarding the placement of Family Mansolea in specific restricted site areas defined by the existing Development Agreement or any changes to Area S within Building site "E% Submitted by I.eoxwd Fish, a Spyglass Hill resident bordering PVMP. 949 -644 -7876 Sent via fax to 949 -644 -3229 4 q3 April 27, 2007 Ms. Rosalinh Ung, Associate CityPlanner City of Newport Beach, Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: Notice of Availability of Initial Study /Negative Declaration Pack View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No.3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 (PA2006 -282) Project Location: 3500 Pack View Drive, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 City of Newport Beach, County of Orange Proposed Modification to Development with Area 8 and Building Site H Dear Ms. Ung: We are residents and homeowners living in Spyglass I-pill in Corona Del Mar, Cahformia, directly adjacent. to Pack View Memorial Park, in an area contiguous to the areas referenced above. We have been informed of Pack View's intent to seek approval of an Amendment to the Development Agreement ( "Agreement ") as set forth above, which was approved on July 10, 1995, Ordinance No. 95-26. We are opposed to Pacific View's proposed Amended on the following basis: 1. The construction of the proposed 9 family mausoleums instead of one community mausoleum is in direct violation of the intent of the Agreement. That Agreement was reached after substantial negotiations and compromises between parties and involvement of the affected homeowners, as expressly stated in the Agreement in order to "Minimize the impact of the building on adjoining residents... " [Recitals, 1.1(b)] and to "Benefit the parties, nearby residents and the general public ... intended to mitigate the impact of construction on nearby residents and doing so with a level of certainty that will minimize the potential for disputes in the future." [Recitals, 1.1(c)] 2. Based on the Agreement, we have invested all of our capital in our homes, which are directly adjacent to Area 8 and some of us view this investment as our retirement plan, which is being negatively affected by this proposed amendment. 3. This proposal has already created much stress in our families and thus has negatively affected our quality of life. 4. The Agreement states that no family mausoleums are to be built in Building Sites H as they are expressly prohibited by the Agreement. [Section 32(2)(e), page 11(e)] This prohibition has induced reliance on the part of those �y homeowners that have invested substantial monies in those properties directly adjacent to Building Sites H and Area 8. 5. The Notice of Availability of Initial Study/Negative Declaration states that "The proposed amendments to the Use Permit and Development Agreement would set the maximum allowable size of family mausoleum structures at 22' x 17' x 17' high, within Building Site H only." However, it is not possible to build 9 of these huge structures within the footprint of Building Site H only and it will be expanded across the Area 8 in a higher elevation, meaning closer to our homes, and increased total width being again closer to our homes. 6. The increased size of the construction project needed to build these multiple structures will necessarily be closer to our homes, will create a tract housing appearance and will destroy the "park litre" environment of the Property, which has been stated in the Agreement. [Section 4,10 (c)(1), page 20] 7. The proposal will also negatively change the views of our homes and will seriously affect the values of our properties. 8. Because the locations of the family mausoleums are constructed closer to our homes, this will create substantial noise, increased traffic and additional maintenance personnel by the virtue of the fact that the gravesite services and frequent family visits of the mausoleums will be closer to the existing adjacent homes, which would not be the case if a single communitymausoleum is built. Such additional noise levels and traffic will negatively affect our privacy. 9. The construction of 9 separate mausoleums will take place at different times, will take a longer period of time, and will create direct physical changes in the environment such as to produce dust, noise, and traffic of heavy equipment that would result from construction. Also, the nearby residents will be subject of continual construction, which are unnecessary and will contribute to global warinitg- 10. The proposed 9 family mausoleums will hold a total of 140 crypts in maximum, whereas, the community mausoleum under the Agreement will hold a total of 1200 crypts, which is more likely to serve the future needs of the community and avoid additional future construction. 11. The site of 9 separate family mausoleums will create an unpleasant view and destroys the natural look of the Area 8, which cannot be sufficiently screened due to the different height levels of the adjacent homes. 12. As compared with the original Development Agreement, the proposed amendment necessitates increased permit processing activities, excavation in 9 different areas, investigations, surveys, and increased construction activity at different times, which if viewed scientifically affects long term global warming. We have the responsibility to pay attention to these unnecessary activities to protect the earth, avoid global warming, and leave sufficient space for future burials in this area. 13. According to the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based on the adverse effect of the project and consideration of the views held by the members of the public in all areas affected [CEQA, Section 15064(c)], which 2 43 in this case is the Spyglass Hill homeowners, and direct physical changes in the environment, [CEQA, Section 15064(d)], which in this case is construction of 9 different family mausoleums in a broader area, and the increased dust, noise, and traffic of heavy equipment [CEQA, Section 15064(d)(% as well as the indirect physical changes that fewer crypts are being built thus requiring additional future crypt construction [CEQA, Section 15064(d)(2)], an environmental impact report should be prepared to study the effect of the project on the environment as required by CEQA. It should be noted that case law requires the City to require an environmental impact report if it is presented with "a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment" No C4 Im u City cf Las Ards (1974) 13 CAM 68, [CEQA, Section 15064(0(1)1. 14. 'CEQA, Section 15065(a)(4) requires that an environmental impact report be prepared if the project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. We respectfully request that the City deny the proposed application and abide by the approved Development Agreement, which was fought over for a long period of time, reduce the stress on the homeowners, and avoid approving a project that unnecessarily increases global warming. Sincerely, Seaw S. Lkf -" "M. Angela �/ aG,rr � M�►rC�,� �����_�_ A 6,003 &rg,wb,om rinon/�n>✓� Ci2� 14 06e-5 94/30/2007 05:41 94970611R$ RICHARDABRCCKS Richard A. Brooks, PhD 9 Monterey Circle Corona del Mar, CA 92625 1949)706 -1172 Fax(949)706 -1188 Email lt.richard. a. brook s6i2cox.net April 27, 2007 Ms. Rosalinh Ung, Associate City Planner City of Newport'Beach, Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 VIA FAC'STMT.T.P: (949) 644 -3229 Re: Notice of Availability of Initial Study/Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park- Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 And Development Agreement No. 95 -26 (PA2006 -282) Project location: 3500 Pacific View Drive, City of Newport Beach, County of Orange Proposed Modification to Development within Area 8 and Building Site H Dear Ms. Ung: PAGE 01 In 1997, while cdnsidering the purchase of a home in the Spyglass Hill Community, I was presented whh a copy of Development Agreement No. 95 -26 between Pacific View Memorial Park and the City of Newport Beach. Naturally I was keenly interested in this document, as the existence of an adjacent neighboring property as prominent as PVMP could potentiallyhave a significant impact on multiple environmental and aesthetic factors and issues related not only to residing in the Spyglass Hill home I was considering, but its intrinsic investment value as well. Upon careful review of the Development Agreement, I was impressed and relieved by its thoroughness and consideration for the neigbbors of PVMP, realizing that much intense effort and negotiation had evidently gone into preparation of the document. It was also apparent that the dwuturut pritaurily addrtisscd issues of interest to homeowners in the Spyglass Hill Community adjacent to PVMP, and the City of Newport Beach would use its legal authority to protect those very same interests. This understanding, together with the level of detail in the document and its twenty five year life span, provided me with sufficient asstuance to prodeed with the purchase of the home located at 9 Monterey Circle in Spyglass Hill Counnunity. In the latter part 0f 2006 my neighbors and I in the Spyglass Hill Community received notice from PVMP of its desire to modify the aforementioned Development Agreement with respect the Site H. Specifically the PVMP proposed modifications would include substitution of a total of nine family mausolea for the community mausoleum described in the Development Agreement. I subsequently had a cordial and congenial meeting with V� a PVM P representative, Ms. Fran Motskin, and learned more details of the proposed modifications desired by PVMP. During the meeting Ms. Motskin stated that PUMP would not go forward with an attempt to amend the original Development Agreement if' there were significant objections from PVMP neighbors living in the Spyglass Bill Community. Subsequently, after several meetings between PVMP managers and homeowners, there arose from a near unanimous number of Spyglass Hill Community homeowners whose respective properties are adjacent to PVMP strong objections to the PVMP proposed modifications to the Development Agreement. Nonetheless PVMP has apparently gone forward with its proposal to the City of Newport Beach to amend the Development Agreement, not only with respect the to nine family mausolea replacing the couumudly Anaudulcum, but PVMP has also prvposw further modification to the Development Agreement to allow features in Area 8 expressly prohibited therein, with the sole justification that such features were allowed in Area 1. The latter proposal ignores the reality that PVMP property in the northeast comer of Area 8 is much nearer affected homeowners than anywhere in Area 1. Thus in addition to the nine family mausolea, PVMP also is proposing what amounts to a subversion of the original intent of the Development Agreement to specify precisely which areas would be permitted certain features and which areas would not be permitted such features. Chronologically the Development Agreement now is at its halfway point, and PVMP has not nearly exhausted areas in which to expand interment sites. Thus there is neither a pressing need for modification now nor in the remainder of the Development Agreement twenty five year life span. Furthermore, the nine family mausolea proposed by PVMP would have only a small fraction of the interment capacity of the community mausoleum that would be precluded at site H. Also, it is likely the family mausolea would not be built at once, but sporadically as sales of the mausolea occur in the fullness of time. This would lead to a repetition of construction projects at site H, possibly as many as nine in toto, with a consequent continuing disturbance to the environment and disruption of the peace and quiet in homes adjacent to the area containing site H. The possibility of perpetual construction activity in near proximity to homes adjacent to PVMP is almost certain to have a liegative impact on property values and sales in the affected neighborhood. In summary, the following points are offered respectfully for your due consideration. 1. Development Agreement 95 -26 was prepared in strong measure to provide SPYglass Hill Community property owners, present and future, with certainty for a period of twmy five Yeats with NOW to activities and construction nmierta 9q inefficient use ( re interment resource, potentially strai. Ig future capacity. Second it creates the prospect of long term repetitive construction projects at site H, with attendant negative impacts to the environment and aesthetical enjoyment of those in the adjacent neighborhood. 4. PVMP did not approach members of the Spyglass Mill Community in good faith with the promise it conveyed not w pursue a proposal for Development Agreement amendment over significant objections from members of that Community. 5. Amending Development Agreement 95 -26 and Use Permit No. 3518 at this time for the purposes stipulated in the PVMP request would set a precedent for future proposals that would be a continuing concern for residents and a certain detriment to property values in the neighborhood of PVMP. Together with the above text, please forward my respectful motion to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and the Newport Beach City Council that the amendment to Development Aereement 95 -26 and Use Permit No. 3518 proposed and sponsored by PVMP be. denied. Thank you for y9ur assistance. Respectfully yours, ROO s 04/27/2007 14:19 949759GP7? RUZBASAN ROME PAGE 01 Susan L. Ruzbasan 1 Twin Lakes Circle Corona Del Mar, CA. 92625 (949) 644 -5560 Fax(949)759 -6672 Email: dux nn aol corn April 27, 2007 Ms. Rosallnh Ung, Associate City Planner City of Newport Beach, Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92683 VIA FACSIMILE (949) 644 -3229 Re: Notice of Availability of Initial Study/Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park - Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 And Development Agreement No. 95-26 (PA2006 -282) Project Location: 3500 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach CA. 92663 City of Newport "Beach, County of Orange Proposed Modification to Development within Area 8 and Building Site H Dear Ms. Ung, I am a homeowner Irving in Spyglass Hill, in Corona Del Mar, CA., directly adjacent to Pacific View Memorial Park, in an area contiguous to the areas referenced above. I am also a member of the Board of Directors of Spyglass Hill Homeowner's Association, a neighborhood of 349 Homes that borders the Pacific View Memorial Park. I am writing in my capacity as a homeowner to express my concerns about the proposed amendment to the Development Agreement reached in 1995 between the City of Newport Beach and the Pacific View Memorial Park. First, I appreciate that Pacific View Memorial Park has notified potentially impacted homeowners about their proposed changes, and provided opportunities for us to view the site, attend informational meetings, and answer questions that we had. During the seven years that I have lived adjacent to the Memorial Park, I have found Fran Motskin and the Memorial Park to be responsive and Courteous neighbors in responding to requests for tree trimming and maintenance so as to preserve the views and property values of homeowners in Spyglass Hill, including myself. I attended one of the Informational meetings at Pacific View, and had the opportunity to meet with the cemetery management. Management indicated that if they had strong opposition to the proposed amendments, that they would refrain from seeking a modification of the development agreement. Since that date, concerned homeowners have attended Spyglass Hill Board Meetings to S/ 04/27/2007 14 :19 9497596x'2 RUZBASAN HOME PAGE 02 express concerns and objections to the proposed changes. A petition has circulated among homeowners who would be directly impacted by the proposed modifications. 21 families in Spyglass Hill who would be directly impacted have signed the petition objecting to the proposed changes. A copy of that petition has previously been forwarded to the City of Newport Beach. Among the purposes of the existing Development Agreement are: "Minimize the impact of the buildout on adjoining residents by establishing strict, binding limits on the amount, height, and location of permitted development as well as ensure compliance with numerous conditions on the timing of construction, the design of structures, and landscaping of the property." (RECITALS, Paragraph 1, Section 1.1(b). Another purpose of the Agreement was "...Ensuring continued compliance with conditions on development that are intended to mitigate the Impact of construction on nearby residents and doing so with a level of certainty that will minimize the potential for disputes in the future." (RECITALS, Paragraph 1, Section 1.1(c). Construction of 9 family mausoleums in lieu of one community mausoleum violates the purpose of the 1995 Development Agreement in the following respects: The location of the proposed family mausoleums is closer to the existing single- family homes in Spyglass Hill than the 7,200 square foot community mausoleum the Development Agreement currently allows, bringing gravesite services, increased traffic, additional maintenance personnel, and regular family visitation closer to our homes. This would produce Increased noise levels and loss of privacy to private homes in Spyglass Hill. 2. The proposed height of the family mausoleums is 22 feet, and the family mausoleums are elevated higher on the slope of the Memorial Park than the approved 7,200 square foot community mausoleum, and would negatively impact private homes visually. Although the Memorial Park has offered to provide some landscape buffers for the proposed family mausoleums, they have Indicated at their meetings that they do not intend to block the ocean view of areas around the family mausoleums In the park that have not yet been developed. 3. The construction of the original community mausoleum would involve construction on a single project, and once completed, the noise and related nuisance of the construction would terminate. Allowing nine family mausoleums to be built to suit for individual families as the demand arises would likely entail nine separate construction projects, with nine different timetables, and would likely continue for many SZ 04/27/2007 14:19 949759F ^�2 RUZBASAN HOME PAGE 03 years, as it would be dependent of future demand. This would result In a significant loss of the right of quiet enjoyment that each homeowner In Spyglass Hill currently enjoys. 4. The current Development Agreement provides that family mausoleums not exceed 15 feet in height (14 feet in height In Building Site G). The Memorial Park seeks approval for family mausoleums that are 22 feet in height. The Development Agreement allows family mausoleums that are not more than 12 feet deep, while the Memorial Park seeks approval for family mausoleums that are 17 feet deep. The increased height and girth of the proposed buildings, closer to existing homes and positioned higher on the slope, will reduce the value of the adjacent homes because additional areas that are currently landscaped gardens, trees, and open areas will be replaced with large, imposing structures with 22 foot rooflines. 5. I purchased my home in Spyglass Hill in 2000, with justifiable reliance on the existing 1995 Development Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Pacific View. This agreement provided certainty as to the future potential development within the areas of the Memorial Park contiguous to my property. I Invested in my property in reliance on the Development Agreement, as recorded. I object to proposed modifications of the agreement because I believe the modifications will reduce the value of my residence and its future salability and market value. Please forward my objections to the Newport Beach Planning Commission, and the Newport Beach City Council, so that they may be included in the record at future public hearings on this matter. Thank you for your assistance in that regard. Respectfully L. Ruzbasan, S3 February 7, Rosalinh M. Ung Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 :[VED BY DEPARTMENT FEB 16 2007 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Re: Pacific View Memorial Park Conditional Use Permit Modification Request Dear Ms. Ung: We are residents, property owners, and the Board of Directors of the Spyglass Hill Community Association. Our properties are directly adjacent to the Pacific View Memorial Park cemetery. We are writing this letter in regards to Pacific View's intention to seek modification of its current conditional use permit for development of their property and construction of additional mausoleums. We have been informed by the cemetery that it seeks to modify the current conditional use permit to allow for construction of 9 single family mausoleums instead of the construction of a previously approved single community mausoleum. We are opposed to the modification sought by Pacific View cemetery on the basis that the construction of these 9 family mausoleums will have the appearance of a tract home development and will seriously detract from the natural and open look of the cemetery, which the City and the community have sought to maintain in the past, and which is best addressed by the previously approved conditional use permit for a single community mausoleum. Additionally, the expanded and more prominent look of this part of the cemetery that will result from the building of these numerous family mausoleums will most negatively affect the value of our homes, as well as the entire community, due to the loss of the natural and open look of the cemetery which in its current condition blends well with its surroundings and does not call attention to the existence of the cemetery. Further, the proposed 9 family mausoleums will hold a total of 140 crypts in maximum (meaning that each family mausoleum will accommodate about 15 crypts) whereas the community mausoleum will hold a total of 1200 crypts, which is more likely to serve the future needs of the community and avoid additional future construction that may be necessary if only 140 crypts are built in the 9 family mausoleums. In light of the above considerations, we respectfully request that the City Planning Commission reject Pacific View cemetery's modification plan and preserve the natural view and values of our homes. 39 Argonaut, Suite 100, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 -1423 (949) 855 -1800 Fax (949) 855 -6678 �Y For the Spyglass Hill Community Association and its Board of Directors, (See attached signature sheet) CC: Planning Commissioners: Jeffrey Cole Barry Eaton Robert C. Hawkins Earl McDaniel Michael L. Toerge Scott Peotter Bradley Hillgren Pacific View Memorial Park SS TO: MEMBERS OF THE SPYGLASS HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RE: PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK We the undersigned are 100% against building 9 separate family mausoleums. The look that these granite built mausoleums across the cemetery will give to the cemetery will have a negative effect on the value of our properties and then indirectly on the value of Spyglass Hill Community homes in general. Family mausoleums will accommodate only 140 crypts in maximum. This means each family mausoleum should accommodate approximately 140 - 9 = 15.5 crypts, which practically never happens. Therefore, the shortage of accommodated crypts will mandate the building of more mausoleums, community or family, in the near future. This will have additional negative effect on the value of our properties and the Spyglass Hill Community homes. One community mausolea, based on the past agreed plan, with a tile roof can look like a house down the hill from us. Since Community mausolea will accommodate 1200 crypts, no need will arise for more future buildings in the cemetery. We do not want that Spyglass Hill Community be recognized by the virtue of its proximity to the cemetery and we strongly oppose this plan. NAME: ADDRESS: SIGNITURE: Sewn .4- R� e�q ��� 5-MOn7—e ,,e -------- ------- --- ------ - - -- -- --------------- - - - - -- - --- ------ ---- - ------ - -(� � -- ---- Y ------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -� - -_ ---- -- - - -- -1I - -- -QS- -_Y ore -ca-Z- - -- -- `bykA-,e- ►Jfie- I-- 6r i u ----------------- 1> - wwvfi4!z - C` - - -- - ---.. . �6 NAME: ADDRESS: SIWNUq (� 0111 - --------- o---- --- C � e 1rR��itSHA_ �tN I Til l�_ �ny�_Y �-� - - _ ------ - - - - -- AUA - l - Loe� cr�s/�a� %dw:� ,L�L�eS�il ------------ - - ° - �t4 T)ct%A 'LksKtIL- 4,:Z�.L h 1 -v,11 L4 te-r- C,•M1. Vim' d u 1 ( A '�lC- CiU /`�-C l�.l'1., L- j.oLl ---C----------------------------- `� ��(1 t (go k-" D - 1---------------------- - - - - -- - - - - -- Z- = t''?v� ---- - - - - -- I S poi evv"3 /� !n ®�'' fir- v - -- --- - - - - -- - - -- ---- - - - - -- - - - - - -- IN S> NAME: ADDRESS: SIGNITURE: `- -- --�cx- ee� _�/��i`?c- 1 .2 -�!1l1 z-- - - - - -- ��W, W. EXHIBIT 4 REVISED APPLICATION LETTER DATED AUGUST 1, 2007 59 Assoc Iales landscape Architecture August 1, 2007 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 RECENED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AUG 0 12001 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RE: Pacific View Memorial Park Amendment to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No.95 -26 Dear Rosalinh: We would like to revise Pacific View's application for amending their use permit and development agreement. In light of Pacific View's anticipated agreement with the Spyglass Hill Home Owners Association, Pacific View has agreed to revise their initial request for amendment. The attached revised exhibits C, D, and F (Attachments 1 -3) represent the proposed revisions and are based on the anticipated agreements reached with the Spyglass Hill HOA. Proposed Amendment Revisions In general Pacific View has agreed to construct a maximum of only six structures, for a total of 2,024 maximum square feet, in Building Site H. The family mausoleums would replace the 7200 square feet of community mausoleum structure. This revised request would also provide for other development restriction as detailed below and formalized in the revised development amendment. 1. Family Mausolea Ouantity. Within Building Site H, nine (9) family mausolea envelopes have been proposed as shown on the initial applicants Exhibit'V'. At the request of Spyglass Hill HOA, Pacific View has agreed to delete envelopes 1, 2 and 9 fiom the application and amend our request to six (6) family Mausolea envelopes for a total of 2024 square feet. 2. Family Mausolea Dimensions. Family Mausolea other than building envelopes 1,2,3 and 4 in Building Site H, as shown on .Exhibit D shall be a maximum of 15 feet high, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth. Family Mausolea in building envelopes 1,2,3 and 4 may be a maximum of 17 feet high, 22 feet wide and 17 feet deep. 3. Roof Ornaments. Religious, ornamental and other vertical objects shall not be permitted on the roof or protrude above the roofline of the family mausolea. Lic. # CA 2311, 4233; AZ 19864 150 Pauiarino Avenue, Suite 160, Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714)434.9803 - FAX (714) 434-9109 �l August 1, 2007 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Page 2 4. Site E Crypt Wall. Construction of a community mausoleum and crypt wall within Building Site E shall not commence prior to January 1, 2014. Estate Gardens. Estate gardens shall be constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls consistent with the visual simulations prepared by the City of Newport Beach and as shown on Exhibit' F" attached. No monuments, fences, gates or other elements except plant material shall exceed the top height of the estate garden walls or total height of the terraced slope. 6. Development A eement Term Extension. Pacific View will agree to extend the term of the Development Agreement for eighteen (18) years from the effective date of the First Amendment with and option by Pacific View to extend the term for an additional seven (7) years for a total of twenty -five (25) years. No Development Ameement Amendment. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 65868 of the California Government Code, Pacific View waives any right it may have, now or in the future, to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement and shall not amend, change modify or request or otherwise seek to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement for a period of not less than fifteen (15) years from the effective date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. In the event there is a conflict between this provision agreeing not to amend the Development Agreement with any other provision of the Development Agreement, statute, ordinance, regulation or law governing the Development Agreement, this provision and intent shall govern. 8. Minor Adiustments. A further provision will be added to this section of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement to read as follows: "Given the extended period of years over which the property will be developed, minor adjustments necessary for safety, maintenance, slope engineering, landscaping, the engineering of building pads, and the reorientation of structures within existing building envelopes, shall be allowed with the approval of the Planning Director, so long as such minor adjustments are consistent with the building envelopes and at or below the building height limits shown on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit °C° to the First Amendment to the Development Agreement), and do not involve changes or additions to the number, type, height, or placement of structures (other than changes in the orientation of structures within building envelopes specified in accordance with Exhibit "G" to the First Amendment to the Development Agreement in Areas 8, 9, 10 and 11 6z August 1, 2007 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Page 3 9. Landscape Screening. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any individual family mausoleum, Pacific View will plant additional trees, as necessary to screen the constructed family mausoleum in Building Site H from the ground floor views of the residential properties as shown in the computer visual simulations on file in the office of the Planning Director and as depicted on Exhibits "D. I" and "F" attached. 10. 430 Foot Covenant, The 430 -foot mean sea level elevation landscape restriction shall be extended to encompass the entire boundaries of Building Sites E, F and G. 11. Tree Planting. Pacific View agrees to plant within Building Site H, landscape buffering consisting of two (2) thirty-six inch (36 ") box size trees on the slope around each family mausoleum building envelope. The trees shall he planted within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the fast stmcture, whichever is earlier. At the time of construction of any family mausoleum in Building Site H, one (1) additional forty -eight inch (48 ") box size tree shall be planted at the side or rear elevation and one (1) additional thirty -six inch (36 ") box size tree shall be planted adjacent to the front elevation of each family mausoleum building site envelope. Please let us know if you need additional information. We are in the process of finalizing our agreement with the Spyglass Hill HOA and will forward it to you upon completion. Sincerely, CLARK & GREEN ASSOCIATES Y` `�)p Rand ni 1, ASLA Registered Landscape Architect #4395 Project Director cc: Robert Motzkin, Pacific View Fran Motzkin, Pacific View Mike Green, Clark & Green Dennis O'Neil, Hewitt & O'Neil 109-01-07 06-112 ammdm t application idly b3 6 y ..i (� I � .: d; a P •9 Mj� 1Yf ryy ' I M1 � = V. u R ai •• _ j I • { n n u 1 � � � • ri { I I 6 y .1 1 1 1 1 af90 ��� tea O v 1 4c� < /1) I A; m _., Go kIIII I < F- °'•.. W ,A Q A i A t t AA i t t � A i � � t 1 a 1 t A , , A 1 A A •60 i i vi 'J 6b - - wm,mvm,m JltlVdmaorow,t�enom�vd +ire {, � 1 ioo i W $o s • � I ; ��y� I I -fill a { � 1 f i 4 t fa I qq 6 ' ! 1 1 Iftft cI I R� i li i 1R RRR Ij �! t I; Pt i I ii 6b EXHIBIT 5 LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM SPYGLASS H I L L H OA DATED AUGUST 2, 2007 6? rage i or i Ung, Rosalinh From: Chevalier, Allen & Lichman, LLP [cal @calairlaw.com] Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:10 PM To: Ung, Rosalinh Subject: Pacific View Memorial Park Development Agreement Amendment Attachments: Letter from Wohrle to Planning Commission.pdf Attached is Spyglass Hills Homeowners Association Board of Director's letter regarding the Pacific View Memorial Park Development Agreement Amendment. Berne C. Hart CHEVALIER, ALLEN & LICHMAN, LLP 695 Town Center Drive, Suite 700 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel. (714)384 -6520 Fax (714)384 -6521 calOcalairlaw.com The information contained in this electronic mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. The information herein may also be protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510 -2521. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 08/02/2007 � d Aug 02 07 01:06p CHEVALIER, ALLEN, & LICHM 7143846521 p2 Angast2, 2007 Plann g Commies City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport BoWevwd Newport Bcac% Califtnia 92658-6915 DwChaimm Hatvldno do Mambas of the Planning Commission: TU SPYOW IMIS Homeowners Association Hoard of Directars and represenudves of Pacific Views Manorial Pads Lave met and exchanged corteVondmw concommg dw flame devciopment of Pacific View Memorial Pack. Tbrough their meetings and conospowlence, the Board and Pacific View have negotiated and readm d sgreemcat on ton siSWft ptpobw as sex forth is IW attached letter, with the undersbrodift that those agreements wM be tocorporsted Iwo the Pacific Vmw Development Ageament Avwetxhnert. TLe BeatdofDaedw cOMM with the application byPacift Viow Memorial Pack to amend its Use Permit and Development Avacrucat. Sincerely, BOARD OF DR.RCTORS, SPY(II.ASS HLLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION l Dr. Peter S. Wohde President cc: D" Lego, Planning Director Ateaelanent [l] >b DEAN DLM-RANKRi SANDRA A. GALLS WILLIAM E. HALLE ANDREW K. HARTZELL Hum HEWnT LAWRENCEJ. HILTON JOIiN D. HUDSON DENNIS D. O'NEIL HEwm & OTNEiL LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAY F. PALQUNOIT 19900 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD, SUITE 1050 Jum L PusmKI tRv1Nr, CAuPDaNIA 92612 PAUL A.#OWE (949) 798 -0500 • (949) 798 -0511 (FAX) SANDRA W. SRARON EMAIL. ecu bghewhmwlmm WILLIAM TWOmEY JOHN P. YEAGER' WRITEWSUMECTOIAL. (949)796 -0734 EMAIL: dmil@Iewiu mflmm or C� AMY W. LARM August 1, 2007 VIA E MAIL Barbara E. Lichman Chevalier, Allen & Lichman LLP 695 Town Center Drive Suite 700 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Re: Pacific View Memorial Park Dear Barbara: By letter to you dated July 19, 2007,1 set forth ten "deal points" under discussion between Pacific View Memorial Park ("Pacific View"} and the Spyglass Hill Homeowners Association Board of Directors ( "Spyglass Hill HOA') relating to the pending applications filed by Pacific View with the City of Newport Beach to amend the Pacific View Use Permit and Development Agreement ( "Amendments'). The proposed Amendments relate to the elimination of a community mausoleum building in Building Site H, Area 8, to be replaced by nine family mausolea structures and ground burial estate gardens. By letter dated July 30, 2007 to me, you responded to my July 19, 2007 letter stating agreement on most points and requesting further revisions on several other points. By telephone and e-mail messages we have discussed and mutually agreed on the revisions to those issues listed in your July 30, 2007 letter requiring frther revisions and clarification. This.letter will restate all of the ten deal points in final form and content to reflect our mutual and final agreement. 1. Six Familv Mausolea Within Building Site H, nine (9) family mausolea envelopes have been proposed as shown on Exhibit "D.1 " At the request of the Spyglass Hill HOA, Pacific View has agreed to delete family mausolea envelopes 1,.2 and 9 from their Amendments applications to request six (6) family mausolea 011!07 10154.3 H &o: #40225 V2 71 Barbara E. Lichman August 1, 2007 Page 2 2. Family Mausolea Dimensions. Family mausolea, other than in building envelopes 3, 4, 5 and 6 in Building Site H as shown on Exhibit D.1 attached, shall be a maximum. of 12 feet in depth, 22 feet in width and 15 feet in height. Family mausolea in building envelopes 3, 4, 5 and 6 may. be a maximum of 17 feet in depth, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in height. 3. Roof Ornaments. Religious, ornamental and other vertical objects shall not be permitted on the roof or protrude above the roofline of the family mausolea 4. Site S Wall. Construction of a community mausoleum and crypt wall within Building Site E shall not commence prior to January 1, 2014. 5. Estate Gardeus. Estate Gardens shall be constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls consistent. with the visual simulations prepared by the City of Newport Beach and as shown on Exhibit "F" attached. No monuments, fences, gates or other elements except plant material shall exceed the height of the back wall of each terrace or the total height of the terraced slope. 6. DevelopMent Agreement Terns Extension. Pacific View will agree to extend the term of the Development Agreement for eighteen (18) years, with an option by Pacific View to extend the term for an additional seven (7) years for a total of twenty -five (25) years. 7. No Development Agreement Amendment. The Development Agreement Amendment shall provide: "Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 65868 of the California Government Code, Pacific View waives any right it may have, now or in the future, to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement, and shall not amend, change or modify, or request or otherwise seek to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement for a period of not less than fifleen (15) years from the effective date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. In the event there is a conflict between this provision agreeing not to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement with any other provision of the Development. Agreement, statute, ordinance, regulation or law governing the Development Agreement, this provision and intent shall govern." 7A. Minor Adiustments. A further provision will be added to this section of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement to read as follows: "Given the extended period of years over which the property will be developed, minor adjustments necessary for safety, maintenance, slope Bn107 101513 H&O: #10225 v2 Barbara E. Lichman August 1, 2007 Page 3 engineering, landscaping, the engineering of building pads, and the reorientation of structures within existing building envelopes, shall be allowed with the approval of the Planning Director, so long as such minor adjustments are consistent with the building envelopes and at or below the building height limits shown on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit "C" to the First Amendment to the Development Agreement), and do not involve changes or additions to the number, type, height, or placement of structures (other than changes in the orientation of structures within building envelopes specified in accordance with Exhibit "C" to the First Amendment to the Development Agreement in Areas 8, 9, 10 and 11. 8. Landscape Screening. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for. any individual family mausoleum, Pacific View will plant, if necessary, additional trees to screen the constructed family mausoleum in Building Site H from the ground floor views of the residential properties as shown in the computer visual simulations on file in the office of the Planning Director and as depicted on Exhibits "D. I" and "F" attached. 9. 43AFoot Covenant. The 430 -foot mean sea level elevation landscape height restriction shall be extended to encompass the entire boundaries of Building Sites E, F and G. 10. Tree Plamtine. Pacific View agrees to plant within Building Site H, landscape buffering consisting of two (2) thirty -six inch (36 ") box size trees on the slope around each family mausoleum building envelope. The trees shall be planted within twelve (12) months of the effective date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first structure, whichever is earlier. At the time of construction of any family mausoleum in Building Site H, one (1) additional forty-eight inch (48 ") box size tree shall be planted at the side or rear elevation and one (1) additional thirty-six inch (36 ") box size tree shall be. planted adjacent to the front elevation of each family mausoleum building site envelope. Although not numbered as a deal point, Pacific View agrees that, besides the six (6) family mausolea, estate gardens, ground burials, and roads, there shall be no further requests for changes to the development within Building Site H, Area 8. Assuming this letter accurately sets forth our final agreements, and in accordance with our verbal understandings, Pacific View expects and will appreciate a letter of support for the Pacific View Use Permit and Development Agreement Amendments. The letter from the Spyglass Hill HOA should be filed with the Newport Beach Planning Director to the attention of the Newport Beach Planning Commission. In order for this letter to be included in the Planning WI /M 101543 WzO' aons yr 73 Barbara E. Lichman August 1, 2007 Page 4 Commission Agenda materials, it is imperative that it be received by the City no later than the end of the day on Thursday, August 3, 2007. Again, on behalf of my client, Pacific View Memorial Park, I wish to thank you and the Spyglass Hill HOA Board of Directors for engaging with us in these productive negotiations which, when approved as part of the Pacific View Amendments by the Planning Commission and City Council, will be beneficial for all parties. VP truly yours, Dennis D. ONeil DDOIjme cc: Robert Motzkin Michael Green Sn/07 30154.3 H&O: 440225 v2 7!9 - ----------- - ---- - ---------- --------------- --- --------- -------- ------------------ M W Z 0 0 Z co 1 101 r VII u u w ui W�6 ran x w 29 5 ro- k M `r0 6 6 Z loe � 0a MIR 1114111, 1 1A1 2, 11 L 111141 11110 1111111, 1,11 io I cq C9 CD ,••••�'• 3Ntl0 h43N'JLiYJYd 006E kf31[�NG1L�36 �^ NtlVd INtlCIW3W M3N �tll'.P/d d63LS9NM Md lN3WON3ww lmd3E(IMo ®SOdOtld L j 1N3W33tl'JV If&WdDl3A30 e '�'I EXHIBIT 6 VIEW SIMULATION PHOTOS FROM 5 MONTEREY CIRCLE RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUL 10 2007 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH v S " v d' bi L e :I Ja N.I Aw V 1 15 r � �rF tT .. f iL4 fl'Y i L as a� aim L a P.: maim 4v. - I° Na �i t 1 P•� °Ij. i e •r n0 p 49 .dc i. !° 1 � it f°y L`. - r dQ•j I v. 7 O 7 G p ; Y C V C q t C �Q o c g E N O V 3Y .d 0. V � CL ° ,z 7 O 7 G p ; Y C V C q t C �Q o c g E N O V 3Y .d 0. V � CL L wti y ° 1 4 11 xr per.- "j�p l� a1 ( 9' S � f �rY Y� E1 ,^ I Ki 1 LN 0 0 0 ` S�pao � C t o E�� E en 0 u at s ,= � O u AI }` r }, •�' - i e 'f� 1� � ` 17 a� u rs► ; u T C 1 1 a t h anc q p Al �IL4 a + y o ''J l je Y • . a4 t v J @ vd 11�. .�6 JLr -•� _ �� a LL E ILL � I U VINSON 0 SIMON P •7i ,1� :.7 �; EXHIBIT 7 VIEW SIMULATION PHOTOS FROM 1 LITTLE RIVER CIRCLE 11 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT J3 JUL 101001 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH /L� r P � fly t, d .a L fyic"PetyY'• 0 T i del�i •� + ,` u o d CL s ^- .t �j t• 1� fJ W � _ ♦,.,LaE� < S °aa t.fb4�.it,;, IYa;' � � I r r, J C �,> 1 A Q _ ; a ° o u ai > V C3 U . 0 c a o 3 �5 E`j o�� v 4t� 9 J� � .1, 1, 1y,'1 •A. -. ww,, Y yo _ ; a ° o u ai > V C3 U . 0 c a o 3 �5 E`j o�� v 4t� 9 J� � .1, 1, 1y,'1 •A. -. ww,, o , i j`u > ° •mow_ FI /1 iii J,�• 1 i � r f" � �5�;� ✓ \ � rr �i,, � Iii,,, =. AT rT U ;. If a T.d It 7+ CL BIM �m N �p e4q I pr. .13 n. 17- 3F 0 0 O C rg s 0 E E O ex IL > T 0 E as .13 n. 17- 3F 0 0 O C rg s 0 E E O ex IL > T 0 E 1- l ' 44I V y7 'L i i' n, t � o 0 n £ r `p. 4 T OJ -4 uS.Yd4 1,`. rve 4� n ey 1, s'' �4 • r�. y 1 j�� L LteaR '•'4�N�1 2v � � V m> CIO �C T;m d L r CZ LL J U r @ 6> - LLfl Y � —i Q r \ •f�ca 5' uS.Yd4 1,`. rve 4� n ey 1, s'' �4 • r�. y 1 j�� L LteaR '•'4�N�1 2v � � V m> CIO �C T;m d L r CZ LL J U r ]1 a „!!•� °�'p' � �� em L 7 w 44. ~i1•,,A , � � 1 r;- s R' e p- i f + sir 2.2 2 o > U G T ► = C b ano E_= 6 J 3Y ._ a v ,R am 1� E R � CL e� J� , J , >T•_� l c I Y� r ��_> /mar � ➢n 2.2 2 o > U G T ► = C b ano E_= 6 J 3Y ._ a v ,R am 1� E R � CL EXHIBIT 8 PICTURES TAKEN FROM ADJACENT RESIDENCES 1b-) RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUL 101007 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ;a s a , ow � 'h • _ l+� e rj� • 1 y. , r �--4wv c v r' P i•.i SQ �_'n c .a t Fr' .r s r m i z a ` s W J V K �v Oy d' W WY WJ >Z N I!t �a � .R ._ 0 V E aS Y \ y p J �< a � 4 O a �4J 'b+ W J V y � Y W n -a+ A 4 1 ' a d e .7-� 4 P•, a .. �r ,a - :. -7!- ,ri xt . ..,i .a s; 0 ea e f' J V OV N LL W 3a W_ J >2 .ry f• u }}o e r a fl � 4 f . d�ya Y e •'f� V' r t � r � •t 0 u E t.• l� lei r.'• . f 9 Sure .a s; 0 ea e f' J V OV N LL W 3a W_ J >2 .ry f• u e r d�ya Y e •'f� IL t 1_ w' 0 u E t.• l� lei r.'• a ja n' W ..., J a d W LU s fY Rv � �. q i � �,•_ �. �� dry,.. +3 I��,0 n' W ..., J a d W LU s fY Rv � _ �Yd I ( �yy � 1� ♦ ' 0 c !4' 41 � e 4� r'1 � i r V ` 1 -47 W 7�L ti°y LL W /any. AN. %n�:�q C1 e�.o r _ L V r' CL ♦ 4 I "Y 11) t J to ai w 0 0: > w . U. 4z W z 0 a% r � yqw Y l9 g l y ?moo �r �°j t ¢� 'r • -n v u e 1 �'rQ '�•J �` r. LA ° ti + r. W J v oV U. W 3a WW F 5O {'9 3Y IL /2 .o V E a� ti lip_ w j LL. w X1 17 IIA� 41 4 I-Al EXHIBIT 9 DRAFT FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 7 /zy Recording Requested By and When Recorded Return to: City Clerk City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P. O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659 -1768 Fee Exempt - Gov't Code §6103 for Recorder's Use) FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.7 BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK Approved ,2007 Ordinance No. Version 08 -02 -07 �3l FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.7 (Pacific View) THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 7 is made and entered into effective as of , 2007 by and among the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a charter city and a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (the "City"), and SCI CALIFORNIA FUNERAL SERVICES, INC. doing business as PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK ( "Pacific View "), successor -in- interest to PIERCE BROTHERS, a California corporation, with reference to the following facts and intentions: RECITALS A. Pacific View is the owner of approximately forty-five (45) acres of real property located at 3500 Pacific View Drive in the City bounded by residential uses to the north and east, San Joaquin Hills Road to the south, and Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School to the west (the "Property "). B. On July 10, 1995, the Newport Beach City Council certified a Negative Declaration, approved certain land use entitlement permits for development of the Property, including Use Permit No. 3518, and adopted Ordinance No. 95 -26 approving Development Agreement No. 7 between the City and Pierce Brothers, a California corporation doing business as Pacific View Memorial Park, recorded in the Official Records of Orange County, California on September 8, 1995 as Instrument No. 95- 0392537 (the "Development Agreement "). The Development Agreement grants to Pacific View statutory vested rights to develop the Property in accordance with the terms, conditions and exhibits contained in the Development Agreement. C. Pursuant to the provisions of the General Corporation Law of the State of California and by Certificate of Ownership dated December 31, 2001, filed in the office of the Secretary of State of the State of California, SCI California Funeral Services, Inc. acquired all of the outstanding shares of Pierce Brothers and merged Pierce Brothers into SCI California Funeral Services, Inc. to become effective on December 31, 2001. Under the terns of the Certificate of Ownership, Pierce Brothers was determined to be the disappearing corporation and SCI California Funeral Services, Inc. continued in existence as the surviving corporation. D. Pacific View is proposing to amend Use Permit No. 3518 by Use Permit No. 2006 -040 (the "Use Permit Amendment') and amend Development Agreement No. 7 by Development Agreement No. 2006 -001 (the "First Amendment ") and make appropriate changes to the Technical Site Plan, Preliminary Landscape Plan and Section Diagram through Building Sites E and H attached to the Development Agreement as Exhibits "C," "D" and "F," to remove a 7,200 square foot Community Mausoleum in Building Site H, Area 8 and replace it with a maximum of six (6) Family Mausolea having a total of 2024 square feet and ground burial terraced garden estates (as governed by the restrictions in Section 4(10.)(b) of the Development Agreement) and associated landscape planting to the rear and around the Family Mausolea to buffer each structure from views of residents in the surrounding community. The Use Permit Amendment will establish the maximum allowable size of the Family Mausolea structures at 17 2 Version 08 -02 -07 13? feet in height, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in depth, for four (4) Family Mausolea for Building Envelopes H.1, H.2, H.3 and HA and two (2) Family Mausolea with a maximum of 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth for Building Envelopes H.5 and H.6 to be located within Building Site H, Area 8. E. After giving appropriate notice, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the First Amendment on 2007 and voted to recommend approval of the same. F. After a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council approved execution of this First Amendment pursuant to Ordinance No. , adopted on 2007. G. This First Amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan and associated amendments, and other applicable ordinances, plans and policies of the City. This First Amendment is also consistent with the purpose and intent of the provisions of Section 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code, and Chapter 15.45 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. H. An initial study has been prepared for the Use Permit Amendment and this First Amendment, which determined that the changes proposed in the Use Permit Amendment and this First Amendment would not have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Use Permit Amendment and this Fast Amendment, which is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and was certified by the City Council on 12007. I. Based on the foregoing and subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, City and Pacific View desire to enter into this First Amendment to Development Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and having determined that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and should be and hereby are incorporated into this First Amendment, Pacific View and the City agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Section 1.4 of the Development Agreement entitled Development of the Property is hereby amended to read as follows: 1.4 Development of the Property. This Agreement grants Pacific View the statutory and contractual vested right to develop the Property during the Term of this Agreement, as extended by the First Amendment, consistent with Pacific View Memorial Park's Technical Site Plan attached as Exhibit "C ", as amended, subject to compliance with the conditions and mitigation measures set forth in Section 3 with respect to the Discretionary Approvals as defined in Section 2.11 of the Development Agreement, as amended, as well as the additional conditions relating to public benefit set forth in Section 4 and other portions of the Development Agreement, as amended. 3 Version 08 -02-07 /Z 3 2. Section 1.5 of the Development Agreement entitled Planning Commission/City Council Hearings is hereby amended to add the following paragraph at the end of Section 1.5: After giving appropriate notice, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the First Amendment on 2007 and voted to recommend approval of the same. After a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council approved execution of the First Amendment pursuant to Ordinance No. adopted on 2007. 3. Section 1.8 of the Development Agreement entitled City Ordinance is hereby amended to add the following sentence: On , 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. approving the First Amendment and authorizing the City Council to enter into the First Amendment. The Adopting Ordinance will become effective on , 2007. 4. Section 2.1 of the Development Agreement entitled Adopting Ordinance is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.1 The "Adopting Ordinance" refers to City Ordinance No. 95 -26, adopted on July 10, 1995 by the City Council, which approved and authorized the City to enter into this Agreement. With respect to the First Amendment, the "First Amendment Adopting Ordinance" refers to City Ordinance No. adopted on 2007 by the City Council, which approved and authorized the City to enter into the First Amendment. 5. Section 2.2 of the Development Agreement entitled Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.2 "Agreement" refers to this Development Agreement No. 7 between the City and Pacific View, approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995. The "First Amendment Agreement" refers to this First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 7, approved by the City Council on , 2007. 6. Section 2.4 of the Development Agreement entitled Approval Date is hereby amended to read as follows: The "Approval Date" for purposes of the Development Agreement means the date on which the City Council voted to adopt the Adopting Ordinance approving Development Agreement No. 7. The "First Amendment Approval Date" refers to the date on which the City Council voted to adopt the Adopting Ordinance approving the First Amendment. 4 Version 08 -02 -07 7. Section 2.11 of the Development Agreement entitled Discretionary Approvals is hereby amended to read as follows: "Discretionary Approvals' shall collectively mean as follows: with respect to the approvals granted in 1995, the Negative Declaration certified on July 10, 1995, General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1(F), Use Permit No. 3518, Development Agreement No. 7, and Site Plan Review No. 69, and with respect to the 2007 approvals, the Use Permit No. 2006 -040, Development Agreement No. 2006 -001, and Negative Declaration No. 2007 -01. 8. Section 2.12 of the Development Agreement entitled Effective Date is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12 The "Effective Date" for purposes of the Development Agreement means the effective date of the Adopting Ordinance approving the Development Agreement. The "First Amendment Effective Date" for purposes of the First Amendment means the effective date of the Adopting Ordinance approving the First Amendment. 9. Section 2.14 of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: An "Exhibit" refers to an Exhibit to the Development Agreement and the First Amendment. All Exhibits are incorporated as a substantive part of the Development Agreement and First Amendment. The Exhibits to the Development Agreement and First Amendment are: Exhibit A: Legal Description of Property Exhibit B: Map of Property Exhibit C: The Technical Site Plan dated July 10, 1995, as amended and dated on July 27, 2007. Exhibit D: Preliminary Landscape Plan dated July 10, 1995, as amended and dated on July 27, 2007. Exhibit E: Building Site G Section Diagrams dated July 10, 1995. Reference points: Lots 19, 21, 23 & 28) Exhibit F: Building Site E & H Section Diagram dated July 10, 1995, as amended and dated on July 27, 2007. (Reference point: Lot 7) Exhibit G: Estoppel Certificate Exhibit H: Restrictive Covenant Exhibit I: Garden of Valor Improvement Plans dated July 10, 1995. 5 Version 08 -02 -07 Exhibit J: Computer Visual Simulations dated July 10, 2007. 10. Section 2.13 of the Development Agreement (defining "Estoppel Certificate') is renumbered to Section 2.14 and the following definition is added in the place of definition Section 2.13: 2.13 "Estate Gardens" means an area where ground burials are permitted and which may include retaining walls, benches, monuments, gardens and landscaping, governed by the restrictions set forth in Section 4(10.)(b.). 11. Sections 2.13 through 2.24, which include the definitions for Estoppel Certificate, Exhibit, Existing General Regulations, Future General Regulations, General Regulations, General Plan, Includes, Mortgagee, Notice, Parties, Planning Commission and Project Specific Approvals, are renumbered to Sections 2.14 through 2.25, respectively. 12. Section 3.1(1.)(c.) of the Development Agreement entitled Buffer Area Landscaping/Irrigation System is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Buffer Area Landscaping/IrriQation System. The Buffer Area shall be landscaped and improved with an irrigation system. Except for slope areas, the Buffer Area shall be provided with a below ground permanent irrigation system. Slope areas shall be improved with an above - ground irrigation system consisting of U.V. resistant PVC piping. The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with a final landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect which has been approved by the Planning Director and which fully complies with the preliminary landscape plan, attached as Exhibit "D," as amended (the "Final Landscape Plan'). The Final Landscape Plan submitted by Pacific View shall depict location of planting, the minimum number of planting required, and the type and size of plantings such that, in comparison with the Preliminary Landscape Plan, there will be the same screening of Community Mausolea, Family Mausolea and Building Sites E. D, F, G and H from the perspective of ground floor views of the existing residences adjacent to the eastern property line of the Property consistent with the 430 foot mean sea level elevation limitation in the "Height Limitation Area" designated on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit "C," as amended). 13. Section 3.1(1.)(d.) of the Development Agreement entitled Installation of Landscaping and Irrigation is hereby amended to read as follows: d. Installation of Landscaping and Irrigation. The installation of all required Buffer Area landscaping and related irrigation shall be initiated as described by Section 4.6 of this Agreement, but prior to issuance of building permits for the construction of the remaining phase of Sunset Court in Building Site G. Except as provided in Section 4.6 of this Agreement, the remainder of landscaping and related irrigation shall be installed during the individual Community Mausolea projects. 6 Version 08 -02 -07 134 All landscaping within the "Height Limitation Area," including Building Sites E, F and G on Exhibit "C" of this Agreement, shall be maintained by Pacific View at or below 430 feet elevation above mean sea level in such a way so as to preserve night light, water and mountain views from existing residences. 14. Section 3.1(1.)(e.)(3) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) Slopes behind the new Family Mausolea in Building Site H shall conform to the Sections depicted in Exhibit "F," as amended. 15. Section 3.1(2.) of the Development Agreement entitled Height Limit is hereby amended to read as follows: 2. Height Limit. All structures shall comply with the 28/32 -foot height limitation measured from the elevations set forth in Exhibit "C" of this Agreement. In addition, no structure or landscaping shall exceed 430 feet elevation mean sea level in the "Height Limitation Area," including Building Sites E, F and G on Exhibit "C" of the Development Agreement. 16. Section 3.1(4.) of the Development Agreement entitled Mausoleum Design is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Mausoleum Design. All roofs, eaves and facias of new garden crypts and community mausolea shall be constructed of material, color, texture, thickness and pitch to blend with, and complement, the architectural style of the original structures within the park (e.g., Lagunita and Pahn Courts). Blank walls of Community Mausolea in Building Sites E and G shall be screened in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan. 17. Section 3.1(9.) of the Development Agreement entitled Archaeological and Paleontological Resources is hereby amended to read as follows: 9. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for development as provided in the First Amendment, the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the project will comply with Council Policies K -4 and K -5 regarding archaeological and paleontological resource investigation, surveillance and recovery. 18. Section 3.2 of the Development Agreement entitled Use Permit No. 3518 Conditions is hereby amended to be entitled "Use Permit No. 3518 and Use Permit No. 2006 -040 Conditions." 19. Section 3.2(1.) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 7 Version 08 -02 -07 /�� I . Exhibit "C" depicts the approximate size, configuration and location of building envelopes for future Community Mausolea to be constructed within the Property. Community Mausoleum shall mean any mausoleum building or crypt wall structure containing interment spaces capable of accommodating casketed remains, and which are available to the public at large. Future Community Mausolea shall be permitted only in Building Sites A, C, E and G and within the Building Envelopes specified on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit "C," as amended). 20. Section 3.2(2.) is hereby amended to add new Subsections (fl and (g) to provide as follows: f. Religious, ornamental and other vertical objects shall not be permitted on the roof or protrude above the roofline of the Family Mausolea located in Building Site H, Area 8. g. Estate Gardens shall be constructed into the slope supported by retaining walls consistent with the visual simulations prepared by the City and as shown on Exhibit "F," as amended. No monuments, fences, gates or other elements except plant material shall exceed the top height of the walls of the Estate Gardens or the total height of the terraced slope. 21. Section 3.2(2.)(a.) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: a. Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall not exceed 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth; provided, however, in Building Site G, Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall not exceed 14 feet in height. In Building Site H, there shall be no more than six (6) Family Mausolea, as follows: a total of two (2) Family Mausolea may be built in Building Envelopes 5 and 6, and are limited in size to a maximum of 15 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 12 feet in depth; and in Building Envelopes 1, 2, 3, and 4, a total of four (4) Family Mausolea may be built, not to exceed a maximum of 17 feet in height, 22 feet in width and 17 feet in depth, as depicted on Exhibit "D," as amended. 22. Section 3.2(2.)(b.) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: b. Family Mausolea and Columbaria shall be permitted in Building Site D. Family Mausolea and Estate Gardens shall be permitted in Building Site H. Pad height elevations and finish floor elevations for new Family Mausolea shall comply with elevations indicated on Exhibits "C," "D" and "F," as amended. 23. Section 3.2(3.) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. The General Plan Amendment and Technical Site Plan provides for a maximum of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support s 1 Version 08 -02 -07 f facilities, 114,480 square feet of Community Mausolea, and 12,000 square feet of Family Mausolea. Square footage for Columbaria, if any, shall be deducted from Community or Family Mausolea allotments at Pacific View's option. The allotments described in this subsection include development on -site as of the date of this Agreement. As described in Section 4. 1, overhangs, eaves, walkways, and similar architectural features and improvements shall not be counted against permitted square footage. 24. Section 3.2(10.) of the Development Agreement entitled Minor Adjustments is hereby amended to read as follows: 10. Minor Adiustments. Given the extended period of years over which the property will be developed, minor adjustments necessary for safety, maintenance, slope engineering, landscaping, the engineering of building pads, and the reorientation of structures within existing building envelopes, shall be allowed with the approval of the Planning Director, so long as such minor adjustments are consistent with the building envelopes and at or below the building height limits shown on Technical Site Plan Exhibit "C," as amended, and do not involve changes or additions to the number, type, height or placement of structures (other than changes in the orientation of structures within building envelopes specified in accordance with Exhibit "C," as amended). 25. Section 3.2 is hereby amended to add a new Subsection (11) to provide as follows: 11. All conditions of Use Permit No. 3518 and No. 2006 -001 are hereby incorporated as conditions of this Development Agreement. 26. Section 4(2.)(e) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: (e) Roof elevations of new Family Mausolea in Building Site H shall not exceed the heights indicated on Exhibits "D" and "F." 27. Section 4(2.)(f) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: (f) Pad elevations of new Family Mausolea in Building Site H shall comply with the pad elevations indicated on Exhibits "D" and "F." 28. Section 4(5.) of the Development Agreement entitled Phasing is hereby amended to read as follows: 5. Phasing. Pacific View may develop the Community Mausolea in Building Sites E and G in one or more phases. For the purposes of this Agreement a "phase" shall mean the construction of one or more Community Mausolea structure(s) within one or more of the Building Envelopes shown on the Technical Site Plan (Exhibit "C," as amended). 13 Version 08 -02 -07 G The first phase shall include the completion of Sunset Court within Building Site G (but may, in Pacific View's discretion, also include one or more additional Community Mausolea in Building Site G). A minimum period of thirty (30) months shall be required to have elapsed between the completion of construction of any phase and the initiation of construction of any subsequent phase. Construction of each phase shall be completed within nine (9) months of the commencement of construction. Subject to the requirement that Pacific View commence the additional screening of Sunset Court required by Section 4.4 and issuance of appropriate permits, construction of the first phase authorized by this Agreement may commence upon the Effective Date of the Development Agreement. The phasing requirements in this Agreement pertain exclusively to the grading and site preparation for, and construction of, new Community Mausolea and do not apply to any Family Mausolea, Columbaria or other improvement, structure, or appurtenance of the Property. The additional screening to Sunset Court required by Section 4.4 shall not be considered a "phase" for purposes of this Agreement. 29. Section 4(6.) of the Development Agreement entitled Buffer Zone Grading and Landscaping is hereby amended to read as follows: Buffer Zone Grading and Landscaping. Pacific View shall commence study and analysis of the grading and landscaping for the Buffer area and Building Sites E & G within sixty days after expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations, assuming no legal challenge has been filed to this Agreement or the Discretionary Approvals, and thereafter apply for all necessary permits. Grading for the Buffer Area and Building Sites E & G shall be completed within six (6) months after commencement of construction of the remainder of the Sunset Court Mausoleum in Building Site G. Pacific View shall also complete the installation of landscaping and irrigation systems in the entire Buffer Area as specified in the Final Landscape Plan within this six (6) month period. Pacific View shall be permitted to subsequently encroach into, remove a portion of or otherwise disturb Buffer Area landscaping and irrigation as specified in Section 3.1.1(B). Within six (6) months of the Effective Date of the Development Agreement, Pacific View shall plant twenty -six (26) fifteen - gallon trees within Area 8 (as shown on Exhibits "C" and "D ") designated on Exhibit "C" hereto, and shall plant five (5) twenty -four -inch box trees along the northeasterly boundary of Building Site D as shown in the Preliminary Landscape Plan. In Building Site H, Pacific View shall plant landscape buffering consisting of a total of two (2) thirty- six -inch box trees on the slope around each Family Mausoleum Building Envelope as shown on Exhibits "D" and "F," as amended. The trees shall be planted within (12) twelve months of the effective date of the First Amendment, or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first ]0 Version 08 -02 -07 / yb structure, whichever is earlier. At the time of construction of any Family Mausoleum in Building Site H, one (1) additional 48" box tree shall be planted at the side or rear elevation of the structure and one (1) additional 36" box size tree shall be planted adjacent to the front elevation of the structure as depicted on Exhibit "D." Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first structure in Building Site H, Pacific View shall submit a Final Landscape Plan that depicts the location, type and size of all plantings so that, in comparison with the revised Preliminary Landscape Plan (Exhibit "D," as amended by the First Amendment), there would be the same amount of screening of Family Mausolea and Estate Gardens in Building Site "H ", Area 8 as in the Preliminary Landscape Plan. The Final Landscape Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit for the first structure. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any individual Family Mausoleum, Pacific View shall plant all trees determined by the City, in its sole discretion, to be necessary to screen the constructed Family Mausoleum in Building Site H from the ground floor views of the residential properties as depicted in the computer visual simulations attached and marked as Exhibit "J" and as shown on Exhibits "D" and "F," attached to the First Amendment. 30. Section 4(10.)(a) of the Development Agreement entitled Building Site E is hereby amended to read as follows: (a) Building Site E Except for the Community Mausoleum and Crypt Wall, Pacific View is permitted only below ground interment and the installation of plaques or memorials at or below grade in Building Site E. Pacific View shall not install pillow blocks, benches, memorials or other above grade objects (exclusive of landscaping as provided in the Final Landscape Plan and trash receptacles only as necessary). Construction of the Community Mausoleum and Crypt Wall in Building Site E shall not commence prior to January 1, 2014, 31. Section 7.2 of the Development Agreement entitled Term of Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: Version 08 -02-07 /Y/ 7.2 Term of Agreement. The term of the Development Agreement shall begin on the effective date of the First Amendment and continue for eighteen (18) years unless otherwise terminated or modified pursuant to this Agreement (including, but not limited to, the extension provisions of Section 11.16 hereof). In addition, the term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended for an additional seven (7) year term if, at the end of the expiration of the initial eighteen (18) year term, Pacific View has not completed all of the development authorized by the Development Agreement and the First Amendment. 32. Section 7.4 of the Development Agreement entitled Amendment of Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 7.4 Amendment of Agreement. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 65868 of the California Government Code, Pacific View waives any right it may have, now or in the future, to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement, and shall not amend, change or modify, or request or otherwise seek to amend, change or modify, the Development Agreement for a period of not less than fifteen (15) years from the effective date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. hi the event there is a conflict between this provision agreeing not to amend, change or modify the Development Agreement with any other provision of the Development Agreement, statute, ordinance, regulation or law governing the Development Agreement, this provision and intent shall govern. 33. Section 11.1 of the Development Agreement entitled Notices is hereby amended to update the contact information for Pacific View, to read as follows: To Pacific View: Pacific View Memorial Park 3500 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attention: Robert Motzkin With a copy to: Clark & Green Associates 150 Paularino Ave., Suite 160 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attention: Michael Green and a copy to: Hewitt & O'Neil LLP 19900 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 1050 Irvine, CA 92612 Attention: Dennis D. O'Neil, Esq. 34. The Development Agreement is hereby amended to provide that all sections of the Development Agreement containing the words "Agreement," "this Agreement" or "modified Agreement" shall also include a reference to this First Amendment. 12 Version 08 -02 -07 /L% 35. The term "Approval Date" as applied to those sections in the Development Agreement means the date on which the City Council voted to adopt the Adopting Ordinance approving the Development Agreement. The term "Firs[ Amendment Approval Date" means the date on which the City Council voted to adopt the Adopting Ordinance approving the First Amendment. 36. The Development Agreement is hereby amended to provide that all sections of the Development Agreement referencing Exhibit "C" (Technical Site Plan), Exhibit "D" (Preliminary Landscape Plan) and Exhibit "F" (Building Site E &H Section Diagram) shall be as amended. 37. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which so executed shall be deemed an original, and such counterparts together shall constitute but one Amendment. 38. No Other Changes. Except as modified by this First Amendment and Exhibits "C," "D," "F" and "J," the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement, including this First Amendment and the amendments to Exhibits "C," "D" and "F" and new Exhibit "J," remain in full force and effect and shall be incorporated as a part of and interpreted as one integrated agreement covering the subjects included therein. 13 Version 08 -02 -07 /�� IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Pacific View have entered into this First Amendment on the date first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Lo Robin Clauson, City Attorney ATTEST: LaVonne Harlkess, City Clerk 14 Version 08 -02 -07 CITY: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Charter City and municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California Steve Rosansky, Mayor PACIFIC VIEW: SCI CALIFORNIA FUNERAL SERVICES, INC. doing business as PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: 9V EXHIBIT 10 DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2007 -001 Distributed separately due to bulk. The entire document is available in Planning Department PACIFIC VIEW MEMORIAL PARK INITIAL STUDY /NEGATIVE DECLARATION April 2007 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH F 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 ^' Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (949) 644 -3200 NEGATIVE DECLARATION INTRODUCTION This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 and its applicable Guidelines, as amended. It is an informational document prepared to inform the decision - makers and the general public of the potential environmental effects associated with the proposed project. The City of Newport Beach will use this Negative Declaration in its decision - making process on the proposed project. The conclusion of this Negative Declaration is that the proposed action would not generate any significant direct or primary physical impacts on the environment. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Pacific View Memorial Park is located at 3500 Pacific View Drive in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. The 45 -acre site is bounded by residential uses to the north and east, San Joaquin Hills Road to the south and Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School to the west. Pacific View Memorial Park proposes to amend Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 for future development within Area 8, including Building Site H. The property is zoned for Governmental, Educational, and Institutional Facilities (GEIF); an approved Use Permit is required for cemeteries, mausolea and other structures housing crypts. The Development Agreement establishes the allowed future development and the conditions within the Park. Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 would be amended to reflect the following proposed modifications: the classification of Area 8 would be corrected to be consistent with its undeveloped condition; future development within Area 8 would consist of estate gardens with ground burial similar to the gardens in Area 1 and up to nine (9) family mausolea in Building Site H in lieu of a 7,200 square foot (60'x 120') community mausoleum; and the footprint of Building Site H, which is within Area 8, would be altered to accommodate these family mausolea. The proposed amendment to the Use Permit and Development Agreement would also set the maximum allowable size of family mausoleum structures at 22' x 17'x 17' high, within Building Site H only. Additional landscaping around each structure to integrate and buffer each from surrounding views is also proposed. Mitigation measures were incorporated into the Initial Study and Negative Declaration adopted for General Plan Amendment 94 -1(f) on June 12, 1995 (City Council Resolution No. 95 -73). Those measures which are applicable to this project have been considered as part of the analysis. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3516 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 1 FINDINGS AND BASIS FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION The Planning Department has reviewed the Initial Study for the project and finds the following: • The project will not significantly degrade the aesthetic quality of the area. • The project will not generate significantly adverse effects on water or air quality, or increase noise levels substantially. • The project will not have any significant adverse impacts on the biological resources of the area. • The project will not have any significant adverse impacts on traffic, land use, or public services and infrastructure. • In addition, the project will not: • Create impacts that have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment. • Create significant impacts that achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. • Create impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable to a significant degree. • Create environmental effects that will cause significant adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, it may be determined that the potential environmental impact of the project will be less than significant. INITIAL STUDY A copy of the Initial Study on which the findings for a Negative Declaration have been based is attached. REVIEW PERIOD The review period is from April 6, 2007 through April 26, 2007. The City of Newport Beach Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, PO Box 1768, Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915, must receive all written comments regarding this Negative Declaration by April 26, 2007 no later than 5:00 PM. The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to consider the project on May 17, 2007 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA. Oral comments may be presented at the public hearing. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and its applicable Guidelines, as amended. CONTACT PERSON: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3208 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 2 1 2. 3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Project Title: Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Contact Person and Phone Number: Rosalinh Ung, Planning Department (949) 644 -3208 4. Project Location: Pacific View Memorial Park is located at 3500 Pacific View Drive in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed amendments are specific to undeveloped Area 8, located in the southeast portion of the 45 -acre memorial park. (See Figure 1, Vicinity Map) 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Fran Motzkin SCI Pacific View Memorial Park 3500 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Agent: Randy McDaniel, ASLA Clark & Green Associates 150 Paularino Avenue, Suite 160 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 6. General Plan Designation: PI (Private Institutions) 7. Zoning: GEIF — Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities 8. Description of Project: Pacific View Memorial Park desires to amend Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 for future development within Area 8, including Building Site H. In the GEIF zone an approved Use Permit is required for cemeteries, mausolea and other structures housing crypts. The Development Agreement establishes the allowed future development and the conditions within the Park. The project consists of the following: • Amendment to Use Permit No. 3518, and • Amendment to Development Agreement No. 95 -26. Initial Study f Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 3 Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 would be amended to reflect the proposed modifications. Specifically, the classification of Area 8 would be corrected to be consistent with its undeveloped condition. Future development within Area 8 would consist of estate gardens with ground burial similar to the gardens in Area 1 and up to nine (9) family mausolea in Building Site H in lieu of a 7,200 square foot (60' x 120') community mausoleum. The footprint of Building Site H, which is within Area 8, would be altered to accommodate these family mausolea. The proposed amendments to the Use Permit and Development Agreement would set the maximum allowable size of family mausoleum strictures at 22' x 17' x 17' high, within Building Site H only. The plan includes landscape around each structure to integrate and buffer each from surrounding views (see Figures 2 through 6, Photo View Point Key Map and Existing Photos and Figure 7, Building Site H Family Mausoleum Detailed Site Plan). Mitigation measures were incorporated into the Initial Study and Negative Declaration adopted for General Plan Amendment 94 -1(f) on June 12, 1995 (City Council Resolution No. 95 -73). Those measures which are applicable to this project are referenced within this document as part of the analysis. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) Current Pacific View Memorial Park is a 45 -acre site with flat marker Development: ground burial areas, estate gardens, community mausolea and family mausolea. Area 8, which is approximately 2 acres and presently undeveloped, is located in the southeast portion of the ark. To the north: Single-family Residential To the east: Single-family Residential To the south: I Single-family Residential across San Joaquin Hills Road To the west: I Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None Initial Study r Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. O Land Use Planning O Population & Housing O Geological Problems O Water O Transportation/ Circulation O Biological Resources O Energy & Mineral Resources O Hazards O Public Services O Utilities & Service Systems O Aesthetics O Cultural Resources O Air Quality O Noise O Recreation O Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Q I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a 'potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. p Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permk No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-28 Page 5 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Submitted by: Rosalinh U Planning D s Signature C3 /o Prepared by: Carolyn Schaffer?,' Project Manager Signature Date Dudek J Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No, 95 -26 Page 7 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect ❑ ❑ [J( ❑ on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing ❑ ❑ H ❑ visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial ❑ Q ❑ H light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project. a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ❑ ❑ ❑ Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for ❑ ❑ ❑ Q agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? C) Involve other changes in the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct ❑ ❑ Q ❑ implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No, 95 -26 Page 7 e) Potentially Less than Less than No ❑ Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact b) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ Incorporated ❑ 0 ❑ contribute to an existing or a) projected air quality violation? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 C) Result in a cumulatively ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ considerable net increase of any modifications, on any species criteria pollutant for which the identified as a candidate, sensitive, or project region is non - attainment special status species in local or under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions or by the California Department of which exceed quantitative Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and thresholds for ozone precursors)? Wildlife Service? d) Expose sensitive receptors to ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? C) Have a substantial adverse effect on ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 8 d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ R1 ❑ ❑ a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ a ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific view Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -28 Page 9 Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 10 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant significant with significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated i) Rupture of a known earthquake ❑ ❑ p ❑ fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground ❑ ❑ p ❑ shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, ❑ ❑ p ❑ including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ p ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or ❑ ❑ p ❑ the loss of topsoil? C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil ❑ ❑ ❑ that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as ❑ ❑ p ❑ defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately ❑ ❑ ❑ supporting the use septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the ❑ ❑ ❑ p public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 10 Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacific view Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 77 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Create a significant hazard to the ❑ ❑ ❑ public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or ❑ ❑ ❑ handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is ❑ ❑ ❑ included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a ❑ ❑ ❑ Q private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or ❑ ❑ ❑ physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ ❑ Q significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacific view Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 77 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 12 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater ❑ ❑ p ❑ supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? G) Substantially alter the existing ❑ ❑ ❑ 8 drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing ❑ ❑ a ❑ drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water ❑ ❑ a ❑ which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade ❑ ❑ a ❑ water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year ❑ ❑ a ❑ flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 12 Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific view Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 13 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ mudflow? k) Result in significant alteration of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 receiving water quality during or following construction? 1) Result in a potential for discharge of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? m) Result in the potential for discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal, a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 conservation plan or natural rnmmi inihi rnnc.mnfinn nlan9 Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific view Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 13 X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? rownnany Less man Less man No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 14 f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Other public facilities? vorenuauy r.ew man Lese man no Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 15 Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 16 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? opportunities? XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed either individually or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ access? r7 Result in inadequate parking ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 capacity? Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 16 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 17 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ p requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction ❑ ❑ ❑ p of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction ❑ ❑ ❑ O of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies ❑ ❑ ❑ Q available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the ❑ ❑ ❑ p wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ p ❑ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local ❑ ❑ p ❑ statutes and regulation related to solid waste? Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 17 XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? C C C C L 0 L C RE Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park - Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 18 Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated h) Include a new or retrofitted storm ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetland), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors)? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? C C C C L 0 L C RE Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park - Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 18 XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 19 I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is located within a developed area within the City of Newport Beach. Public views of the site are generally limited to the vantage point at the park entrance at 3500 Pacific View Drive. Single - family residences to the north, east and southeast have private views of the park. Short Term: Visual impacts associated with construction of the estate gardens and terraces for the family mausolea, as well as installation of the mausoleum structures, are considered short term and temporary in nature. Heavy equipment would be used during grading activities and for assembly of the mausoleum structures. Twenty -four (24), fifteen gallon trees will be planted on the slope around the nine mausolea within in one (1) year of the effective date of the amended development agreement, or before construction of the first mausoleum structure, whichever comes first, to provide adequate screening and reduce visual impacts to the residences. Shrubs and groundcover will be planted with each structure. Family mausoleum structures are typically prefabricated so the onsite work is primarily assembly. In comparison, the estimated construction time for a community mausoleum such as is approved now would be nine (9) months. Mitigation Measure No. 3 — Temporary Screening from the 1995 Negative Declaration would apply: All construction sites shall be screened from view from adjacent residential areas for the duration of construction activities. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit the Planning Department shall verify that appropriate screening requirements have been provided on the construction plans. The short term visual impacts associated with the proposed modifications are less than the short term impacts expected for the development currently allowed with the approved Development Plan and Use Permit. Construction activities would primarily consist of grading, building estate garden walls and retaining walls for the family mausoleum terraces, and landscaping. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista in the short-term. Long Term: The single- family residences adjacent to the memorial park along the north, east and southeast property lines have private views of the park. The proposed family mausolea would be located a minimum of 190 feet from the southeast property line and 380 feet from the easterly property line. The finish floor elevation of the structures would be approximately 80 feet below the nearest residence to the southeast and approximately 70 feet below the easterly residences. The structures would also be approximately 20 feet Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95.26 Page 20 below the 430 foot (mean sea level) height limitation line so as to continue to preserve night light, water and mountain views for existing residences. They also would comply with the 28/32 foot height limitation. The Use Permit currently allows for a 7,200 square foot maximum (60' x 120') community mausoleum with a maximum building height of 24 -feet. The maximum allowable size of the proposed family mausoleum structures would be 22'xITx17' high (see Figure 8, Family Mausolea and Figure 9, Community Mausoleum). The total combined building floor area of the family mausoleum structures would be 3,366 square feet, which would be a portion of the maximum 12,000 square feet of family mausoleum space approved for the park. The proposed amendments would result in no change to the maximum square footage allowed for family mausolea and a reduction of 7,200 square feet of community mausoleum space from the maximum 121,680 square feet of community mausoleum space approved for the park. The spacing of the family mausolea within Building Site H allows for landscaping around each structure to integrate and buffer each from surrounding views. Mitigation Measure No. 4 — Mausoleum Design from the 1995 Negative Declaration would apply: All roofs, eves, and facias of new garden crypts and community mausolea shall be constructed of material, color texture, thickness, and pitch to blend with the architectural style of the original structures of the park. Any blank walls shall be bermed or covered with plant material so as to soften the appearance from adjoining residential areas. Marble fronts and sides and mausolea shall be screened by the generous use of the roof and tree canopies. The proposed project would result in reduced building mass, lower maximum roof height, and landscaping surrounding the structures and unifying the family mausoleum area. The long term visual impacts associated with the proposed future development are less than the long term impacts expected for the development currently allowed (community mausoleum). The proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse long -term effect on a scenic vista. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The proposed project site is not located near a state scenic highway as identified by the California Scenic Highway Program (www.dot.ca.gov, accessed on February 22, 2007). Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 21 C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less than Significant Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is bounded by the Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School to the west and by single - family residential to the north, east, southeast and across San Joaquin Hills Road to the south. The proposed project would modify the development allowed within Area 8, a two -acre undeveloped area in the southeast portion of the park. Visual impacts associated with construction of the estate gardens and family mausoleum terraces are -considered short-term and temporary in nature. Heavy equipment would be staged occasionally onsite, particularly during grading activities; as noted above, Mitigation Measure No. 3 would apply. Since these impacts are short-term in nature and would not be present following completion of construction, they are considered to have a less than significant impact on the visual character of the site and surrounding area. On a long term basis, the proposed project allows future development which would introduce a change in the visual appearance of the site. Area 8 is currently undeveloped, while the surrounding areas within the park are developed and landscaped. The development proposed for Area 8, including estate gardens and family mausolea, is similar to the uses in adjacent Area 1 and Building Site D. The proposed project would reduce the density and overall building mass from the approved community mausoleum structure. The proposed project would be consistent with other uses in that area of the park and would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Impacts would be less than significant. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. The development which would be allowed under the proposed project does not include lighting; therefore, no impacts would occur. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - Would the project: a. Convert (Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. No agricultural resources are located within the Pacific View Memorial Park. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in development which would convert farmland to non - agricultural use. No impact would occur. Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park— Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 9526 Page 22 b. Conflict with existing Zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Pacific View Memorial Park is neither zoned for agricultural use nor part of a Williamson Act contract; therefore, no conflicts would occur. C. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use? No Impact. See Responses 11. (a) and (b) above. The project would not involve the conversion of agricultural resources to non - agricultural resources; therefore, impacts would not occur. Ill. AIR QUALITY - Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would allow development of estate gardens and family mausolea. This type of development is not expected to conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan. Short term construction - related air quality impacts will be less than significant by utilizing standard best management practices such as watering excavated soil, as described in AQMD's Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust. b. Holate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would allow development which is anticipated to cause minor short-term construction related emissions due to grading activities. Although grading activities may be similar for the approved community mausoleum and proposed development, the impacts associated with construction of the structures vary significantly. The family mausoleum structures are mostly prefabricated and only assembled on site, whereas construction of a community mausoleum is estimated to take nine months. Impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant by utilizing standard best management practices as outlined in AQMD's Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust. C. Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 23 Less than Significant Impact. See Response III (a) and III (b) above. d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. There are residential uses adjacent to Pacific View Memorial Park and Harbor Day School is adjacent to the west. Both residential land uses and schools are considered sensitive receptors. The proposed project would allow development which only requires short-term grading activities and structure installation. The potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. Grading activities for the development allowed by the proposed project could generate odor associated with vehicle emissions from the operation of construction equipment; this may be considered objectionable by some people. However, such exposure would be short term or transient. Operations following development would be similar to the existing memorial park and would not create objectionable odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people and impacts would be considered less than significant. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Came or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. Due to the highly developed and disturbed nature of the site and lack of native habitat, it is not anticipated that sensitive plant or animal species would occur within Pacific View Memorial Park. With the exception of minor undeveloped areas, the park is covered by landscaping. The undeveloped areas have some existing trees; the areas are mowed to control non -native annual grasses. No significant native vegetation or wildlife habitat is present. Therefore, development allowed under the proposed project would not impact any species identified in local or regional plans and/or policies. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -25 Page 24 b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The Pacific View Memorial Park site is fully disturbed and located within an area bounded by residential and institutional uses. No riparian habitats, federally protected wetlands or other sensitive habitats are known to be located within or adjacent to the park site. Therefore, impacts would not occur. C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact. Area 8 within Pacific View Memorial Park has been slightly graded and does not include any wetlands or jurisdictional waters. In addition, construction for the allowed development would not involve dredging or filling of wetlands. Therefore, there would be no impact. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. Land uses bounding the project site consist of developed lands with both residential and institutional uses. The Big Canyon Reservoir is lined and not providing habitat. Pacific View Memorial Park is not known to be located within a habitat corridor. Therefore, impacts would not occur. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinance protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less than Significant Impact. Future development which would be allowed under the proposed project would be located within Area 8. This area is currently undeveloped and consists of a small amount of existing vegetation such as non - native annual grasses and groupings of trees including fan palms, California peppers and pine trees. There are approximately 40 trees along the lower two- thirds of Area 8. The primary grouping of existing trees is located directly above Building Site `H' and will be preserved. The proposed development plan provides for the addition of twenty four (24), fifteen gallon trees on the slope around the nine structures. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Park View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95.26 Page 25 f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. There are three subregional plans for the Orange County area: Orange County Central - Coastal NCCP Subregional Plan (approved in July 1996), Orange County Northern Subregion Habitat Conservation Plan (in planning phase) and Orange County Southern Subregion Habitat Conservation Plan (approved in late 2006). Pacific View Memorial Park is not located within any of the three subregional plans for Orange County. Therefore, no impacts would occur. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. According to the California State Registry of Historic Landmarks (htg2:Hceres.ca.gov /geo area/coun ties /Orange /landmarks.html, accessed on February 16, 2007) there are no registered historic landmarks located within the Pacific View Memorial Park. The proposed project is not anticipated to result in impacts to any historical resources. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less than Significant Impact. An archaeological or paleontological survey has not been conducted on the site. The site has been graded and disturbed over the 50 years of operation as a cemetery and it is unlikely that potential historical, cultural or religious impacts will occur as a result of this project. If any inadvertent discoveries of historic or prehistoric cultural resources are found onsite, a licensed Archeologist and Paleontologist can be made available for monitoring during grading. Mitigation Measure No. 7 — Archeological and Paleontological Resources from the 1995 Negative Declaration would apply: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the project will comply with Council Policies K -4 and K -5 regarding archeological and paleontological resource investigation, surveillance, and recovery. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95.26 Page 26 C. Directly or indirectly damage or destroy a paleontological resource without first being subject to proper scientific analysis. See Response V. (b) above. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the type of future development which would be allowed in Area 8. Area 8 is located in an area which has not been used for internment and disturbance of human remains is highly unlikely. Therefore, no impacts would occur. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Less than Significant Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is located within seismically active southern California, an area where several faults and fault zones are considered active by the California Division of Mines and Geology. Alquist- Priolo earthquake fault zones have been established for the majority of these faults and fault zones. The purpose of the Alquist -Priolo earthquake fault zones is to prohibit the location of structures on the traces of active faults, thereby mitigating potential damage due to fault surface rupture. The City of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport- Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach and nearby communities (City of Newport Beach, General Plan, Safety Element, July 25, 2006). However, the project site does not lie within a currently delineated State of California, Alquist - Priolo earthquake fault zone and an active fault rupture is unlikely to occur at the project site (Department of Mines and Geology httv: / /www. conservation. ca.gov /cizs /rjzhm/ai)/index.htm. accessed February 19, 2007). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No, 95-26 Page 27 ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Significant Impact. As stated in Response VI (a) (i) above, a certain level of exposure to seismic ground shaking has the potential of occurring within seismically active southern California. On a regional scale, the City of Newport lies within a zone of moderate to large earthquake activity. The City's General Plan incorporates policies which should be implemented for the project to ensure development meets seismic design standards. As indicated in the City's General Plan Safety Element (chapter 11), the City would require all future development to be made safer by strict enforcement of current building standards and new development to be located so as to avoid the most hazardous areas. As a result, potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. The potential for liquefaction in a given area is dependent upon soil characteristics, groundwater conditions, and the intensity of seismic shaking. Areas susceptible to liquefaction include areas with loose to medium dense sandy soils that have become saturated. In the Newport Beach area, the potential for liquefaction is greatest in the areas along the coastline that includes Balboa Peninsula, in and around the Newport Bay and Upper Newport Bay, in the lower reaches of major streams in Newport Beach, and in the floodplain of the Santa Ana River (City of Newport Beach, General Plan, Safety Element, and July 25, 2006). Pacific View Memorial Park is not located within any of these areas. Therefore, the likelihood of liquefaction to occur as a result of a seismic event is considered unlikely and impacts would be less than significant. iv. Landslides? Less than Significant Impact. Landslide hazard areas are generally considered to exist when substantial slopes are located on or immediately adjacent to a subject property. The existing topography consists of a gradual slope averaging 5:1. The proposed development to be allowed within Area 8 will provide terraced pads at various elevations for the family mausolea. The terraced area will be retained along the front with low walls and with a 2:1 engineered slope along the back (Environmental Information Form). This area and areas immediately offsite have not been identified as an existing or past landslide area, therefore, impacts as a result of this geologic hazard would be less than significant. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 28 b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. The existing topography consists of a gradual slope averaging 5:1. The proposed development to be allowed within Area 8 will provide terraces at various elevations for the family mausolea. The terraced area will be retained along the front with low walls with a 2:1 engineered slope along the back. The terraces are estimated to result in approximately 1,400 cubic yards of cut and 800 cubic yards of fill. Per the Environmental Information Form submitted by the applicant, the excess soil will be balanced onsite at various undeveloped locations within the cemetery. Short-term erosion effects during construction would be prevented through implementation of drainage and planting solutions, which is required by the City of Newport Beach during plan review and approval of project improvement plans (City of Newport Beach Municipal Code 15.10.130 Erosion Control). The municipal code includes standard construction methods such as temporary erosion control to minimize soil erosion during construction. Future development would include estate gardens and family mausoleum structures with surrounding landscaping; therefore, soil erosion is not anticipated to be an issue during construction or after development. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? No Impact. There are no known unstable geologic units located on the project site or within the surrounding area (see Responses VI (a) and (b), above). Subsidence has not been documented on the site in the past. The onsite surface soils do not present geologic hazards to construction. Furthermore, there is no known incidence of landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse at or near the project site; therefore no impact would occur. d. Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - I -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are characterized by a shrink -swell characteristic. Structural damage may result over a long period of time, usually resulting from inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of structures directly on expansive soils. Expansive soils are largely comprised of clays, which expand in volume when water is absorbed and shrink when dried. Some of the geologic units in the Newport Beach area, including both surficial soils and bedrock, have fine- grained components that are moderate to highly expansive. All development allowed under the Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 29 proposed amendments to the Development Agreement and Use Permit will comply with the Uniform Building Code for all structural engineering. Therefore, impacts due to expansive soils will be less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No impact. The estate gardens and family mausolea allowed under the proposed project would not require wastewater. facilities. Pacific View Memorial Park is connected to the municipal sewer system, and the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems is not necessary. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. The development allowed under the proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, there will be no impact. b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact. Future development of estate gardens and family mausolea within Area 8 will not create any significant hazards to the public through the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No impact is expected. C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is adjacent to the Harbor Day School. During construction activities, the owner would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials. Once operational no hazardous materials are anticipated beyond those used for maintenance. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3516 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 30 d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than Significant Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is not known to be a listed hazardous materials site. Some hazardous materials are kept on site, such as formaldehyde, cleaning materials, and fuel for the equipment. However, the quantities are limited and Pacific View Memorial Park is required to adhere to local and State regulations regarding storage and use of these materials. Therefore, the impacts of the proposed project are less than significant. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. John Wayne Airport, the closest air facility, is located 5.26 miles north of Pacific View Memorial Park. The proposed project will not result in development which would interfere with airport operations or pose an airport safety hazard. Therefore, no impacts would occur. L For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would theproject result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and the proposed project would not result in development which would impact this type of facility or its associated employees. g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The proposed project would allow development of estate gardens and family mausolea in Area 8. Construction and operations of this type of development would not impact evacuation or emergency response plans /times in the surrounding area. Therefore, no impacts would occur. h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is located within a developed area, surrounded by residential and institutional uses. The site is not located in or adjacent to a designated Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 9526 Page 31 "wildland fire danger zone" (City of Newport Beach General Plan, Figure S4 Wildfire Hazards, July 25, 2006). There are no wildland areas within the vicinity which would create a potential fire hazard at the subject property. Therefore, no impact would occur. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact. During grading activities for future development, there would be a potential for short -term erosion and discharge of pollutants, especially during times of inclement weather. Construction activity would be required to comply with all City of Newport Beach and State regulations related to water quality, including (1) the permit for Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity and (2) Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter, treat, or infiltrate stormwater runoff in accordance with specific design standards. Per the Environmental Information Form submitted by the applicant, a Stormwater Management Plan will be implemented that meets or exceeds the BMPs from development of the proposed project. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (Le., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less than Significant Impact. The development allowed under the proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surface as compared to existing conditions, but it would substantially reduce the roof surface area as compared to the approved community mausoleum. This would allow for more stormwater infiltration. The proposed project would not result in development which would substantially alter any groundwater recharge that is currently occurring onsite. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite? No Impact. The majority of Pacific View Memorial Park is already developed. The development allowed under the proposed project would incorporate drainage facilities in accordance with the City's development standards to avoid substantial erosion or siltation. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 32 d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed site design for Area 8 maximizes the distance water travels from paved surfaces over landscape areas to drains in order to aid in infiltration. The irrigation system will use efficient irrigation components such as low flow irrigation heads, drip irrigation, moisture sensors, and weather based irrigation control systems to provide optimum moisture application. Therefore, changes in the existing drainage pattern of the site will be minimal and impacts would be less than significant. e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses VIII (c) and (d) above. Future development of estate gardens and family mausolea would not contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, therefore impacts to existing stormwater conveyance systems would be less than significant. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality (marine, surface, groundwater or wetland waters)? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses VIII (a) through (e) above g. Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not include housing. Pacific View Memorial Park gently slopes downward to the Big Canyon Reservoir. Based on Figure S3 Flood Hazards of the City's General Plan, the Big Canyon Reservoir is depicted as a "Special Flood Hazard Areas Inundated by 100 -year Flood" zone. Since the cemetery does not lie within a currently delineated earthquake fault zone, the likelihood of a seismically induced inundation to occur which may cause a flood to the project site is unlikely to occur. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 33 h. Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect ,Jlood,Jlows? Less than Significant. Refer to Response VIII (g) above. i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving ,flooding, including,Jlooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of an existing levee or dam, and no portion of the project would involve the construction of a levee or dam. Therefore, no impact would occur. j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less than Significant Impact. Big Canyon Reservoir is adjacent to the westerly edge of Pacific View Memorial Park. The reservoir may potentially threaten low -lying areas of the park by flooding due to seismically induced inundation, which refers to flooding that results when water retention structures fail due to an earthquake (City of Newport Beach General Plan Update, Safety Element, July 25, 2006). However, since the park does not lie within a currently delineated earthquake fault zone, the likelihood of a seismically induced inundation to occur which may cause a flood to the park is unlikely to occur. Furthermore, the reservoir is lined and surrounded by a berm and no surface runoff or subsurface flows can enter the reservoir (Park View Memorial Park Initial Study, March 20, 1995). Therefore, the likelihood of impacts from a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would not be likely and impacts would be less than significant. k. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction? No Impact. Due to the use of BMPs during construction and operations as noted above, future development allowed under the proposed project is not anticipated to result in alterations to receiving water quality. Therefore, no impacts would occur. 1. Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Less than Significant Impact. During the associated grading and/or construction activities, there would be a potential for short-term erosion and minimal discharge of Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Penn No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 34 pollutants, especially during times of inclement weather. The proposed project provides for modifications to the development allowed within Area 8 and does not include areas to be used for operational material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, maintenance or handling or storage. During construction, the project would be required to comply with all City of Newport Beach and State regulations related to water quality, including (1) the permit for Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity and (2) Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter, treat, or infiltrate stormwater runoff in accordance with specific design standards. A Stormwater Management Plan will be implemented that meets or exceeds the BMPs from development of the proposed project (Environmental Information Form). Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. M. Result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? No Impact. Due to mandatory stormwater regulatory compliance and the use of BMPs during construction and operations as noted above, future development allowed under the proposed project is not anticipated to result in stormwater discharge which would affect the beneficial uses of receiving waters. Therefore, no impacts would occur. n. Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed site development plan for Area 8 is primarily pervious surface except for hardscape and the family mausoleum structures. The site plan maximizes the distance stormwater travels from paved surfaces over landscape areas to drains in order to aid in infiltration. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. o. Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? Less than Significant Impact. During the associated grading activities, there would be a potential for short -term erosion and discharge of pollutants, especially during times of inclement weather. The project would be required to comply with all City of Newport Beach and State regulations related to water quality, including (1) the permit for Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity and (2) Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter, treat, or infiltrate stormwater runoff in accordance with specific design standards. Per the Environmental Information Form submitted by the applicant, a Stormwater Management Plan will be implemented that Initial study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 35 meets or exceeds the BMPs from development of the proposed project. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the development allowed within Area 8 and is consistent with existing uses within the memorial park. It would not result in the need for additional roadways. The existing park entrance will continue to be the point of ingress /egress and the existing roadway alignment and /or land use patterns will not need to be modified. Therefore, project implementation would not physically divide an established community. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The Pacific View Memorial Park site is designated as Private Institution within the City of Newport Beach General Plan (Chapter 3 Land Use Element) and zoned Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities (GEIF) within the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code (City of Newport Beach Zoning Code, 2006). The project is consistent with these designations. Cemetery uses are allowed under each designation. The proposed project is therefore consistent with both the zoning criteria and General Plan Land Use. There would be no conflict with applicable land use plans, policies or regulations. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. Refer to Response 1V (f). X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. There is no active mining within the Newport Beach area. Mineral resource zones (MRZ) within the City are either classified as containing no significant mineral deposits (MRZ -1), or the significance of mineral deposits has not been determined (MRZ- Initial Study ! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-26 Page 36 3) (City of Newport Beach General Plan, Natural Resources Element, July 25, 2006). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of a known mineral resource. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. See Response X (a) above. XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact. Increased noise which would be generated by the proposed project would be due to construction activities. Construction activity is regulated per Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 10.28.040. Construction will be required to conform to the City's noise standards and to the permitted construction hours of 7:00 AM to 6:30 PM on weekdays and 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays, excluding holidays. The estate gardens and terraces for the family mausolea would be constructed initially, with the family mausolea installed individually over time, based on family needs. It is anticipated that the development allowed under the proposed project will not have a significant construction noise impact since it will incorporate all available noise attenuating technology (i.e., mufflers, shields, etc.) in order to reduce construction noise level to the maximum extent feasible. The nearest residences would be subject to increases in noise as a result of construction. Because construction noise is considered temporary and would adhere to local noise regulations, the temporary increase in ambient noise levels would be less than significant. b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. Heavy equipment used during grading and construction activities may generate some ground vibration. However, the associated grading activity would be short -term in nature and not involve jack hammering or blasting. While it is possible that temporary vibration would be heard/felt by nearby neighbors during construction, any impact would be short term and minimal, therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 37 C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses XI (a) and (b) above. d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses XI (a) and (b). The proposed project would allow estate gardens and family mausolea within Area 8, similar in nature to other areas in the park. As stated above, noise generated by construction equipment would occur with varying intensities and durations during construction. The closest residences to the project site are located to the southeast and would be exposed to some increased noise levels during construction. It is anticipated that the development allowed under the proposed project will not have a significant construction noise impact since it will incorporate all available noise attenuating technology (i.e., mufflers, shields, etc.) in order to reduce construction noise level to the maximum extent feasible. It is anticipated that any ceremonies held at the family mausolea would be conducted in accordance with the current procedures of Pacific View Memorial Park. Ambient noise levels may increase slightly due to instrumental music or the number of people gathered. However, the ceremonies would be conducted on the west side of the family mausoleum and the noise would be buffered by the structures and landscaping. Any impact, whether from construction or ceremonies, would be short term in nature. Impacts due to an increase in temporary or periodic ambient noise levels would be less than significant. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is located approximately 5.26 miles from the John Wayne Airport and is not located within an airport land use plan area. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. Refer to Response XI (e). Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 38 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed project would modify the development allowed within Area 8. The estate gardens and family mausolea would not induce substantial population growth in the area. Therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. Development allowed under the proposed project would be limited to area within the boundaries of Pacific View Memorial Park. No existing housing would be displaced and no impact would occur. C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. See Response Xil (b) above. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project: a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: i. Fire protection? No Impact. Future development allowed under the proposed project would not create a long term fire hazard; therefore the need for increased fire protection would not occur. ii. Police/Sheriprotection? No Impact The nature of the project would not warrant police intervention; therefore an increase in local police protection would not occur. Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-28 Page 39 iii. Schools? No Impact. The project does not propose the development of homes and would not induce substantial growth in the area. Therefore, a demand on nearby schools would not occur. iv. Parks? No Impact. The proposed project would not have any effect upon area parks. V. Other public facilities? No Impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would not generate population growth, and therefore would not place new demand on public facilities. Therefore, no impacts would occur. XIV. RECREATION - Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The project does not involve a housing component that would result in the need for additional park services or increased use of existing parks. Therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Propose recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The project does not propose recreational facilities or require new recreational facilities. Therefore, no impacts related to this issue would occur. XV. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC -Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) ? Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park —Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95.26 Page 40 Less than Significant Impact. In order to describe the proposed project's potential impact related to increase in traffic, discussions related to construction (short term) and operation (long term) are provided. Short Term — Construction trucks would access the site during approved construction hours from 7:00 AM. to 6:30 PM on weekdays, excluding holidays and 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate additional traffic on the regional and local roadways serving the area. Construction worker commuter trips, project equipment deliveries, and hauling materials such as concrete and gravel would increase the existing traffic volumes in the project area. The proposed project has approximately 1,400 cubic yards of cut and 800 cubic yards of fill. The excess soil will be balanced on site at various undeveloped locations within the cemetery. The anticipated construction - related traffic could potentially impact traffic volumes and may change traffic patterns such as to affect the level of service on nearby roadways. However, these impacts would only occur during grading and construction of the terraces. The family mausolea would be installed individually over time based on family needs. The proposed project would result in lesser traffic- related impacts than construction of the allowed community mausoleum which has an estimated construction period of nine months. A substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections is not anticipated as a result of the proposed project and impacts would be considered less than significant. Long Term — The proposed project would generate additional traffic on local roadways during funeral ceremonies, which would not be expected to increase substantially in frequency or size over current conditions. The proposed project is anticipated to provide 140 casket spaces rather than the 1,200 casket spaces within the approved community mausoleum. This would significantly reduce the number of ceremonies and neighboring street congestion over the development which is currently approved. Furthermore, cemetery and mausoleum uses do not generate consistent or predictable traffic volumes (City of Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element pg. 90, July 2006). Therefore, long term traffic impacts as a result of the project would be less than significant. b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact. See Response XV (a) above. C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results In substantial safety risks? Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacffic View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -28 Page 41 No Impact. Development allowed under the amendments to the Development Agreement and Use Permit would not impede existing air traffic navigational patterns or cause a change in the location of existing airport facilities at the John Wayne Airport. d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the development allowed within Area 8. This would not increase hazards or incompatible uses and no impact would occur. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. The primary vehicular access for Pacific View Memorial Park is provided from Pacific View Drive. The primary entrance has been designed to provide adequate access for emergency services vehicles as well (fire, police and paramedic). Development allowed under the proposed project would not result in any modifications to this roadway; therefore impacts to emergency access would not be altered. Due to the short-term nature of construction, any street usage and equipment parking that may occur would be temporary and impacts would be less than significant. f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The proposed project will include sufficient onsite parking spaces provided per City Off -Street Parking and Loading Spaces Requirements (Ordinance 20.66.030) and the approved Use Permit. Therefore, the proposed site plan accommodates adequate parking and no impacts would occur. g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is not currently served by or located in an area conducive to public transportation. No conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation are anticipated. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 42 XVI UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. Development allowed under the amendments to the Development Agreement and Use Permit would not result in additional needs for wastewater treatment. Therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the development within Area 8 to include estate gardens and family mausolea. These uses would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. No impacts would occur. C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the development within Area 8 to include estate gardens and family mausolea. The existing drainage system for the park will accommodate drainage from Area 8 as it is developed. No impacts would occur. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. Pacific View Memorial Park is adequately served by existing utilities and no significant alteration or expansion of existing utility systems is anticipated. Therefore, no impacts would occur. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. The proposed project modifies the development within Area 8 to include estate gardens and family mausolea. These uses will not generate additional wastewater and there would be no impact on wastewater treatment capacity. Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 43 f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less than Significant Impact. Solid waste disposal is provided by Waste Management Inc. of Orange County, which operates under a franchise agreement with the City. A limited amount of solid waste would be generated during construction. It is anticipated that the solid waste generated by construction would not be substantial or interfere with the permitted capacity of nearby landfills and therefore would have a less than significant impact on local solid waste facilities. g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less than Significant Impact. Solid waste generated during construction would be disposed of in a manner consistent with federal, state and local statutes and regulations. Anticipated uses of the proposed estate gardens and family mausolea are typical of the existing park and would not violate any federal, state, or local statutes or regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. h. Include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, construction treatment wetland), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and odors)? No Impact. The site is adequately served by existing storm water utilities and no significant alteration or expansion of is anticipated, including water quality treatment basins or treatment wetlands that might have indirect environmental effects. Therefore, no impacts would occur. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number ortrestrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No Impact. The amendments to the Development Agreement and Use Permit pose no direct impacts to biological resources and do not threaten any endangered species or habitat. Biological issues, as well as other environmental issues, are further discussed Initial Study! Negative Dedaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95-28 Page 44 elsewhere in this Initial Study. Important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory would not be eliminated as a result of this project. b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probablefuture projects) ? No Impact. No long -term significant impacts are associated with the project. The proposed project modifies the development which is allowed within Area 8 of the park to include estate gardens and up to nine (9) family mausolea in lieu of a community mausoleum. This modification would result in a reduction of 7,200 square feet of community mausoleum space, reduced casket space from 1,200 to 140, lower maximum roof height and reduced roof surface. The impacts associated with the proposed project are lower than the currently allowed community mausoleum. There would be no cumulatively considerable impacts. C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact. Based on the findings contained herein, the project's potential impacts would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. Initial Study / Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95.26 Page 45 SOURCE LIST The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660. 1) Newport Beach, City of General Plan Update. July 25, 2006 2) Newport Beach, City of General Plan Errata. December 8, 2006 3) Newport Beach, City of Planning Department. Environmental Information Form. 4) Newport Beach, City of Municipal Code 15.10.130 Erosion Control 5) Newport Beach, City of Construction Activity — Noise Regulations 10.28.040 6) Newport Beach, City of Zoning Code. 2006. 7) Pacific View Memorial Park Initial Study. March 20, 1995. Additional Sources California Department of Conservation. Important Farmland Map. 2002. California Scenic Highway Program. www.dot.ca.gov, Accessed February 22, 2007. California State Registry of Historic Landmarks. httv: / /ceres.ca.lzov /geo area /counties/Oranae /landmarks.html Accessed February 16, 2007. Department of Mines and Geology httv: / /www.conservation.ca.sov /cgs /rghm/ap /index.hun, Accessed February 19, 2007 Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 46 Figure 1 — Vicinity Map V-1 C O IW O v O .I d IL d W .!C a 0 0 E m m CL Initial Study 1 Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 9526 Page 47 Figure 2, Photo View Point — Key Map O Initial Study/ Nogathe Declaration Pao"dk View Memorial Part: — Amandnmis to Uae Perm9 No. 3519 and Davetoprmnt Agreement No. 9529 Page e9 c 0 0 a CL m N Y L IL L E '3 o a a •- a� v� c w y V u; a c 0 bid w 0 d a. m N . a m � o 0 a s 3 o > a v c w. y 'v wa Figure 5, Existing Photo — View Point C Initial Study J Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 51 Figure 6, Existing Photo — View Point D Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 52 '.� d . ;.:,i P � � ��n� r 1 >� .�\ „ ;�_: ,�.'. ��, '1'1� ... �, �, r�1'' ,y 4�I. yI ..'it�Sii' fix} ��. r �Ti .�' r i. •:�' �. '\ .b I Figure 8, Family Mausolea 1` 1! r. Initial Study I Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park — Amendments to Use Permit No. 3518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 54 Figure 9, Community Mausoleum Initial Study! Negative Declaration Pacific View Memorial Park— Amendments to Use Permit No. 9518 and Development Agreement No. 95 -26 Page 55 EXHIBIT 11 1995 ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Distributed separately due to bulk. The entire document is available in Planning Department IV? F6 S OF NEWPORT BEACH F I L E 3300 Newport Boulevard 4900 Newport Beach, cA UIE 1 6A L E OF DETERMINATIC Y1'aRa J�1' erk•Recorder To: Office of Planning an Rd esearch From City of Newport Ben F-1 Sacramento, CA 95814 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 County Clerk, County of Orange (Orange County) El Public Services Division P.O. Box 838 Date received for filing at OPR: Santa Ana, CA 92702 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21104 2S5rZ Public Resources Code. JU �Rj'l 5 Name of Project: Pacific View Memorial Park (Development Ag State Clearinghouse Number. City Contact Person: Te ph'� °fir N/A John Douglas 714/ 644 -3230 Project Location: Easterly terminus of Pacific View Drive (N /San Joaquin Hills Road, E /Marguerite Ave.) Project Description: Adoption of a Development Agreement for the Pacific View Memorial Park Master Plan This is to advise that the City of Newport Beach has approved the above described project onJuly 10, 1995 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Date) 1. The City is 12 Lead Agency ❑ Responsible Agency for the project. 2. The project ❑ will ® will not have a significant effect on the environment. 3. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. ® A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 4. Mitigation measures El were ❑ were not made a condition of the approval of the project. 5. A Statement of Overriding Considerations ❑ was t9was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings ® were ❑ were not made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. The final EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval is available for review at the Planning Depart- ment of the City of Newpo each, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915; 71416443225. l( qS John . uglas, P, Environmental Coordinator I bate Revised 11/94 t_ f Jr- r t_,# �'UL 1 1995 ALOORNIA DEP T L E CERTIFICATE OF F " E M NI�JU��)12 1995 I 4 - --..^ utE. Clerk geCprder De Minimis Impact Finding DEPUTY A. Name and Address of Project Proponent: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 B. Project Description: Newport Beach, Ca. 92659 -1768 Adoption of a Development Agreement for the Pacific View Memorial Park C. Project Location: Easterly terminus of Pacific View Drive (N /San Joaquin IIills Road, E/Marguerite Ave.) D. Findings: The City of Newport Beach has conducted an Initial Study to evaluate the project's potential for adverse environmental impact, and considering the record as a whole there is no evidence before this agency that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. On the basis of the evidence in the record, this agency finds that the presumption of adverse effect contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) has been rebutted. Therefore, the proposed project qualifies for a De Mmimis Impact Fee Exemption pursuant to Section 753.5(c) of Title 14, CCR. E. Certification: I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and that based upon the initial study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. `? FI IS Dab F: \WP51 VI ANNINGUOFW- D\FORMS\DFGEXSM. Jo Don AICP En i:= rdinator City of Newport Beach �,b`t RE%EIVED By PLANNING DEPARTMENT ,^,ITY OF NEWPORT BEACH? o F= Air! AUG 2.21995 PM 718AIDA12111213141516 GE i OFflce OF I E COUNTY CLERK Memorandum TO_ CIT�I o�F N)�wp)g.+ LIL DATE: J GARY L GRARVtLLr CWNTY aEac.R TELEPHONE (7141931.2m WO K !RUNWAY P.U. BOX 270 SANTA ANA" CA 02702 SUBJECT: Eavi.ronmencal Impact Reports - AmendTenC of 'Public Resources Code, Section 21092.3• 'fie attaesed Notice r=eceived, filed, and a c^Dy umas posted on Ti T_C rr�ine^ nested for 30 (thirty) cale_^ca= days. fn '__e e Stace f Cal; F0 onn of O ce. Py DuCy ayC::c Rescu=e Coda =, Oa.. "he aoc_ces required Dursuanc to Sec =ons 21080.4 and 2 =092 for ar-- ev= rcrmencal imoac- reDor- shall be Dcsce_ in z:he of__ce of the. Councf Clerc of each county * * *in wh; ch the _Drojecc Wi_1 be located and sha11 .re.main posted ter a Der_od of 30 days. The notice r_Qu'_red Dursuanc to Se= ion 2!092 for a necac ye declaTZt'on shall be so DOsted for a Der" od of 20 days unless ocher-wise `-eTl` red by law ro be Dosced for 30 days. The Councv CT_err shall Dost nec_ces w'_t_`!in 24 hours of r -ce;DC ?' =bL =c Rescu=se C-- d.e :52 (c) -4?1 notices -Filed oursuanc =c this section sha-i be available for Vublic _nsoecczon, and shy_ he DcsCE,,4 - ** wirh4n =4 hours Pf - e-ce =DC h the office of the Councv Clerk. Each notice shall re -main oasced for a period of 20 days " *. Thereafter, the clerk c!]a =L return the ncCice to c !e LocH'_ g °?d age!lcv "" w? Ch a ,ap5 aoC =Cioa of the oeriod 1t was The local 'e=c aC_encY s.la =- reca_m the acC_ce for act 1ess ---a11 rz - =e months. .M OF NEWPORT BEts.,JH 3300 Newport Boulevard • P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658.8915 (714) 644-3225 NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 ❑ Sacramento, CA 95814 County Clerk, County of Orange Public Services Division P.O. Box 838 Santa Ana, CA 92702 From: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (Orange County) Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk: Public review period March 21 - ADr:U 10 9 Name of Project: Pacific View Memorial Park; GPA 94 -1(F), UP 3518, SPR 69A, DA 7 Project Location 3500 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach (Easterly terminus of Pacific View Drive) General Plan Amendment, Use Permit, Site Plan Review and Project Description: Development Agreement for the expansion of an existing memorial park. Finding: Pursuant to the provisions ofCiityCouncil Policy K- 3perta '"�to procedures and guidelir ;toimplement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting this Finding is © attached 0 on file at the Planning Department. The Initial Study may include mitigation measures that would eliminate or reduce potential environmental impacts. This document will be considered by the decision- maker(s) prior to final action on the proposed project. If a public hearing will be held to consider this project, a notice of the time and location is attached. Additional plans, studies and/or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you would like to examine these materials, you are invited to contact the undersigned. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, your comments should be submitted inwriting prior to the close of the public review period Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. There is no fee for this appeal. If a public hearing will be held, you are also invited to attend and testify as to the appropriateness of this document. If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact the undersigned A-46L.C.-L Date March 20, John o AICP Enviro al Coor 1995 Revised 1/95 VOW ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Pack View Memorial Park 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: John Douglas, Environmental Coordinator (714) 644 -3230 4. Project Location: Easterly terminus of Pacific View Dr., Newport Beach, California 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Pack View Memorial Park c/o Robert Levonian 436 W. Colorado Blvd., #215 Glendale, CA 91204 6. General Plan Designation: GEIF (Governmental, Educational & Institutional Facilities) 7. Zoning: R-3 -13; Unclassified 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. See attached analysis 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) Existing memorial park surrounded by residential neighborhoods on the north, east and south, and by Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School on the west. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None 1 ao ENVIRONMENTAL I ;TORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTE The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning ❑ Population & Housing ❑ Geological Problems ❑ Water ❑ Transportation/ Circulation ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Energy & Mineral Resources ❑ Hazards ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities & Service Systems XAesthetics XCultural Resources ❑ Air Quality Noise ❑ Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ 2 spy I find that although tho proposed project could have a signm ant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. O Si na re John H. Douglas, AICP Printed Name Date 0 EVALUATION OF ENORONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designa- tion or zoning? (source #(s): ) b) Conflict with applicable environ- mental plans or policies adopted by agen- cies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be Incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( ) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low- income or minority community)? ( ) fl. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects In an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) Potentialy soificeet Potentially unlew Low than significant Motion Significant No impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4 ❑ ❑ u J :R C 9 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 C 9 0 ❑ �( poI IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage p p p patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water p p p related hazards such as flooding? ( ) c) Discharge into surface waters or other p p p alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbid- ity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water p p p In any water body? ( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or p p p direction of water movements? ( ) f) Change in the quantity of ground p p p waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) 5 a\\ Pote sIgntricant Potentially urdess Less than significant MiNgatian ftNflcant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Ill. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? () p p p b) Seismic ground shaking( p p p c) Seismic ground failure, including p p p liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?() p 0 p e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) p p p f) Erosion, changes in topography or un- p p p stable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? () p p 0 h) Expansive soils? ( ) p p p ) Unique geologic or physical features? () p p p IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage p p p patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water p p p related hazards such as flooding? ( ) c) Discharge into surface waters or other p p p alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbid- ity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water p p p In any water body? ( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or p p p direction of water movements? ( ) f) Change in the quantity of ground p p p waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) 5 a\\ VI. TRANSPORTATIOWCIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in impacts PoteMialy Unless Less Man to: Slynillcard Midgafbn Sign CNA No a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic Impact Incorporated Impact impact g. Altered direction or rate of flow of ❑ ❑ p groundwater? ( ) ❑ ❑ p h. Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ❑ ❑ p ) Substantial reduction in the amount of ❑ ❑ ❑ groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ❑ ❑ p V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ ❑ p contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ❑ ❑ � p b) Expose sensitive receptors to ❑ ❑ p pollutants? ( ) ❑ ❑ p X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temp• ❑ ❑ ❑ erature, or cause any change In climate? ,ail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? ❑ ❑ p d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ❑ ❑ p VI. TRANSPORTATIOWCIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic ❑ ❑ p congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features ❑ ❑ p (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or Imcompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or ❑ ❑ p access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or ❑ ❑ p off -site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or ❑ ❑ � p bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies ❑ ❑ p X supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ,ail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? ❑ ❑ p () 6 A0. �- sioncart Potwmy Unless Less nun swficard Motion sngnincant No Impad incorporated Impad impart VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species O O O or their habitats (including but not limited Plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g. O O O heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural O O O communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, eta)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian O O O and vernal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration O O O corridors? ( ) Vlll. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conserva- tion plans? ( ) b) Use non - renewable resources in a O O O wasteful and inefficient manned ( ) c) Result in the loss of availability of a O O O known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the state? ( ) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or O O O release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an O O O emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or O O O potential health hazard? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources O O t O of potential health hazards? ( ) 7 ao 8 at patew so"cant pota dally UnIm Less than soacent Migpation svifkant No impact Incorporated impact Impact e) Development on or near a fisted ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous waste site pursuant to Govt. Code Sec. 85962.5? ( ) 0 Increased fire hazard in areas with ❑ ❑ ❑ flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise ❑ ❑ ❑ levels? ( ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Police protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ [] c) Schools? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ X d) Maintenance of public facilities, ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ including roads? ( ) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ XII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities? a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Communications systems? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Local or regional water treatment or ❑ ❑ ❑ distribution facilities? ( ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 8 at XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) d) Affect a coastal bluff? ( ) XN. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) c) Affect historical resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic or cultural values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? Paer 9favy Slgniricant Impact 0 Al Y C' C Al 0 Pofer�rfy 5igMflcaM Unless Less Nan Mitigation Significant Incorporated impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 4c+. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ l'l ❑ No knpact J u ■ 1 ■ ■ i'1, ati5 �•— Pote" W90 =4 Patenuly unless Less than Slpnfffcant MHEpaaon Sfgnlfkant No Impact Irtcorporated Impact Irnpact b) Does the project have the potential to ❑ ❑ ❑ achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ �q( ❑ Individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Does the project have environmental Q ❑ ❑ effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or Indirectly? XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope Of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitioation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. f:lwin%PlanWffVW W1E1RFORM 10 ��� (, INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST EXPLANATIONS Pacific View Memorial Park GPA 94- 1(F)/UP 3518/SPR 69ADA 7 INTRODUCTION On February 2, 1995 a Negative Declaration was posted for this project. Public hearings were held by the Newport Beach Planning Commission on February 23 and March 9, 1995. In response to comments by the Commission and the public the applicant has submitted revisions to the project that are intended to address the major concerns expressed at the public hearings. The key aspects of these revisions are summarized as follows: ♦ The minimum setback for structures and ground interments would be increased from 30 feet to 60 feet from the eastern property line, with a 75 -foot setback at some locations. ♦ The maximum amount of community mausoleum structures would be increased from the previous proposal of 98,600 square feet to 126,700 square feet, or an equivalent building bulk restriction. The limit of 30,000 square feet of administrative office/support facilities and 12,000 square feet of family mausoleums (or equivalent building bulk) would remain the same as the previous proposal. ♦ Consideration of a Development Agreement has been included in the list of proposed actions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of a General Plan Amendment, Use Permit, Site Plan Review and Development Agreement to increase the allowable development intensity and establish development standards for the existing Pacific View Memorial Park, located at the easterly terminus of Pacific View Drive (see attached vicinity map). The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a development allocation of a maximum of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 126,700 square feet of community mausoleum and garden crypts and 12,000 square feet of family mausoleums (or equivalent building bulk restrictions for non - habitable structures). Mausoleums and other structures housing crypts shall be constructed in accordance with plans approved in conjunction with a use permit and site plan review application. Approval of a Use Permit is requested to establish a master plan for the property and permit the interim use of a temporary building for sales offices associated with the cemetery operation. Approval of a Site Plan Review is also requested to establish grade for one or more mausoleum sites. vdnc vivw MemodaJ Puk wuw sway PWi xl'1 ±, ; Approval of a Development Agreement is proposed to provide additional assurance to the City, the applicant, and the community that the project will be developed in accordance with the approved plans and requirements. Copies of the site plan, section diagrams and view illustrations are available for public review in the office of the Planning Department during normal business hours. SURROUNDING LAND USES Pacific View Memorial Park is surrounded by Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School on the west, single -family residential neighborhoods on the north and east, and single -family homes across San Joaquin Bills Road to the south. ANALYSIS L land-Use and Planning The property is designated for Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is currently allowed a maximum floor area of 50,000 square feet. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to establish a separate development allocation of 30,000 square feet of administrative offices and support facilities, 126,700 square feet of community mausoleum and garden crypts and 12,000 square feet of family mausoleums. Zoning for the property is'R 3 -B" (Multiple-Family Residential) and "U" (Unclassified). Pacific View Memorial Park is surrounded by Big Canyon Reservoir and Harbor Day School on the west, single - family residential neighborhoods on the north and east, and single- family homes across San Joaquin Bills Road to the south. The property is not within the Coastal Zone. A. Potential impacts The City has determined that the existing General Plan development allocation includes mausoleum floor area, therefore the proposed master plan would exceed the current entitlement for the site. The proposed General Plan Amendment would eliminate this conflict. The proposed master plan does not conflict with the zoning designation for the property. The project would not affect agricultural operations, nor disrupt the physical arrangement of an established community. Pa is view bt al Pods h1kW sh* r'W2 �`� i Continued development of mausoleum or support facilities could result in impacts to adjacent residential areas if not appropriately located, designed and buffered with setbacks and landscaping. (Additional analysis is provided below under Noise and Aesthetics) B Mitigation Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment would eliminate conflicts between the master plan and the Land Use Element designation for the property. The master plan has been designed so as to substantially. reduce potential land use conflicts between the memorial park and adjacent residential uses. The following mitigation measures would implement the applicable provisions of the master plan: L Buffer Zone a. A 60 -foot minimum landscaped buffer zone shall be provided along the eastern property line adjacent to residential propertlex No structures roads, walkways, walls, or ground interinnents shall be permitted within this zone. This buffer shall widen to 75 feet at mausoleum structures in Building Site E and G as inScated on the site plan. b. The setback area shall be kodscaped and provided with a permanent irrigation system. Satd hndscaping shall be installed in accordance with a plan designed by a licensed landscaped architect and approved by the City of Newport Beach Said haruftaping shall be maintained by Pacific View in such a way as to preserve night light, water and mountain views from existing residences C Level of sienificance The proposed General Plan Amendment, master plan design specifications, and recommended mitigation measures would reduce potential land use impacts to a level that is not significant. IL Population and Housing A Potential impacts The project is institutional and is not directly related to population or housing growth. The proposed project would have no direct effects on the area's population or housing. No additional employees would be expected. Pack vim Memorial Prk PW3 a1� 4 B Mtbgation No mitigation is required. C. Level of si ' cane No significant impacts would be anticipated. IIL Geologic Problems The property Ges on sloping terrain that falls from east to west. Elevations range from ±435 feet on the east down to ±315 feet on the west. The average grade for the entire site is approximately 15 %. No significant geologic problems affecting the site are known at this time. No known active earthquake faults are located within the immediate vicinity, although the property is subject to groundshaking during earthquakes. A. Potential impacts If unstable soil conditions exist where new structures are proposed, remedial earthwork may be required prior to construction. Soil erosion could occur during grading and construction if appropriate erosion control methods are not followed. The applicant has indicated that no borrow or stockpile sites will be necessary, as excess earth will be spread over undeveloped areas. Each internment site generates approximately 1.5 cubic yards of excess earth. B Mfi ag ti on The City Excavation and Grading Code (NBMC Sec. 15.04.140) contains requirements for geotechnical evaluation and erosion control methods to ensure that any future grading and construction is done in such a manner as to minimize the potential for erosion or unstable conditions. C. Level of significance Existing requirements of the Excavation and Grading Code would reduce potential impacts below the level of significance. Pw&w View Memorial Park Wtiel Study Pape 4 n �V IV. Water ,r The project site is located within the Big Canyon drainage, which flows to Upper Newport Bay. The property is not located within a floodplain. Big Canyon Reservoir is a City -owned domestic water storage facility immediately adjacent to the western boundary of the site. The reservoir is lined and surrounded by a berm, and no surface runoff or subsurface flows can enter the reservoir. The site does not fie above an aquifer used for domestic water supply. A. Potential impacts Construction impacts: Potential sources of water contaminants include soil erosion, spillage or leakage of fuel and oil from construction equipment, and construction debris which could be washed into Upper Newport Bay via Big Canyon and the storm drain system during storms. The project would not directly alter any drainage patterns or bodies of water. Operational impacts: After completion of the project, pollutants from parking areas, streets and driveways (such as coolant, OR and grease drippings), and fertilizers and pesticides from landscaped areas could be washed into surface waters. Some increase in impervious surfaces would result from construction of additional facilities, which would result in an increase in runoff during storms. B Mtinfio n Construction impacts: All grading activities are required to comply with the erosion control provisions of the City's Excavation and Grading Code (NBMC Sec. 15.04.140), as well as the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES), which will substantially reduce pollutant runoff Operational impacts Potential operational impacts to stormwater runoff will be mitigated through compliance with NPDES requirements. Any future construction would also be required to provide adequate drainage facilities as required by the City's building code. With the mitigation measures required by the Grading and Excavation Code and the NPDES program, impacts would be reduced below the level of significance. PaciSeviewKf=r" ai Perk filwal Study Page 5 V. Air Oual ity A� Potential impacts ra C VL A. Construction impacts: Potential effects on air quality would result from dust, construction equipment exhaust, and construction traffic emissions generated during grading and construction. Operational impacts: No substantial increase m traffic would be expected to result since the project is an existing facility, iherefore no substantial increase in vehicle exhaust emissions would occur. There are no other operational characteristics of the project that could result in significant air quality impacts. The only known hazardous or toxic substance used or stored on the property is formaldehyde, but the amount is below the reportable quantity required by law and is not considered to be significant. Miti a 'on Construction impacts. All grading activities will be required to comply with the dust suppression provisions of the City's Excavation and Grading Code (NBMC Sec. 15.04.140) and AQMD Rule 403. Operational impacts: Since no substantial increase in vehicular travel would be anticipated, no Mitigation is necessary. There are no other potential operational impacts to air quality that would require mitigation. Level of si rificance Construction impacts: With the mitigation measures required by the Grading and Excavation Code and AQMD Rule 403, impacts would be reduced below the level of significance. Operational impacts: No significant impacts would be expected during operation. Transportation/CirculatiowParking Potential iL,pacts Construction impacts: A temporary increase in traffic would be generated during construction of new facilities. Operational impacts: The site is located at the easterly terminus of Pacific View Drive, a 2 -lane commuter road. The property contains a network of private drives providing access to the facilities. No substantial increase in traffic beyond current levels would be anticipated. The PwiOc Vim Momma! Park initial study Page 6 p?- primary source of traffic is funeral ceremonies, which would not be expected to increase substantially in frequency or size as a result of the project. An extension of the internal loop road system is planned in Areas 3, 4, 5 and 12. In Area 12 the road will be required to maintain a 150 -foot setback from the eastern property line as a buffer for residential properties. There are currently 24 parking spaces located in front of the administrative offices which are used by office employees and visitors. In the maintenance area there 181 parking spaces for maintenance employees. To the southeast, near the flag pole, there is a staging area for funeral processions that can accommodate as many as 70 cars In addition, there is curbside parking available throughout the 1.29 miles of private roads within the park. Based on these figures, as well as the fact that staff has never been aware of any parking problems within the park, the existing on -site parking is considered adequate for the proposed operation of the cemetery. B. Mitigation Construction impacts: All construction activities shall be required to comply with the traffic control provisions of the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook to ensure that no hazardous traffic conditions occur during construction. Onarrational impacts: No mitigation is required. C. Level of sivig ficance No significant impacts would be expected. VII. Bioloiical Resources A. potential impacts The project site is covered by landscaping and ruderal weeds. No significant native vegetation or wildlife habitat are present. The project would not substantially affect any natural vegetation or wildlife habitat. B. Windon No mitigation is required. C. Tavel of significance No significant impacts would occur. P&MW vim xfemaia Pert Mal sway Par y o�� VIII. Enemy & Mineral Resources A Potential imps No substantial change in the use of energy is anticipated. No known significant mineral resources are located on the property. B Hfigati on No mitigation is required. C. Level of significance No significant impacts would be expected. IX. Hazards A Potential impacts During constriction, fuel or oil could be spilled from equipment creating a potential risk. No other potential hazards would be expected. The project would not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. The only other known hazardous or toxic substance used or stored on the property is formaldehyde, but the amount is below the reportable quantity and is not considered to be significant. B. Mitigation Existing provisions of the Municipal Code and state law require that fuel and oil spills be cleaned up promptly. No additional mitigation measures are necessary. C. Level of significance Compliance with existing law would reduce potential impacts to a level that is not significant. X Nain A. Potential impacts Construction noise impacts Temporary noise would occur during grading and construction operations. Construction activities near the adjacent residential neighborhoods could disturb occupants of those areas. Pacifw YewKfww al Park WWI Sndy PW$ pa Operational noise impacts could result from traffic generated by the project and from outdoor firneral services. Projected traffic generation is not expected to increase substantially as a result of the project, therefore no new significant impacts due to traffic noise would be anticipated. Outdoor memorial services could generate noise that could impact adjacent residents if services were held near the common boundary with residential properties. In order to assist the City in determining the significance of noise impacts due to memorial services a consulting noise engineer was retained. The consultant's report compared estimated noise levels associated with two alternative mausoleum locations, with the rear wall located either 30 feet or 80 feet from the residential property line. The consultant's report indicated that although noise levels would be approximately 5 dB higher with a 30 -foot setback as compared to an 80 -foot setback, the actual noise level in the rear yards of adjacent residences would be well within acceptable limits with either mausoleum location. The study indicates that with a 30 -foot setback noise levels would be about 60 dB even if the noise source were 90 dB, an unrealistically high assumption for memorial services. A copy of the consultant's report is attached. B Iyfitieation All construction activity is required to comply with the noise limitations in the City's Noise Ordinance (N13MC Chapter 10.28) and is restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturdays. This restriction will substantially reduce noise impacts to residential areas. In addition, Mitigation Measure No. I provides that a 60 -foot buffer zone (with a 75 -foot buffer zone at specified mausoleum locations) shall be maintained along the eastern property line, with no burial sites or walkways permitted within this zone. A 150 -foot minimum setback is proposed between the future loop road extension and the eastern property line in Area 12. C Level of si lnr Compliance with the existing Noise Ordinance and the proposed design restrictions would reduce potential impacts to a level that is not significant. XL Public Services Public or governmental services would not be acted by the proposed project. A. Potential imoacts The project would have no substantial effect on demand for public services, including fire, police, schools, roads, or other services and facilities. P"kVimmeww" Puk rnidal SW* Page 9 p,5 U B. IvIfiti No mitigation is required. C. Level of significance No significant impacts would be expected. XII. Utilities & Service Systems A. Potential im accts U The site is adequately served by existing utilities and no significant alteration or expansion of existing utility systems is anticipated. B. Mitigatio n No mitigation is required. C. Level of sig u No significant impacts would be expected. IIIK Aesthetics/Liaht and Glare A. Potential impacts The project is located adjacent to residential neighborhoods that have prominent views of the ocean and Newport Bay. New structures or landscaping located near the northern and eastern property lines could adversely affect these private views. No views from scenic highways or public areas would be affected by the project. If construction sites and landscaping are not maintained in a neat and orderly fashion, adverse aesthetic impacts to adjacent residential areas could result. The project could produce light and glare that could adversely affect nearby residential properties if exterior fighting is placed on mausoleum structures. No coastal bluffs would be affected by the project. Paifie View Memafd Pails Traw Study Abe 10 - a, t B Mi n In order to reduce potential aesthetic impacts to adjacent residential areas, the applicant has incorporated the following design requirements into the proposed site plan: • Private mausolea within the park shall be limited as outlined below. "Private mausoleum" as used herein shall mean a mausoleum structure containing one or more crypts which are owned and privately used by one individual or family. a. Private mausolea shall not exceed 12 feet in depth, 22 feet in width and 15 feet in height; b. Private mausolea shall be limited to Building Site "D" without restriction; C. Private mausolea shall be permitted in Building Site "A" provided they are contiguous and adjacent to a community mausoleum and that a minimum separation of 40 feet between mausoleums is maintained; d. Private mausolea shall be permitted in Building Site "E" provided they are contiguous and adjacent to a community mausoleum and are constructed within the approved envelope for Building Site "E "; e. Private mausolea shall be permitted in Building Sites 'T" and "G" provided they are contiguous and adjacent to a community mausoleum and located on the westerly elevation of such structures. • The plan does not show garden walls, walkways or similar structures which may be constructed anywhere within the park except within the 60 foot landscape buffer adjacent to easterly property line. No roads or driveways shall be located so as to be closer to adjoining residential areas than depicted on the approved plan and that the road extension of Pacific View Drive adjacent to the northerly side of Area 12 shall be deleted. • All roofs, eves and facias of new garden crypts and community mausolea shall be constructed of material, color, texture, thickness and pitch to blend with the architectural style of the original structures within the park. Any blank walls shall be bermed or covered with plant material so as to soften the appearance from adjoining residential areas. Marble fronts and sides of mausolea shall be screened by the generous use of the roof and tree canopies. In addition to these design specifications, Mitigation Measure #1 would require a 60 -foot buffer zone (with a 75 -foot buffer zone at specified mausoleum locations) along the eastern property line. The following additional mitigation measures would substantially reduce any remaining potential aesthetic impacts to adjacent residential areas. Paaiaa View MemwW Pmk tniad sway Pegs 11 p-� 2. Height Limit All structures shall comply with the 28/32 foot height limitation as provided in the Zoning Code. In addition, no structure or kutdscaping shall exceed 430 feet elevation mean sea level 3. Temporary Screening All construction sites shall be screened from view from adjacent residential areas for the duration of construction activitiex Prior to issuance of arty grading or building permit the Planning Department shall verify that appropriate screening requirements have been provided on the construction plans. 4. Mausoleum Design A11 roofs, eves and factas of new garden crypts and community mausolea shall be constructed of material, color, texture, thicktess and pitch to blend with the architectural style of the original structures within the park Any blank walls shall be bermed or covered with plant material so as to soften the appearance from adjoining residential areas. Marble fronts and sides of mausolea shall be screened by the generous use of the roof and tree canopies. 5. Lcmdrecr�ingandMaintenance a. Ike design: A landscaping and permanent irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed kindscope architect and approved by the Plwvft Depa tment for following areas: 1. The 60 -foot setback buffer area 2. The area between the existing community mausolea in Building Site "F" and the setback area; and 3. The area between the garden crypt wall in Building Site "G" and the setback area The landscapng plan shall be designed so as to screen these structures from the view of existing residences. b. installation: Prior to issuance of building permits for the remaining construction of Sunset Court the lmu architect shall certify to the BuikdingDepaiftent that landscaping and irrigation has been installed according to the approved plm. Pacific Vim MemorW Puk MW P4F 12 r , C. I,arndmaK maintenance: All trees, both existing and new, shall be trimmed oval maintained in such a way as to preserve, to the greatest extent practical, water, night light and mountain views from adjoining residcmtlal areas This condition shall not require the removal or trimming of arty tree so as to eventually cause its remowal, The existing landscaping between the terrace bench and the toe of slope, adjacent to the homes on Monterey Circle, shall continue to be maimaineed and irrigated The undeveloped areas of the Memorial Park shall be mains aped free and clear of weeds and debris d Reclaimed water connection: All existing and proposed irrigation systems shall be connected to the City's reclaimed water system as soon as it is practical and economically feasible. 6 Light and Glare Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall demonstrate to the Building Department that the lighting system " be designed &rected and maimai ed in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential uses The pkms shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Architect or Electrical Engineer, with a letter from the Architect or Engineer stating that in his or her opinion, this requirement has been satisfied C Level of signiflcance Compliance with the recommended mitigation measures and design modifications would reduce potential aesthetic impacts to a level that is not significant. XIV. Cultural Resources A. Potential impacts The project site is located in an area where archaeological and paleontological resources have been discovered in the past and may be expected to exist on this site. Grading and excavation could uncover artifacts or fossil remains, which could be lost unless salvage operations are undertaken by qualified experts. There are no known unique ethnic, cultural, religious or historical resources that would be disturbed by the project. Puffin view Manorial Pai< Initial Body Pop 17 J ,�a°� WMM�� The applicant will be required to comply with the following mitigation measure, which requires compliance with Council Policies K -5 and K-6 regarding archaeological and paleontological surveys and recovery of resources. 7. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Prior to issuance of a grading permit~ the applicant .shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the project will comply with Council Policies K -5 and K-6 regarding archaeological and paleontological resource mmstigation, surveillance and recovery . C Level of significance Compliance with the recommended mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to a level that is not significant. W Recreation A. Potential impacts Recreational activities and opportunities would not be affected by the project. B. Hai ag tion No mitigation is required. C. Level of significance No significant impacts would be expected. Mandatory Findines of Sieniticance 1. On the basis of the foregoing analysis, the proposed project does not have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment. 2. There are no long -term environmental goals that would be compromised by the project. 3. No significant cumulative impacts are anticipated in connection with this or other projects. Pacific view Memaid Pak Initial Study Page 14 a3D i s 4. There are no known substantial adverse effects on human beings that would be caused by the proposed project. f.l...UGHN -DIPAC -VIEW US-RE V.DOC 3/20/95 PedQe View Mmw wPark knitid Sft* PW 15 EXHIBIT 12 SUBMITTED PLANS 191 IS/ APAPM mm Tvrdomm ='JL= Fm It e F !- INUKDSWYl"Mawnp#A! ,W3Yp3lIgY1N3iTd0'8Ya0 e Y Y �'- g O Bp r Z � i#> isSB #:Y.Y'9g.3fit§x.9adstbbd3lt :iag z LU _° LU D 8 ¢ L U N a gjp @a5 pp��3, t g {, d#gipn LU LL. w i3 2 pp o U�'1�. Q� tn Z g}e� i9p $pA�a� 9slt� &1$i4it3 ?t193pEa23S3o#aI =? :� C i4 ?�9i. V d��o x `t� Z 5°¢•'z°' z� LU m 0 LU Q 1S.S LU ! L.0 1 ca •— n: nE U ¢ 6LLQ O Q- Q tn IS/ moons=== 14 4N,1- W� KOREAN � ■ PTZ 1 o � 10\ did A t l i l t W 1 •a t P � 1 ; s "k, 9LY3AMA Y,AOIA OM NJId9dYD90NY1 34mva2U0HgMd000C AtlYNRYf6Ud39kHUd A �y i mtam tr = x t a3uaekwnns r r. 1lHYI�tlOVL8Wd�1'dA9C ,�.,, e 1 S V t t ti b W 0 °�>y • 'd HIM � \ ~�\ i tt •ai• • R8 ` ` t N N. . t. •t i t 4 Q ` 1NNNN6 t ,. f � I /j� Jim w"w—D—all Lrmmmo- WE7:11: 4 l 'i F ; i� t' itj�rE I'i 'j 'sy ..w.....«. mum. 9Lenyov4Yf'94YIlONOJ �'°^ 3NU7A13N'JldgYd0U5D NVLI3L8lYdNF{�1 r ,„„: ,„„, ixavareKr.uraedasnma � S 0 z � a s _ gyp e� � t � ! i •� ` Cd CL o r. i Ie riii� � � 11 - a yR] y -2 7 m-� c Q 1'Yr "1p SBLJYmmgwmw aAp/(7NCWgd Ntld M3N0d/d am N.1rfULIWYYM3AdIMR9JH181I08kN1131Y:1 87K139LtlS d E N g w.e., wr lEBflOPl34'!10'kf3d38f1 @1Y �° i � �! .... JlCip�tWRmYdO'f3f130 ox Z cdel p�� m1G � Ilk, E !ep110 ,jj111 j$ S� 0 1 O 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 `1 J jW�44 O O, C N h � s � G C \ R ` �R I R I 1� ( ! R I I Y I I w I � 1 i � 1 t � 1 i ! ! 1 / W 9 g S� �j IM I io I g mo 3 IT lip 14 U4 Ig Big