The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.0 - Newport Center Villas Study Session - PA2014-213 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT October 8, 2015 Study Session Agenda Item No. 6 SUBJECT: Newport Center Villas (PA2014-213) Anticipated Discretionary Applications: • General Plan Amendment No. GP2014-003 • Code Amendment No. CA2014-008 • Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2014-004 • Site Development Review No. SD2014-006 • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2015-003, County Tentative Tract Map No. 17915 • Development Agreement No. DA2014-002 • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2015-003 SITE 150 Newport Center Drive LOCATION: APPLICANT: Tod Ridgeway and Dennis O'Neil representing Newport Center Anacapa Associates, LLC OWNER: Newport Center Anacapa Associates, LLC PLANNER: Makana Nova, Associate Planner (949) 644-3249, mnova@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY The purpose of the study session is to introduce the project and provide the Planning Commission with the opportunity to request specific information prior to or at the public hearing, which is tentatively scheduled for October 22, 2015. No action will be taken by the Planning Commission at this meeting. The proposed project consists of the demolition of an existing 2,085-square-foot car wash and gas station to accommodate the development of 49 condominium dwelling units on a 1.3 acre site. The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: 1. General Plan Amendment - to change the land use from CO-R (Regional Commercial Office) to RM (Multi-Unit Residential) and establish an anomaly (Table LU2) for 49 dwelling units. 2. Zoning Code Amendment - to change the Zoning designations from OR (Office Regional Commercial) to establish a planned community development plan (PC) over the entire project site. 3. Planned Community Development Plan - to establish a planned community development plan (PC) over the entire project site with development standards 1 Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 8, 2015 Page 2 for 49 condominium dwelling units. In order to establish a PC, a waiver of the minimum site area of 10 acres of developed land is necessary. The applicant also requests an increase in the height limit to 87 feet. 4. Site Development Review - to allow the construction of 49 condominium dwelling units. 5. Tract Map - to establish a 49-unit residential condominium tract on a 1.3 acre site. 6. Development Agreement-to authorize development rights in exchange for public benefits. 7. CEQA - a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared to address the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The document was released for a 20-day public comment period from September 11, 2015, through October, 1, 2015. Initial comments received regarding the MND are provided as Attachment No. PC 3. The applicant will provide a detailed overview of the project. Staff will provide an overview of discretionary applications, General Plan policy analysis, Section 423 calculations, traffic analysis, and height limits that are applicable to the project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the proposed project and provide direction to staff as necessary. PUBLIC NOTICE Although not required, a courtesy notice of this study session was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights-of-way and waterways) including the applicant. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: Submitted by: Makana ova *na snes i, ICP, Deputy Director Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Vicinity Map PC 2 MND public comments PC 3 Project Plans Attachment No. PC 1 Vicinity Map 3 V� Q� `-� �,P �� P ,`�O �� VICINITY MAP �)s}rte 40 r ` � dp - i D q 4 g { r ��`a �~ til -• p. - u 150 Newport Center Drive (PA2014-213) • General Plan Amendment No. GP2014-003 • Code Amendment No. CA2014-008 • Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2014-004 • Site Development Review No. SD2014-006 • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2015-003, County Tentative Tract Map No. 17915 • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2015-003 5 V� Q� `-� �,P �� P ,`�O �� Attachment No. PC 2 MND Public Comments V� Q� `-� �,P �� P ,`�O �� g Nova, Makana From: Ron Yeo <ronyeo@me.com> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:45 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Re: Newport Center Villas MND Thanks... appreciate your comments... On Sep 21, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Nova, Makana<MNova@newportbeachca.gov>wrote: > Ron, >Thank you for your interest in the Newport Center Villas project. In response to some of your questions: > 1.The request for comments on the MND is provided in the public notice (NOI)on the website: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/com munity-development/planning-division/prof ects- environmental-document-download-page/environmental-document-download-page To clarify,the public comment period runs for 20 days and ends on October 1,2015. > 2. It appears that the figures you mentioned are having some difficulty downloading on the electronic copy online. I will work with our administrative staff tomorrow to try and get this corrected. I understand that the file sizes are quite large. A full hard copy is available at the City if you are interested in coming in to review these figures. > 3./4.Your comments on the project and review of the aesthetics sections are noted. I will include these items as comments received on the CEQA document. > Please feel free to contact me if you have additional questions or comments on this project. >Thank you, > Makana Nova I ASSOCIATE PLANNER,AICP > Planning Division I Community Development Department >City of Newport Beach > 100 Civic Center Drive I Newport Beach, CA 92660 > P. 949.644.3249 > mnova@newportbeachca.gov >www.newportbeachca.gov >-----Original Message----- • From: Brandt, Kim >Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 8:56 AM >To: 'Ron Yeo' >Cc: Nova, Makana; Wisneski, Brenda; Murillo,Jaime >Subject: RE: Newport Center Villas MND > Good morning Ron, 1 9 >Thank you for your email. There is a 20-day review period for the Newport Center Villas MND, which will conclude on September 29th. > Makana Nova is the project planner, and she will respond to any specific questions you may have on the environmental document, and of course any comments that you have on the MND will be included as part of the record and we will prepare a formal response for the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. >As to the Westcliff Medical Arts Building project,you are correct that it is the Neutra building. That project is from 2012 and did not go forward. The project next door is not related to the Westcliff Medical Arts building. There is a lot of renovation occurring on Westcliff right now. > Have a great weekend! > Kim >-----Original Message----- * From: Ron Yeo [mailto:ronveo@me.coml >Sent:Thursday,September 17, 2015 6:46 PM >To: Brandt, Kim >Subject: Newport Center Villas MND > In reviewing this on line, I have the following comments: > 1. 1 did not see anywhere that requested input and comments for the MND (I admit that I do not have the patience to search and search)2. Some of the graphics were missing important information. 2-2, 2-3 & 2-4. >3. 1 strongly disagree how the items for Aesthetics were checked off. In reviewing the exterior elevations vs.the existing conditions of the low key area and the low height car wash I would mark them "POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT" >4. It is stated that the City requires "comprehensive projects that result in a superior zoning". My conclusion for the project is that it is entirely inappropriate for the area. It is the "classic" spot zoning that will result in a "precedent setting" project that may change the whole area in a negative way. Besides the car wash is a much used, positive existing use. > On an aside.the list of pending projects, document download page: > I saw the Westcliff Medical Arts Building (Mariners Medical) NOP and I had a difficult time determining where the project is.The address is the same an Richard Neurta's historic and classic building, but since I could not find a date, I did not know if it was wiping out the historic building or is the project next door that is now under construction. z 10 Nova, Makana From: RR@USRG.net Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 11:35 AM To: Nova, Makana Cc: Brown, Leilani Subject: Newport Center Villas Mitigated Negative Declaration Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged September 25, 2015 Makana Nova Delivered via Email and USPS City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Via Email: mnova@newportbeachca.gov Re: Newport Center Villas Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Nova, I have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration published by the City of Newport Beach which had been submitted on behalf of the Newport Center Villas on September 9, 2015 and have serious concerns that the public is being denied true and accurate information about the impacts of proposed Newport Center Villas condo development. There are many specific problems and insufficiencies with the study, but the most important problem is that this level of environmental review is wholly insufficient for a project of this large of a change from the existing land use on the site. THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND APPLICANT MUST BEGIN A PROJECT-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AT ONCE AND COMPLETE THAT REPORT BEFORE THIS PROJECT CAN BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. Failure to do so will subject the City and this project to a legal challenge of this environmental determination. The following is a list of problems with the documents provided for public review. It should be noted that this is not an exhaustive list. The residents of the City, were only provided with a 20 day review of this document. When the project undertakes the proper environmental review, the review will be 45 days and we will be able to make more thorough comments. A real environmental review will also provide much more information, which I reserve the right to review and comment upon. Land Use General Plan Consistency —The Newport Villas project is inconsistent with various policies and goals of the General Plan, including Policy LU 6.14.4, which states that high rise buildings should be located to the north of Newport Center to form a visual background for lower rise buildings and uses to the south and west. t 12 There is simply no way that this project and General Plan Amendment can move forward without an environmental impact report analyzing the effects of this change to the General Plan Land Use Policy. This change affects more than this individual project and must be studied fully. Aesthetics Height—The project would be significantly taller than other buildings in the immediate vicinity, which would degrade the existing environment. The MND says that the buildings are similar, specifically identifying some. However,those buildings are primarily less than 40 feet, with only the buildings across Anacapa Drive ranging from 22 -75 feet. The project also would not comply with GP Policy LU 6.14.4, which states that development within Newport Center should concentrate the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where natural topography is highest and progressively scale down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along Pacific Coast Highway. As stated above,these are not issues that can be adequately addressed in a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Ocean Views_— Per Figure 4-3, the project would block a view of the ocean from Newport Center Drive. Though not this specific section, a nearby portion of Newport Center Drive is recognized in the General Plan as a Coastal View Road. Figure 4- 3 is taken from the sidewalk and disguises the ocean views along Newport Center Drive,which are much greater than shown. This is not an issue which an MND can address. An EIR must be completed and circulated for public review. Light and Glare — The MND must analyze the impacts associated with new light and glare created by the project, which is significantly taller than the immediately surrounding buildings. Also,the project's location along Newport Center Drive,which has limited views of the ocean,could create hazardous glare problems for pedestrians and vehicles. This has not been analyzed and therefore the environmental review cannot be sufficient. Public Services Fire and Police Services—The MND fails to adequately analyze the impacts to fire and police services. It concludes that both are less than significant based on the project's location approximately one mile from existing fire and police stations. This analysis fails to determine whether the increase in residents (approximately 109) would significantly impact some performance standard (response time or service ratios,for example). This potential impact must be studied. Car Wash — The MND fails to analyze what the impacts of removing the only car wash within several miles will do to the environment. New residents with cars will increase the demand for car wash services and the removal of the existing car wash will have an impact on the environment by forcing people who used this location to wash their cars elsewhere, resulting in increased traffic, or at home, resulting in additional water usage and additional runoff with non-treated chemicals. Traffic Construction Traffic —The MND fails to account for impacts from construction, including to traffic and parking, although it acknowledges that (1) there will be a maximum of 250 construction workers during construction activities; and (2) there will be significant truck trips associated with demolition and construction. These must be analyzed, especially given that construction employees typically arrive together and leave together. There is simply no way that the City of Newport Beach could approve this study without this information. Trip Generation—The MND's Traffic Appendix uses the High-Rise Residential Condominium designation from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Handbook to predict trip generation numbers. It should have used the Residential Condo/Townhouse designation or some other designation, which has higher traffic generation rates. Because there are two parking spots for each unit and 26 guest parking stalls, it is likely that the project will generate traffic beyond that assumed in the MND. High-Rise Condo Resid. Condo/Townhouse 2 12 AM Peak Hour 0.34 0.44 PM Peak Hour 0.38 0.52 The traffic studies supporting this document are wholly insufficient and must be re-run as part of an EIR. Car Wash—As stated above,the MND fails to analyze the impacts on traffic of redirecting all of the existing car wash traffic to car washes located miles away. The environmental review should disclose the number of users of the carwash and then analyze where these existing trips will be redirected. Noise Construction Noise —The MND fails to analyze potential temporary increases in ambient noise from construction activities, instead relying on a noise exemption in the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Because of the claimed exemption, there is also no noise analysis(i.e.,calculations) with respect to construction noise, including noise generated from construction traffic. This Project cannot be approved without a comprehensive noise study. Operational Noise—Operational noise is not quantified and compared to a baseline noise condition. With respect to mobile source noise, the MND simply says that there would be less traffic. It does not actually analyze operational noise from the development itself(e.g.,from the HVAC system, rooftop pool, or valet). This Project cannot be approved without a comprehensive noise study. Deferral of Mitigation— Mitigation measure MM NO1-1 requires the City, prior to the issuance of a building permit, to verify that an acoustical analysis of the architectural construction plans was prepared to ensure the building will comply with applicable noise standards. Here, the MND does not (1) analyze the potential impact (deferring analysis); or (2) identify specific measures. See Defend the Bay v. City of Irvine (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1261, 1275 ["an agency goes too far when it simply requires a project applicant to obtain a biological report and then comply with any recommendations that may be made in the report"]. The determination of whether a project will have a significant impact, and the formulation of measures to mitigate those impacts, must occur before the project is approved. Oakland Heritage Alliance v. City of Oakland(2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 884,906. Additionally, mitigation measure MM NOI-1 would not mitigate impacts to adjacent uses. This project cannot be approved with these mitigations in place. These mitigations cannot be included in this MND because it fails to analyze the impacts. Water and Wastewater Water Usage —The MND states that the project would require approximately 10,417 gallons of water per day. This number is calculated based upon a wastewater generation estimate of 7,516 gallons per day/acre. This analysis artificially underestimates the real water usage and wastewater generation of the project and is inconsistent with the water use analysis from other projects in the City: The Ebb Tide MND uses a per capita water demand figure of 178.9 gallons per day per capita. Applying this number to the 109 residents of the proposed Newport Villas project yields a water demand of 19,500 gallons per day. This is more consistent with the City's adopted Urban Water Management Plan, which identifies the City's 2015 water use target as 228.1 GPCD. The Lido Villas MND shows that 23 townhomes would generate 172,800 gallons of wastewater per day, a vast increase over the Newport Villas project's estimated wastewater generation. The City of Newport Beach cannot apply different standards to similar projects within the City. This is an attempt to circumvent the required studies in an EIR. Compliance with State Law 3 13 Section 1.4.1 of the MND — CEQA OBJECTIVES — The MND itself states the law, "If significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and balance the project's environmental concerns with other goals and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations." There are numerous areas such as air quality which this project cannot possibly meet the standards or mitigate the impacts and which the City must do a full EIR to study. Conclusion: The Mitigated Negative Declaration is wholly insufficient to analyze the impacts of this Project. As stated above, The City of Newport Beach MUST begin a proper environmental review before attempting to hold any hearings on this project. Failure to comply with State Environmental Law will subject the City and the applicant to a legal challenge of the sufficiency of the environmental determination. Additional comments will be forthcoming if the City insists on holding public hearings without further study. Sincerely, Rl�Gc�if Z. RwL , Robert L. Rush, Homeowner 5205 River Ave. and 29 year resident of NB cc: Leilani f. Brown,City Clerk Via Email: LBrown@newportbeachca.aov 4 14 Nova, Makana From: Brandt, Kim Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 10:46 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Fwd: Request for Extension of Public Comment Period Newport Villas MND Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Kim Via iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Debbie Stevens<dstevens@envaudit.com> Date:September 25, 2015 at 10:21:16 AM PDT To: <bhillgren@highrhodes.com>,<pkgleneagles@gmail.com>,<kkramer@pacifichospitality.com>, <ray.lawler@hines.com>, <tim-brown @sbcglobal.net>, <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>, <pza k@ newpo rtbeachca.gov> Cc: "'Wisneski, Brenda"' <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov>, "'Brandt, Kim"' <KBrandt@newportbeachca.gov>, <EdSelich@roadrunner.com> Subject: Request for Extension of Public Comment Period Newport Villas MND Newport Beach Planning Commission: I would like to formally request an extension of the public comment period for the Newport Center Villas Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND was released for a 20-day comment period on September 11, 2015, which is the minimum allowable time for the review of a MND under CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 CCR§15105(b)). However, MNDs that require review by state agencies must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse with a minimum review period of 30-days ((Title 14 CCR §15105(b)). On page 3-8 of the Newport Villas MND, it is stated that"The Project would require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) because NPDES permits apply to construction site of one acre of more (CA RWQCB, n.d., p.9)and Project construction would disturb more than one acre of land." The RWQCB is a state agency,therefore: (1)the Newport Villas Project requires a permit from a state agency; (2)the MND must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review; and (3) a minimum 30-day review period is required per(Title 14 CCR §15105(b)). At the heart of CEQA, is the requirement for public participation and review. It is more than reasonable to request a minimum 30-day public review period to review an approximately 900 page CEQA document. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. Debbie Stevens 1120 Sea Lane Corona Del Mar, CA 1 �J� V� Q� `-� �,P �� P ,`�O �� 2� Attachment No. PC 3 Project Plans 17 V� Q� `-� �,P �� P ,`�O �� sg PA2014-213 AIIannall PC 3-WGeCI Plans ARCHITECTURAL SHEET INDEX NEWPORT CENTER CONDOMINIUMS o6 `°�naRE T 6nEPaE 1a1PE 16UMMMY MEMS ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 08.112015 Ener OPEN s=ue O.s-eenc.E 11.svuE wi e AIA2 1..-...2 Al 1.s ROdi RPH-LEVEL 03 A1.1 fLGGYRMI-LEVELI Irma.-L£VELt Al� aPoGRPL/ -- E.$ A1s 8 RRFHd Li NOOERPH 1 _ 1 A29 E \SAL A]1 811ESECTION1 AA2 — AI W9 .6 I sui1 WGSOOnON1 WIIR PER6P LTNE NEWPORLd ANALOPA .. RNE-A AiOWAR 31Kn a. I' �y —STC 1 � i TiHN E PNACEPAORE � C __ _ t-��_ _ EYHIBRI PNOPERiYLHESEiHALN6 6ELlbN6 — �— - Essal a.E 88xAOGN'ENO,IXseEL1pIN9 II �._ � 1 art2 axAnEdaW➢Ow aNOY WFP�EO CIVIL SHEET INDEX I L1° LONLEPNµGRNI PLAN CONCEPTUAL IIPLM PL -- II - Eal VIEW6IMOLA10NE,IEW I EX vnx V wGTL VFK-G161 IXMINTa TETIO I ,,.AT ,R IrEA I'I EgrLANDSCAPE SHEET INDEX .1 eas Pw�IP NGPµErtE ILna PISNnPwlnu P.1 al'• + � ': _ 1' I 1 �`. o P v�aurnuv mATERwLSPLUI —_� r. i i ? L+i VICINm IMPNGaAN It l `IT, - - I i' NEW MT DENIER DRIVE 2 Ao.a Newport Center Condominiums COVER SHEET } !A 11 i N E E S aa�pnhM�o�9ueNel iu Charm v11r1 �n1 M i „Im - 1 1� � • , F 1 nl �� I. II ' I� N .n ;< Jim' _ i• w � �!__. ' • - =3� olJON a l PA2014-213 Avatnment PC 3-Pmlect Mane v I £ RENDERING3 Newport Center Condominiums PERSPECTIVE-AERIAL VIEW FROM ANACAPA DRIVE + r x x r x e x x „xwxw,va.o.c,mxx r.cm�o. a�noss�ss.m PA2014213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-Pi e,3 Plane PROJECT SUMMARY GROSS FLOOR AREA: 14,193 S F.13,45x BUILDABLE AR�A) MULTI-STORY PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION TOTAL PROPOSED GROSS FLOOR AREA:THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF(1)MULT-STORY RESIDENTIAL: 163,260 S.F.SAS x BUILDABLE AREA) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, 7 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL _ 3 LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING NOTE:UP TO 49 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE PERMITTED BUILDING SHALL BE COMPLETELY SPRINKLERED. WITH NO NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS.RESIDENTIAL UNITBUILDING CODE:CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2013 AREA IS MEASURED ON A PER UNIT BASIS. DWELLING UNITS: eEE sEre>Ba . OCCUPANCY TYPE:R-2 JN . R 2 Bedroom 38 Units BUILDING TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: 3Bedroom 11 Units worPa,Ms - F e4 1 TYPE I-A-FULLY SPRINKLERED Total 49 UnitsGOVERNING AGENCY, OPEN SPACE: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REQUIRED t wiaeo aaoaEsn.,ae LOT COVERAGE: COMMON OPEN SPACE 75 DUIUNIT 3,6755.F. -- es, serace LOT AREA(prior to dedications), 54,686 S.F. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 30 S.F.PER 1,470 S.F. LOT AREA EACH UNIT ❑ Baasml T (after dedical plus setbacks): 47,592 S.F. T BUILDABLE AREA: 47,592 S.F. TOTAL REQUIRED 5,145 S.F. - BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 29,800 S.F. a PROVIDED LOT COVERAGE: 63% B�eT CKFlu.aEIINE COMMON OPEN SPACE 13,392 S.F. isg BUILDING DEPARTMENT GROSS FLOOR AREA: IST FLOOR AREA: +I-27,294 S.F. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 12,851 S.F, TOTAL P 2 roarecoc weaxon 2ND FLOOR AREA: +1-25,520 S.F. ..+ CNES BSIm,Na 3RD FLOOR AREA: +I-25,198 S.F. i ❑ 4TH FLOOR AREA: +1-25,198 S.F. SETBACKS: k STH FLOOR AREA: +1-25,196 S.F. PROVIDED 6TH FLOOR AREA +I-21,680 S.F. ABOVE PODIUM BELOW PODIUM uNTL Eo`Po�MN°� e I : ANACAPA FRONTAGE- 22.5 FT 15 FT Wn 7TH FLOOR AREA: +I-13.172 S.F. -PORTE COCHERE- '3 FT OFT TOTAL +I-163,260 S.F. NEWPORT CENTER DR- 24 FT 15 FT 0 °10PE'Q1VLNE GROSS FLOOR AREA: +I-163,260 S.F. WESTERN PRTY LINE- 14 FT O FT SOUTHERN PRTY LINE- 22 FT 7F - PARKINGGARAGEGBA +1-133,6715.F. 'NOTE:PORTS COCHERE ENCROACHES BUILDING SETBACK BY 12' .FlEnr "B Ban 1lT.- lWRFnoaeary ,a PROJECT SALEABLE AREA: +1-149,535 S.F. 'NOTE:ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS ARE ALLOWED TO PROJECT P 30"INTO SET BACK AREAS sera Av PARKING: erva Ews Enr "' OOm NT REQUIRED `O PAR�ELAPmena RESIDENTIAL 98 STALLS VISITOR 25 STALLS PROVIDED RESIDENTIAL 100 STALLS MUDMADAULLSATLERBll VISITOR 26 STALLS OQUGHana RArGnOmn,^^ woiwasrulannrttep v ee a +Tv G A0.1 Newport Center Condominiums por u SITE PLAN&PROTECT SUMMARY PA2014-213 AIIacM1mant PC 3-PmfeC Plane aen—,a— —SE M MVE sIX STNGm1�Eni meEe LNiV hLACEOIueIM11M LCC4TIGN5 NGHG MUCnPA Cu NE Z. ]83d' a i /.'�% ,9.,,x,,. ,r, / - - - > W4 LL . .aEI O (' Oc • GMI4L PEMrtL£MEM GIIPGGSETOINFlLL 5IAEETMECIPN IN $W 0 O O T.TFGMRNi41FR4FFCTHW GMNCEFWRyuP lEWlINF➢ SN E j E3 I_ OBLAPEO. _ I I a I a c" _o � � I a ne.r "NOTES: 7 • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPEIHARDSCAPE FEATURES - AO.1 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums Newport u PROPOSED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS wv>aagys,goM PA2014213 A„achmen,PC 3-Pmjed Plans .i .. cunmsc°enarye lwmgl e —ooErvsPnOE(,CCn'�-o, seri sF _ Fptiylq-{a iw�onoae°s�lnaw, Is UNIT • Is AsAsF UNIT 3010 IF I 10 sencsmamr.orvl e 96 IF UNIT UNIT2 I •12 IF 2 � 0215E m m m r - Is - UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT I I . . . R �UNIT -F UNIT -F - ,655 SIF C'J 20M SF 2W SF 2Wm p81S. 1566 SF j ® h • • 20685E • • • _ j o an, An 1.sF r � EALI.wan> T`EMTuprzu os SED OF ICA CA cx�TO O so Nox-INo°ossrus �C-- --- ----------- --------------------------- ------------- ------------- I//ice ------------------------ _-__-___-______- �• I Is Is Is I I 19186E 1318 3F I r r UNITUNIT II � 35825E 35833 5E I UN IT ^f HI IF L"J 2265 SF 22&55F II • Is I I I / I , � _____ Ow,. F.cCamonsracs uvs��-avwsrncs ow.°x,N°wa,o.E — e ,ao rav w °m AU.3 Newport Center Condominiums a'�e+por u OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS-COMMON OPEN SPACE + •••T x e•s N,xmw�naw.swx.,nu..o. PA2014213 Attachment Pc 3-P Oject Plans P -Pu so� PPIVPiEq+EN.inv _ 6aACE` ParvaiE WENSPACE �Is 11 1 mawawecw�m•cpan5e.:mflrowl F+ • • • ; UNIT IrvOCXE 6S NCE U� 10 nsa IMMmOx sF 1 3010S 1396 SF DUNS �.me.. �7.�...� C UNIT •1327 SF ® Hp s9wiwa l�a„suu Pmneca-dmalp zon SF• wm. Are. cE 10 mO wA3u LEGEND FLOORSUMMARY P'�E,NI SPPNCE IP""pEl 2 UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT ! pre ovcx sPPEE ao�qui UNIT uwr —� O P91 x,�,'I %.alw row 1 Obl - 16555F 2W45F 2606 SF p®SF 15865E N6F �� stF15F • • 26683E • • �_,_,,,tl • ` "ass' Ta0PPRI 01 6 - r a s M.F aF 6 LAx 0 eF .2IFE 10 SPE 3W SF ,6165E Jya55E C INTILEVERED sInTnEUTURAL OEM Ess..010 sCREEH Asnllaa N wALL b n _NIiNAl6 -� s .P-sPA- —________________________ 1 rr r . . . . I • UNIT -. UNIT • � 23615E 16 UNIT 23065E UU� • �F ' .sve._,... __......a...., • 2863.3E •� I I I LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY ' UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT FF 111-E.mrx sPACEboron rv1 20 365E x117", " 2536!F �5369F 2015SF� umn unllsq 2384 S 23W SF .aF 0 EF 6F I i � , sa sF 6asF aasz sF El sss.EF 300 a, ,8165E 0.iW55F sn— tl as w m' 1w tl6M A0.4 MW� Newport Center Condominiums N,.,Pd1por u OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS-PRIVATE OPEN SPACE + .•II T x e.s myp•.pngry;y.suW.elrtu.nn wvmay�.v Pm PA2014-213 Attachment FC 3-PUI Flans ars- -s- lC _ _ _____ __ __ __ __ _ 9ua2p-cmmmena�81 •alOx5�1 _ �ao m Nv I � Sz F I mel F IN • • maw4xe cwA—Oss'En.:marowl NIT UNR UNIT UNIT , , 12 11 tl YA 18 30315F 1645 SF ,'� 16455E 3031 SF I I q / Iry nSB OF sF IN I I If II 4Nasnwawae 3wu P:wiea4-atolls VAN I UNIT • _ r r - e UNIT psPecE mmmw sF 13 1] i o�N spncslW�sx sap UNIT 2Efi85F PEN 6PPCEIPRNRIEI est SF 266e sF II LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY zBWBE, 3W85F I UNIT UNIT PRIVATE WER SP.we , IS • • • • • wrvw 14 16 • ti�¢n Tb0.'NROT. w m span rvt 2397 SIF 23915E ftBO;F WBS, e e msF Sms, OEt I i P —__—__—_------- -_ 3erei4.oPeN SPwg sPT oP[x IS UNIT UNIT UNR 21 20 y CC 28 UNIT 30315E 1W SF 19455E FET a s 3031 SF e § e IN UNIT • _ • • _ •UNIT IN LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY 26 26�F p24 2668 SF PRIVATE-OPEN SPACEleolen - 3008 SF spare x.P•:� w rv� I • UNIT UNT • �Xxq 1,A P, • IS 13 • • • • • as BO pSF B 23975F23975E 3B Ls[ II e e gasp 1.11 63335 t t L_L______ _ ___ ____ _______ __ __ __ _________ ___ _ __1 PEx 3PnLF AOEPT �ry��//�� a as sP W .w oam A0.5 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums NA.Ps,por u OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS-PRIVATE OPEN SPACE + ••e r x e•e ANS, •tav�N.:g3.:sspm PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Project Plans s-n E /C _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __� 9ua2p-cmmmena�eP•al�n�l » leeelxm um lme 1 PEN SPAC,[Cobmmx wee sP I 1.1s sr N�atlNIu4 PENON"Cpeemllmm GNIT UNIT' '1l NIT UNIT ; I �, � 28 A" 54 3] 36 30315, 16455F 16455, 30316, Irv000RsvncelexMmox I nsa OF a a • r 4 r A. i I I I I i.. asnxawa lNa^BF4Pule.a-owNp uvw Ar IIA UNIT r r r r NNS 'PAa Ew COP., sF ]88B SF CPPCE IPRNRItiI A 1 UNIT 8F 26668 F ® LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY pEN zs>A3u 808 3F UNIT UNIT �'I'�� P. r • 32 • • X834 �PB.re�ovBx xP.cB u,nrtaElBpw 2397 SF' • 2397 SF • III I _ _ A 305E W55F • IS m m a, 195 sm sE eeees IC ------------------------ _____ ------------------------ _ _ _____________ _________________________ __ __ __ - - -- - - - - - -__ � I ' IT UNIT d. 10 uNIT uNIT FIT 30316E 18456E ®5 16456F 30316F I � � a s I • r r ' .t?7 ® — u 0 — r yNIF LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY a0 2666 5E 2668 5E O PRIVATE- m°v`" o..xxP.. N P.- — µin» xnrlaF, UNIT UNIT • � • •• • 3 • 8165E � 2397 6FSIF ms[ mIDs ssm I � IEN AAOPENSPACE v as w m rw oam A0.6 Newport Center Condominiums �.Ps, Newport u OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS-PRIVATE OPEN SPACE + ••r T x e•sAN. x,.lm.y„na.•.swl..rnu..•. wv>ar:�.ss x PA2014-313 Attachment Pc 3-Project Pians ' __ __ _____ _____ ___________ ___________ __� 9ua2p-cmmme�a�eP•al�x�l� 111 oPery sPnc Irtlory olse sF _$LD' _5-e_ _ _ _ _ _L tweii e6on CCN � rSF _ — ro.NesF I I • • • � I �aemwecw�mw cPnsn.:mfirowl I N I I � X•c4' ;Mf 1378 SF 1378 SIF IrvcoOR s.a ICOMMON I I n5a e[ I I r I UNIT IINR a 35825E _ 3583 3E b am• �a la.��mP -SII I g I � Nvro yr — — I PCE C(N.MW LEGEND FLOOR SUMMARY ePncE loaxnoN e: tINR IITIT' Ptm sPPCE IPRNRIEI uax I llIFff ei SK 858 5 2P8.5 SF 2285 SF / II • _ _ • _ I �PN nre.ovvx evPCE � Bov�w�MW m�u��n romw I I I um l8y) 8Yn Ag r I I I i I 305E rOZ15F IIdt� I / emss � St4txOSF MIF 1117M,� as 3osF roz�sE PPNaIEOPEry EPRCE O t=Fi' OPE SPPCE [nd[O tl as w .w tl m Al Newport Center Condominiums por u OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS-PRIVATE OPEN SPACE + •••T x e•s x,.lmw�naw.swl..rnumo. [I1v>al.syn=M PA201¢213 AIIacM1mant PC 3-PmieC Plane ROOM LEGEND o Elevator Lobby o Generator o Main Electrical Meter Room /� /� /� o Mechanical `' , A.b 6 toy �r� tai red ` I , o private Garage 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 o Resident Storage I I —Service Lobby/Trash A DWVil I I I I I I I o Stair 're n. vm mrt �Switch Gear Trash Room - f------- -----T- f �_ --�--- --f - 1 — - f VISITORS PARKING F i m _ wee r ReYtlenl �VI A6` 66 teary n vWZ _..1IIAF —_ I Ir IV'1 N-0' �eF _ E gi. rE,gory s ii �nE�— It.Z rzi1241 r � II e� E�6a�� M ' a tli >ti ea�°i mu sr I I I D f I r a r a r I 7 tlk B! Zf Y6i A7 77a tlP na i al I `1— -- - r - IIF A.5 �F_ — ea — adss�T TF I'sIo±. a., _ se mr Laa a.o-tn»oscnvE cwrwr,En uoxG 41&G lya'� WMGE WKI 'NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES rowm • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS " ,F "" - A1.0.1 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums or u FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL Bl wv>a•:�ssear PA2014-213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-PmfeC Plane ROOM LEGEND ®Electrical I Elevator Lobby Gas Meter Room ®Generator ///�� /� //�� /,� /'� /} o Mechanical 12 11 10 `r J `a, T7 AB 8 `a, T T T ` I I o Private Garage 7 7 7 7 7 Y YI I I I I I I II I I I I o RESIDENT PARKING A14 ADkIVfi o Resident Storage 9', —Service Lobby/Trash 'W'r ^' nT!, IaaaPrn xe�x – u�eE o Stair ehb J.tN. T 3.mn �Y3 p IIWM.m BUW I Ewi — I I 4 rc I s[a.cx to 1 _k N I a'Ma.-va FXv.1.4up. PMM.G 6...e erne aN6an0• ffib VS 111 yd tusr In-.voeey �L y ------ ----- -- --- _77-7,-11 2.1 12 PARa aNG r -0 -, �- a-----17, i- IIS 1 1 AHELL 'L-44L71,wr r A7 s GE WA P'p W a c T 'NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES „ • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS " t° °° °° "` - ALL ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums or u FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL B2 + e�r 1 x e�s v,bmw�naw.sw.nnu..o. wv>aa�lw PA2014-213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-PmfeC Plane ROOM LEGEND o Electrical o Elevator Lobby C,Garage o Mechanical o Private Garage 12 11 10 9 8 1AC RESIDENT PARKING Resident Storage ADRIVH Service Lobby/Trash mn ©Stair „a. cxoamn kms• uxe r — --- --- -- ----- — ----- — I } -- xe,l�x. 1 _— rrauxo I m.w 1 1Ir 11 - _ II T' 4A- - - - _ _ - _ A.5 T f 4GE WPLL e 'NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEEVEXHIBIT T TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED °^a°n • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED OONNW NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS " 1. °° 1f - A1.0.3 ■ " . Newport Center Condominiums FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL B3 ruNOugn AMw•euWnrt G•nw alfyimsgpy PA2014-213 AIIannaenl PC 3-Pgecl Plans ROOM LEGEND I Concierge I Corridor o Elevator Lobby o IDFIcxE GNOPY FNo�caFs.La.. InI o Lobby 12 11 10 9 8 T A.6 fi � 5 4 3 2 1 o Lounge vv o- mn ma »p rrp o Mail Room ®Service Lo bby/Trash �. A d PADI maa,.."coT�crveRE NaE.,sinEI NG oTH-1 —NNa �.�. o TH-1.1 o TH-2 d oTH-2.1 F o TH-3 oTH-4 ffN o — —I-— — -- mit— — E Unisex 1 o nlsez Restroom o �mser -�e•a„ �"`wl � mLt�YY® bml A euG azu.eun •« _ ' 1 - m ix1. a D a N`nNN., L m m i - m cwaa fSSSp _ _ _ _ rxs -4 TE, rd TH ixs II .- lW',sEftNn g g ora.,: wn�am:v, s wa�,rv��.v, ® B oI I, A5 wa appTLEVEflEG d"LgNGSCFPE PLMJiER YgJG w,LL RCMiEj.. I Laa I I / *NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE HARDSCAPE FEATURES • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS IIE . AL1 ■ - . - ` Newport Center Condominiums FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 1 } I♦II T M F f f pabn PeMw•snCiwre cNno• Hy/iossgss VM PA201¢213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-Pmfecl Plans ROOM LEGEND ©Corridor o Elevator Lobby o IN —Service Lobby/Trash 12 1t 10 9 8 ] A.6 6 5 4 3 2 1 o Stair na as Iva vn na ue va o TH 1 me o TH-1.1 °" C A D TH2 o TH-2.1 __ I^ p1_ UNE_ —TH4 'r Ipp „ ___ _____ ____ 9 � I I I o THS �_ �__ f_ �_ �- \'J IB F I I sOWeaM � I I � I M11[gpne'fe I I I I I 4_ Z 1 II 51q I � Ws . y� Aw'm 1, 2111 IIA°`X ntT*11...: tlico gw ]O:elrtsm I R 41 S B —J56 I I ' I 1 I y H I =7 -T -- -- ---a -- --tea--- - --- -- - I I I I I I I I I I I •NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPEIHARDSCAPE FEATURES • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AL2 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums a•..,aawu,m FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 2 } I♦II T M F f f pabn PeMw•snClsaTe cNno• Hy/iossy¢mvM PA2014213 AIIanvaent PC 3-Pgecl Plans ROOM LEGEND o A-1 o B.1 o C-1 o Corridor o D-1 12 11 10 9 8 7 A 6 6 6 4 3 E-1 2 1 as as an• ua uo ma as o ova o Elevator Lobby "Eva' OF Service Lobby/Trash urvEFEN^ Stair _-- _ _ _ II 9i mk II o a an— r,�I -11 aWl- d -_ a --- 1 - � -s ,.. - I - -- - - E11 1 n I B i — I T r xm., w. �r I I I I I I I I I I I I *NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE HARDSCAPE FEATURES • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AL; ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums a•..,aawu,m FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 3(4-5 TYP.) } I♦II T M F f f pabn PeMw•snClw,Te cNno• Hy/iossa�,°xrM PA201¢213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-Pmfecl Plans ROOM LEGEND o A-1 o B-1 o C-1 o Corridor D-1.1 12 11 10 9 8 ] A.6 6 5 4 3 2". 4 I Elevator Lobby m' m< me o IDIF m dm o Pool Equip Rm I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I Service Lobby/Trash =INEPea,v °Stair �. _�-=--=t—=--�-- - I 1 __ 1 1 1 p1` T_ — f e $ I II I I I wt - I II e e —� --- j I I I I�m root — ll I IL a e . � a — ' I f I P I /A1kmpbe Pad EpN� TYar,, p Hal F SFS` a I /I I I FS I I I 3Y I I I i10tl A I I I I adv *NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE7HARDSCAPE FEATURES • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AL5 ■ - . - ` Newport Center Condominiums a•..aaawu,m FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 6 } P 1 II T M F f f pabnPMw•snClwTa cNno• Hy/iossgp.Psau PA201¢213 HIIannaent PC 3-Pmfecl Plans ROOM LEGEND o Club Room C,Corridor O Elevator Lobby 0 Fitness off-2 12 11 iD 9 8 7 .B 6 5 4 3 2 1 ua nn as >wa na aII ua O OF mII 1rrl,• o I-2 A PA DkIl Service Lobby/Trash ©Stair L'"e ery PL— —__ Ili- TL _ II a I _ I - -0I , I II I I I I II I a I IUEiPV m Fla— Wof I PL 1 II s I .v:w r t " ce wiw+olwra m BL 11111 s a I W ' Z �2 I . n III 9 �as R m w rxs `d'myIX A R B I I El Twss T I r 14 I I I I - =-tea--- - _ --_ --_- -- - I I II aw, I I I I I I #18q w *NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPEJHARDSCAPE FEATURES „ • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS n n �° Baa ALS ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums a•..,aawu,m FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 7 } I♦II T M F f f pabn PeMw•snClwTe cNno• Hy/iossyPpSrM PA201¢213 AIIacM1mant PC 3-Pgix,k Plane ba AU• — V. IDY�IT'i' EN 6FAOMPVEM(' I5v ENNEE 11 sMzae A O V EuvEi.r"wwn �•9 r'f lryFylM6y. MEW.6FA E i �w Ae I 1 6,lv 6TSF ti Pl ..o 6w=o� li 50]6Y� a Ea FAV 6WBF9' L 6 N ga W i I • k 1 1 B I L i � h IlN LEGEND: MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ZONE MECHANICAL SCREENING 'NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES rowm� • ROOM AREA CALLOUTS ARE BASED ON NET AREA.REFER TO OPEN SPACE DIAGRAMS FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS pyg ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums w,..Pd,e..•n,u ROOF PL4N �_L—_ 1//1�1/■1�1//1�1■��. .��I � -==1 _-_=1— ,- __—,. I��I .��■1�1//1�1//I�1//1�1.. �i�l i�b95 ■■ti99 . ti�i9 . �19ti�, Sic 9i' '��'■. � � I .■y�' S� y� �� i'i ■■! a��■�a1la��!!la��a!!a■��!!��!l��a!■�1��1��1�11�1 I��at■al��_■l��aa��!1[a��■IFa�_�!1!a�■I!�!a��'�i iitititi iiitititi ti5ti titi�ii 9� ��' ti�iiiil■Illl�llll�lllll�l�iiy�' '��' y� iii�� ii� ��ii� ■■s��,■■sl!s��:na��■� .'�'�aa��u��:a ■wu.�aani�aaa' aa��u��u��■�ICa'�nEa��e!u ��■sa I■■ ■■� '�^ ii iii --- - i i�iw � � i■■� iii--- ii■�i _ - I..titiy'I■.yyti"tiyti'Iyy�l.��ti'��y'��y�■■II�III�II�11■I�■■y��y'��"��■■��'II�!��"�!��■.�'��■. _ - !■■aaa ■■:Ila ■na__a a■ as u__;.afaiI■■! ■wuw�w!e�wsat.!■■::.. aa__u.!■■ella ■!!: ■!!a■■!_aaa■■� - i■■�til ■■�� ■'� �� 1 ■■I� f!■i■I■�I �I�II ■�III�Ii■■1� �� ■■�1� �11� 111■�■I 111■i■I - CONS . t�I■■ �I■■ " 'I ■I! I ', 1■II ■I■L�. ■w.■ . .w.I■■ IIII' '1 I■■ 1I �.' ■I■II'� ■r i 7lIY� ,r /ns__:/ __/a/.,� w ■■ ■/a ■r t T T T a1�■.!" /■ a a■..�. LL! _ 91J le/ it s/r 1 .1r ■it �� Imo! fly .ice �wY� I�I SII ' IP!�� 1� • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT VTO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED 7---L • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS .. . LANDSCAPEIIHARDSCAPE ®� u. �u.l�u.l�l.� �d■�1 i%iiii i.'.�yy �yy � yy�! yyyi� °p ii■I 17 iii■■�I�■�ip Ii■y �jyy yyy yyyilii pp ■i■I ii�i i•==0 8�'�i i3llS��'ItlE!!S'I'!!!��i��gat'i.�1 u■I■.I'��8I�1■■ yy y' �lyy'I'111yy y�yr.1"°p".■+ I■■■■■ L■�_ !1l�—�—�— !!1�■.I fig_�.1 - �..n.,r.��i.w ��sssss.wlss�sss�s.,.�,1�4s`� !"'�� ,•^ �! :1_,_ �i.u��' I�Ir �I41 EI'.� I�I• .�II_�'t..i.-r.,l n.� . .fit# mu (� �. - n - iii' •'IlFail i=,� ��► �= ,i,,�� :. �__��w _��,: :� ��'�=�II�111�:;II u�:�li■�,I::�.E�:'�u.:��l —_: tis.�� j�� , • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT . SHOW HOW THE BUILDING —��i �f��laa♦�� !�S !a�!!•�laa♦ laal�i� i�ai:�_ . "�IIh111'�"'••III■'■1111■�■IIll�llli■�•'� � �'■"illl■'■1111■'allll�lll■�""''■'i11'" i� .nil■■ ■■ .. .. ..� �.. .. .. ■■ ■■I n.. �i i.��L�e��u�,..ui..u■� u■��n�� KanrM7P�se= a. n�R�n�u■.�i�■��un..u�..i�i��■iie� �� ■■ ---_ ■■1119 111 . 111 : ■� 1 1 1 11■ ��`I11 111 111• 11 91"' Idl 111■■. ■.119111111191 -•11111�1� II II � I � � � �'■■. 11. 11. •_��_II •`�I. , IIID. ■■ i■■saa___�a!_,■■!a_sa,L`ea_��a_�as■� �1 1 � 1 1 �� i■■_sa=__a�_I__w. ■a__as■�_-sa_=_as■a ii519 111 iii11 11 iii119 . 519 111ii� f11 1 1 1 1 1� iiilll 111 Illii 11 �"��■�i 1�1 I��ii■ ■slllllsll,■.a.�laa��, ■aa��al: a.�l�s� � .La. , .a,ll aalll.aa 7Lallaa IL�,IIIIL • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON i::y��,��u.:��l�j�..�ll_�11�.�.� ii��i 1 iii■ �::IIII�1��111• �II��1�.,.��IIIIfI��I�°� ,� - ro �■■ sgti s� � �u ■ice i■■� ■� a � s�7� ■i■ttv., � [¢ + „ �i ■■ ss ass _ssa.�� . ■ ■ ■ � .� .._..___a___a. a.__■q � +.... ,� �� y`7C,�1y�3`aZ�`+.71-�.�.?,•��q�.�i��_��.��.�El��, ■�� i�n.wisa�y. ' uu t�� '=� ��' -r � ` "I�:i9�._� s�'�I■il.'@II■I�__I ��":�-� _�I■II.'= I■III'�� `�. =' � y � 1__ , - iaaaaaala�. .- . . BUILDING PA2014-213 AIIannaent PC 3-PmfeC Plane F - _ IP1xlk ne wvm.wo.om _. A ILIL IFF _ L e i R IFFS LAI 411, P e_ 11 ,alt I�'u � I, ,•" • I "NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT 1'TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums x,.•,d,por u WEST ELEVATION E ' e Tc An � �Y, : ��l��ri!ltkyl■ k _ FT NA : :• .. ItI�Qb�I �, • ✓ ,.. ■i =BGS GGG- T.NA Ln YII • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT . J PA2014-213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-PmfeC Plane IIS Ir A. A] I 1 IY I F r Cr — — __ -- _ _ _ __r �aIK M-MR_rt_ Fq t � f9T�S V Ai q 0.t e a _ I a f II = �—T xrsmsrv4 xss osx4 IF 6 JJ� u<rclxc le ° III SII IItI-�tt lll�l ��II Illl lb.61 I�IfI _ s — J "NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES °" "" "' "' owm f - A3.1 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums por u SITE SECTION 2 + ��r 4 x e�s wxmw�naw.sw..lnu..o. allv>af.aa.meM PA2014-213 AIIannaent PC 3-PmfeC Plane EWPORT CENTER D I I I I I I I I I I 1 a" V I- a, � 1gNi 6 5P11 Tal 1 y'b bGby �WTnI 1 IT j —�� i T41 Mi IeunP iX@, _ t6 6 P. y �tl 3 - 4u a. ite r"tao., P NO emr e Ill III m.woen m.w e. m.m P. w..m j G=t II I, el fl III — 1I{�ITI II-III 11= rte. r"t.y j wwr P" ro.e. tma '" F —111 1 III = 11—I I III I I ° — xv vu,axex a Pre—N.T II W wMI = mP1. Gana. Xc T— b 5-6• 11 111 1 L 111_t - 177" —I tsaoa,. uaxo IIFIIII *NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES ° `° "` a.m� t - A3.3 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums por u SITE SECTION 3 wv"ayss." PA2014-213 AtlacM1ment PC 3-PmfeC Plane 12 71 10 6 6 T I I I I I I xz ztv '� f w ----------- � L _ _ — x� tars a, a, a, ler g -- - - - — — ,�. �, x x ,a, T. ,.., ma TflH5 .x.5 .. IIj1 I1-III r m a: 'm"�. • �;;9 aw •. _ 911TIIhIH � "• mw m«e xn..,. rmw vnwx IHI jis b' „"= TE1 1T-Jlf T III- ""e• a• �•,e. —7c+,.o. �..w. G-Z r...a. �.w• ii � TTI IiL=fIEfIGIT I1=fT +<e X11- 111=11=IT_ r -��eMe SII-IILIIL 1- - I�IJP L-1& L LI- �I H -�I 1-1 I I_I I I-IIT W,p,T 111 d11W111�--LT�I 1�1111W111= -111Tlllmjll„tL �--T_�lL-ll1;;LLTllT1}-llf--�IlZ]-111m11-1LT1f1�1L�ll�W-11�J11�1,-.I-„fT1-1�11TL1111�T1n11T,tL ��mT - �a.-cS "NOTES: • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT V TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE FEATURES °” ”" '°" "' roan, ' A3.4 ■ " . - ` Newport Center Condominiums por u SITE SECTION 4 AT LOWEST POINT + ��r r x e�s wxmwnnaw.sw..,nu..o. ,„v>a�sswoM PA2014-213 AtlacM1ment PC 3-PmfeC Plane a �y ryl Et Et 11 e e aro b li a 1 I � x o ., A3.5 Newport Center Condominiums por u BUIILOING SECTION I el„�,syy:.�eM : --' • 1��•.. C1,II�y I�L,i•I`'•� � r ��__'— � �' I II I`Kyr , `.. 414 ILIt I( OPP • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT VTO SHOW HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS BEING CALCULATED • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL LANDSCAPEIHARDSCAPE FEATURES A4.1 MWNewport Center Condominiums �I ��_ � ��IIII � �I•�11� II 11 JLy16 � I �� ' I'.i�l _V.�� ■�IIII ,+1',' Cj�� I) II 11 � 1j—__��1111 p II II �I�III1 ��IIII , � � � 11 11 'i■■xr n I �� I ■1111 Ih IL II�11 ;"T, � '! " - ' �I�II�i i!�!� � � �� X19 � �I I'_ ■■III II II• 11 �Ilr^+�wtaF,�I�.. ��;e.yeilMw■11+i1.�1:� 1� it �, ■■..s �E I� I, , 4 ! f ��'.�� ••,.;, w�' I• w� I pa�jj' r �._ � i. li I II II 1' �f lFi ivl Ix•f i lu �.e 1'' a� l�. F t �i�V�lrs✓. ��P' `M � 1� I -J 6 •11 il. _ I�ik}r'fC�� v r{ 'i {•1� � I 5 Y ' �1 �� ■ 1 Irl � I �K . s II�� S ::% ;111■■®� ��II II ii • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON SHEET'EXHIBIT . SHOW HOW THE BUILDING • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR . FEATURES A4.2 ^M 4LiF" - _ C 41 w y� 1. t •i �1 � . ', � '� � e f��. �/ � � �� jam•, �}�I I• � �a�, � F ;da •� � �. � ��I I 1 F r 1 9�\ �-5 ;\ `gas; ,Ij\ $�r,�,.� %• � q�)J� ,t a • SEE BUILDING HEIGHT DIAGRAM ON • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS .- . . BUILDING ■—`I■I■ ' '�' �I h1' 1'�' 11■ - �/411■ . _ _ t� I■■___— —'• —■ I _ _ �Ll■ '�I11_ 1'__It JI■■ 11 "I ■�■ 1 I■' i ■ I 11__ 1 _. C. IYa■ 9■■ ■■ �w��•�r' �•�aiJ r nra A �� _ L.... t _e �__e iL—, __ � _- �'__ .� � 31�i1� �_�:inaS�•—•FII y' '�:��3� ��^'— _a,_ DIAGRAM• SEE BUILDING HEIGHT • REFERENCE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR . ® Newport Center Condominiums DRIVE �A� I I �� < �, � I. III � �� 1 r I � �; II/,�,�I�� I �,�� it , il� �� `-�. �,� � ,i = _ - ;� � ��!�l,�r�' .,� „�; � � Irl � ` � ��/ ,, �� s��,' - � , � ,,I _ _ ��.— �= r y. - �" - - � - � II _ �� Ti Eu � ._ ■ � �,..: _ S 1. _ - '��II �t. - � ; �i iii �3' j, �� j,' _ , i I �� I �� i� _. i i3 �� - � � G, �� _ _� . . .- .. . , ., ® -. .-.•. PA2014-213 AIIannaent PC 3-PgeC Plane A.] A.5 I I I I I I I I �.a .a u. a. — — _t— I aI P. 211 VI 193 I � I I ;9T e _ V _ 19T 6'V I l9T.d V I I 1�]�d V I I I I �4 l—I I ba ` .wrMlt -- I I AICII , I � RIM, I - �UI III III III�II-11 �� J_ � x CIII�III III III II � II Illllrl I I I I --� IH�� VIII c � 7lrllrlll III i�IIr1 ��d _ J - VIII III 1_I l xil 111111111111 111 J x,v exxwax l�I , LL IIII ax II III II SII II I ' I I IHII=III III Ilrl I I I I ,1I - 1 —II I III TF ^ -I- - - J IId _II-II�IIHII III-IIHI 111= magnums 11�11=1ms III 111111111 IH IIdI--I I=II - ^LIl=1 II 11=1 I I I r - ___I II,�Il�r�mlllrlll�IurI-�-I.I�rpr� � IIIiIi�Ilrf ll��l_I I�I�c TII. IIII�I�mI�f�H�TI I�ir-R�r�m— rl�l�Iu �r��rl—�li�r rim ul a _� IX�%.x�GE.IAxe9NGS� Asa ^ oP� �E.e 9w 9�� -SMPeoPERWi . DING a EXHIBIT 1 Newport Center Condominiums Newport n PROPERTY LINE SETBACKS-SECTIONS PA2014-213 HIIannaent PC 3-PmfeC Plane I I I mreertry I — ANACAPA DRIVE _ ooe� MMa, 0885 i e p PL 1 iry � N s 9W1 1[0' .e T. „ a I An— .......... .., d I I L—III—I I—I I III—III— I, r .le „ „a�w 11 =aJ=u= =—T1=1T_I=m= 1 911=1=r�1T-m=1T1_ul— 1 C�1L�1=L I��TT�TI�Ti 1 IIJTIJII—II—II=III-11� 1 a �i1=I 1 — �uJ1I= 1I= II—I _ —111 _ 19 91 1 um�n h err Rt - r --rr�m m=�- rWW �relT�i---gym,TM—TU 1 CJI I— 1—=�—�� SII �,�m11�,�L1ll�11,J1ll,Wlll_III�,II—F�J�III=mom I�,III�m=m=Ll�lll_III_I�II�III=III�I�I�r 'J�reer.+apr.w.�.cax cocxe,�cenoevsrraecx EXHIBIT2 Newport Center Condominiums Newport n PROPERTY LINE SETBACKS-SECTIONS PA2014-213 HIIacM1mant PC 3-WGeC Plane H L SN— 51e. an._ --i •,� `" ,.' .,�f„� EXHIBIT Newport fCenter Condominiums SHADE&SHADOW STUDY(EXISTING) } !A 11 i N E E S Oavpn PoMvov9uWu�iu CM1wp e�vyinv�veu, PA2014-213 HIIacM1mant PC 3-PmfeC Plane l E%HIeIT4 MVF Newport center Condominiums SHADE&SHADOW STUDY JPURPOSED) + x�x r x e x xs wxmw�naw.s�x�ncn.,o. aioas,u M PA2014-213 Attachment PC 3-Prated Plana —�� ANACAPA DRIVE ` yea -NA WP ` gym ' .I - - — a E ISO AND.,Pa1B came, asAAN 11Ao � E II ARE a N mESHOE asrED TEST ARMANDE TO �o ALL REQUIRE REPAIR PER Or.STANDARD f ITHE P_HE—PAY AIENG THE SEEI A 4 APPECANATENI t—USH SURVEY DENRETAIN •^S O �1 V T' i a dS r ai TMESTRAII ESS STI ANA PAPA ERI�AND c 0 Eilur¢ u1LLn4 mFWUBERUSHEEn OF M1 saEii,Ec wE TBSCE�t OioA�� -a6 Ile 3w Y s nAz I U ,i�tm HE PROJECT Ir - ox Lrt�c - All & LU a� a LEGEND x�€ J I0- �� ,E wENNE LU SO a HE SPER r —T / V8I 1,� `G PAAAR. BENCHMARK w ua<wAoao INEATCHREARK wONxnO Ems'VMM ss-.5-,a EARTHWORK= uo awr RESBASEEN 3`33/4." wnwcu. m w Al SEE IN�HE TOP N—ECANDER HE A nwElu o SE IN ha EA-11_ r� EYai 51.1.CY PROMINENT POULEVAND E EENrt'1111 OH�MMmua Po EI AN, n7D SEUNTEATI�NOmxEA9RRLv OE THE OF PAN hATUN TRI ROAD.uoNwaEm¢SE13 O. Ep.. I vrtM rxE sm[wwu. SOME. I =10O ' Ct.0 FUSCOE Newport Center Condominiums _ E � CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN +`3 PA2914-213 Attachment PC 3-Pmeecl Plane nnvgr v -' v.Fnmoum.n '. - mneuvaw rtn ua xo.mx -- AA..e....., _ NE xax n..... ...u 6.0 �. — — �EL ..:..r.0 ANACAPA E DRIVE 112 11 TO ��•�-��°• El �.�.M.T � e - tsEDM > mu< wn L4 - IIS HE • rss .......�.:•:u�:�....�_.... � i t,i �I li $� • • • -�—c�-'�. O �� °I �N��zs� ^�M w......u��.e....0 w.....w.. y — _:.._._..w.�'...-........... 0He OREsx T I b "T"C" E. HENTI I x ssx — FARE ED THEIR APPROMMIRE 2�A The .N DOE W Ir `� ro�u� .. ATEHAND NOT REEN ANOTHER x "Mn eEusm NAu RE R i .essx iT U I Yf mi I _ - '. R E - -. � — F DDt N THL EI F R, 1 RE p LJ ,e �-• I LEGEND lTT/4 T _T z ,DR HIT 65852RE/ e 1P RON 1-1 I /. SEWER CONSTRUCTION NOTES WATER CONSTRUCTION NOTES STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION NOTES O w1-DIED VVEquiFYY EATERi OANEP 41ERALLLLORATTOx exEI PER CEov THE O E imW WATER TERVA E TO aE KwWNFD AT READ O cdxER m Euisiwc PREATE oeax RAIN cmxmnmxs o<ITER, .aMR TOcmxszRDnnon.it sDDs..wan.uak Rswat P—ah r•Re.nmx NOTION.RERxeE PwPosFR MmMUW M[nnvm MxIT roe III RATER TRE+.zxm, NO sR.'a N.Pm siM-.os-L 0 P.Em s-mMmxe smMu Q wmPmsm AREA mux QPRDTrosm e SEWER LATERA 0 I—EED I ARE RETIREE —HE.Pm-<cT-L Q Namcan x TMMm.nax arcRnnx -�..S�a� P sm A ASK DRnInD TEM/Em cnwxnD METER/RRCRRMW nssEAREr RR—a KaTE Dx[Px OATmTCR ANNEMRLvxr la TO 0 mDPm:m PRET TxcTrATDR— 1"" PRMPDsm ARE DEPARTARNT sDENTED a C2.0 Newport Center Condominiums FUSCOE CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN ...'ti....'mm } .•11TMF11f B PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Prgecl Plana _� ANACAPA In DRIVE � /W I (zl e.vAI/ -- --- I a iI wtwMr c[xrtn CaM i p tW i sc.«w. W I II I I I : a%nl t III 11-NIN N IN O SECTIDN A ez esm -- –_–_— – -- – -- 3. . Z � N. KEY PLAN sEre.c,IN, o-aa��a�,wz, PL �wrc_ 'INmealIce- R/W C4. R/W s to 4 m&P.Wan z +�ilv ss u uu asachem PL j m It � m2. .x.M.a. —� sza w usi 3_ wrv.R [inti' e3 a 82 J—I� dtl Mu xr SECTION g npum mow raoxo.Iox sacr�w aoux N SECTION D ! ea II m SECTION C 1" oax sacnox /� C3.0 F�CM 5i5 �F Newport Center Condominiums SECTIONS F`RR PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Prgecl Plana ti � 6n 1, View 1 - Existing Conditions View 1 - Proposed Conditions MVE Newport Center Condominiums FU$�DE N,,,.,. „.�. VIEW SIMULATIONS - VIEW 1 • • �Lss. } I L N L R L PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Praecl Plana 1 7 r E(' 1 11 1111111(1 i IEI Iii !i'' v I t "„,. _ e �'�i n, l�, 1 ' -i i I! 111 �'• ,OL kk �+ - , — REDO r View 2-Existing Conditions View 2 - proposed Conditions fi FUSCOE MW Newport Center Condominiums i,,,, ,,,, ,,,, .......�.. VIEW SIMULATIONS - VIEW 2 PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Prgecl Plana A LY View 3 - Existing Conditions View 3 - Proposed Conditions MVE Newport Center Condominiums FU$�DE N,,,.,. „.�. VIEW SIMULATIONS - VIEW 3 • • �Lss. } I L N L as PA2014213 Attachment PC 3-Praecl Plana View 4 - Existing Conditions View 4 - proposed Conditions i •r JJ..',IIqI FUSCOE MW Newport Center Condominiums i,,,, ,,,, ,,,, —.. VIEW SIMULATIONS - VIEW 4 PA2014213 �� Atta amen PC 3-Pmjea Plane i `" I— -- --- —^ -- -- --- -- ^— ❑ ❑ 4- Aj In ( i 1 B }—r f r- sw :. e ,' E%.FH _ Newport Center Condominiums ` FUSCOE u`�µ � MVE� gra U, FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION EXHIBIT a/W,m�ET<a eM PA2010.213 AmMmo�l PL9 Pmud Plaw LEGAL DESCRIPTION. w...,w w.+e,�..ewA..w�,a».• TITLE CONSTRAINTS ANACAPA OHNE n \ \ n m a � a TITLE REPORT:o�Am,a.,a..mm. El 11 P B —T.=o..o.�w...�ww��w.G..a. � I ¢ lo: � / � — PARC9LA e PARCEL / PA1$%1 _ p D PAIKCL 1 f r U 0 1 0 —(\o- a. AA...e.a / E%ISTING ELEVATIONS RECORD BOUNDARY NOTE: s«.,..9..w..m.w<.. •wo o....e J� LEGEND: BENCHMARK: /✓' �aawnm o..�o-. m.R n� , TITLE CONSTRAINTS ��a�� _ l;�l�=FUSCOE NEWPOM°0 AA A. .. PA2014213 AIIacM1ment PC 3-Pmfed Plana ABBREVIATIONS NOTES: PAVING LEGEND PB0�111M'1 f31m'91M d5MME5 ALI AAI Rglm PA.Fml I—PA,-MEN,.,1—, SM&L 11 PON ..I. IXLd Man FEXYIXS ROMEAN ffFG ffG OHI T ui'°n•lux°-ANIMA—IRs IMAM qpm,w� —°m Wl! LWRH (L11WI MEAWAIYiIJ SM n I AA Aw Olmt R—M A.A.Pm!PUMA I� EXIM1T PANW OIYENSIMAL YXII R Rx OINFN9GNAL IlNli PAPA MFA VENFVIAX PAhY 90.5E NAiFAIIL — — IPnu raE 2aax¢I pA Imo ® l d` P R WIEaAI Ip°-rn...n°!m.m rnr..A Plm�rn.e.a!m F. �JvJ w+`" iu:ua:I An" w"agA!XX,n Mm.A"Xµ°-m". en 00) V0.0 3 RE °Y'1B"m'°gym'°°wm I"m P°°"°.'°' I.R.PAMxG 0IYMSIMAE Uxn nm Ro ollENsorvnL unit vFtlnL ro MnrLx o]XW unit vnwrvL.pnYXG 10IFEr — — IPIP EA OxunpMh4 eM A.mrM qmM ruw Nur ex pPVEER uA2AAL APPYRA$CFkIFP 81 vv CC61wxrz aF a eLP. CGASlSF"AA"""(WI�R IFMAnoX51a—, MH*NAACP E. NNE n IMS A mA q" aK e' er , e �yy ° °A•mmm m�m qv m vFMA2 wAIY.wAy :NCER Clv. Ro wRw.LL fGLCP CGwLIEIE VA/EIMAwCEO f1x911&I.SOw wi JIMNIS — °L.C' A" O IA`CN CavME2 PEu519oA1 TNKKNE1S CLE >w ME IgwRIM x. % Ax p CONCRETEuAmevw�as urbr^M mp enA,.1l PslA ur w a ymme Pu51M 9%WILf f.I.P,CMP61C g0.v.q[¢W 91My PAMN4 nPE,.CpAX.Pp9 NF911a WIq EX6TXa UEN IEaCEA" 1.a, d.YahR WgNUI."Ans YEXA m PAI Pm•1 N sPAN.1A N.ElFAEA1 INP hb pO6 PANNG EI uPAx X ICRPdrt NSLCAnWSj Xn NRPT.m M1 AA..I Mmmem Wwm WM Ye xW.ul n, ram E^ ANLMWvwi,YESW#Mulf F.Mym xngn 4vn wegw drep!n $ptlaL 4N£PawNG GIYENSM4 tlwi R IB4 GIIEN5Gx0.L Uxlr PAPER Ww PECESMpp RAR G4 XA1EgVL Tne pmNml rl nylb IMxul A I a—,n Nna APq ® O PAM,WRMAL IF- MSRD OR' mP gAMT) 'mA �I Ivm.w. R En. f(XWn 9MIAIE( ❑ O %RTOAAO SRRNG GIYMSI.1 MY R RO DIWN90NAL UNIT PAVER MFA PMMAN PAR MZ All — — 5T065 p"'n,All Rq �n��(I,w,M) LANDSCAPE AREA QUANTITIES: MO FINE H�APECI �\ AMEN SAX) ENlA=C1P. 1W ISo I1.1 caw CONCRETE w/MMANGm Nw91 MI SAW OUT UMI. w x1ON PMT 100INII EN .—I W9LI MW 50 rl .1 EIE Pwf.MNXN65. I v aL. OPUM NMT TEn"Rgw1R¢ci IOIu nR xcATFO OpA£S 16) R R AOA.wL GMPUNAI ThUxOAR VM wM1NIN SRM: CLEN - mu(M[OMMCN EXMRM E I.T Oc,(.A.,) .l NANEM FIWANtf➢LROSSW.VI: CA. Mr R RO WNC)UR RAR OIKNSIONAL UNIT PAPER OPOP vFHIPLLAP RAR FAX PAVFRS NAT. Mu RAPE,MPAswwEMT) "RYISR U.ILAIWI,XECAPENaI) P.Na AREA IUmUI,MEUMEMJ) CARE WALL LEGEND PXWIPxo lY U'Y 511A90L XEY Xpl ..I. IXlw PNffI 16N.VIXI ACAII 4R'.9EC v9R S PEI �XNN IIAMMC#xOX( pFAMf1ER NRUMNG E / Ra TED FERMI VARY.SEE LAnEUT PLAI — — Rq PFA al(d" Y�E nmASYRWIe¶ \. MIA CLLLgy+l® REAFOR� X =ANT gd1R.. �� CWNttU9 MALL fNJ LONF rv/ T® RD dx-FALL M.- 5/9M W6 IssssIssO ELPL[NG R An PRE'q ass(9ATaMr a[VANM)IN O ENMNY ff0.i 1HLL CW W ION F/ MdE R 1W PALL%AT V ALL PE PRE OP TRE 6 FREE R tAM$A'T FlEYARw l Yld i TOP al,AI Ta TERRACUL / as O mGAL SPfLE.1 TW W. Ma R'PNL YAr WALL w&L SHEET INDEX ® O UPi fAltlAEtF E M a FFNU 1m TED GENERAL SHEETS REFERENCE SHEET NAME O ILEFE°'"0LL AGEwR/ w R) NMwrR EAsn LY FIN&M-OFFROW P1,wMNG)EPIX ACAN u. — — LOO NOTES & LAYOUT LEGEND LSI PLANHNG PALETTE SITE FURNISHING LEGEND L0,2 PLANTING PALETTE (CONT.) E. XErYARIu "xw M. #YYas rcrRIL sEc sc. MATERIALS AND LAYOUT PLANS o ExRr EEM,M ,w R M — — — sFl REFERENCE SHEET NAME IT 0 MATERIALS &LAYOUT PLAN O ss IIRff POT Mw Mm R) — — — PLANTING PIANS II PDT Tm R MD REFERENCE SHEET NAME ° O L2.0 PLANTING PLAN STAR TANDeAIL R R PER — 36 "M"'I's MM TAR Ma SS NENRNNE IRIATE T® raI )ELar an E[IYVN wAIFN FEANY;RWnq S PLEMENT,sP ,ON PUKN ® sG• i.COUNCOUNTY. POT. � S] ® o RACTIN RD Iq reD — — — EOWIXI Ma PER • 49 ® �....o•.,. x.o. �3.I,:TRI Newport Center Condominiums NOTES AN O LAYOUT LEGEND MW } w 111 T M F 11 5 xaxPr n�axgnP r.>oM PA2 - cl PAans TREE PALETTE HEDGE PALETTE SM90. BI NAME ANNE. ARE GONDA H EMY/BRANDANG AM NIHMW YA DETAIL R6 AND. BEADN" CANAL ENDING HOME WIN.NAME SONTAIHER FAMMERiµCHYG U. MINI SZE RETAIL AD, RUNS. FEMNMS .BDA AFTERS9N 9R 1M£ AN GAME ANDS ONS. AD N/A NEDIRI FULL.MAiCHEC,DENSE GROWTH, %.$N.'G REE:CEM' 'GREEN SEN EYBRIp AN FRI SERRANO ALL RESP[ Rp X/A LM NLL/SYMMETRICAL IN NURSERY MYG/Cq PREMIUM SELECT Gg ME.SPECIMEN ENDS IEC. CON'ANEW PREMIUM SELECT SNARE: UPPINER TREE DUALITY,,SYMMETRICAL LL-WEDENSE GROWTH' WELL-RGOTEC: As ROOTED.AS NURSERY TAGGED ANO EIELC-ACCEPTED BY LANDSCAPE FIELD MAGENA DRAGO [R AD.TREE OR MA, NAME ANNIN CNRIYAW IHV N/A YFBV LOW ARCXIIECTEPTED BY LANDSLgPE gRCWTECT. O ACfdT IIGUSIRUN d 'TgONW'IINRIp 1W WW BPM'.ING RERUN RETORT IBD X/A ME111A NUMBER, I.WT READ HEDGE Q EYMM RAWN MtA M 1.11 BICE App DAN. KYF.T BER ER TNA N/A MENTUM df A.VpSfIFE UPROWE ARMANA ANSM BODNAR AN WE BURNING LPN FUGUE RO NA LGW gy p WERE MEA EARREA RNAN SWAN MLL'HWRIp RD WLP-RNNA UANRNA AM 1® N/A IM' FILL BIRDSEED A.,TREE FRAUD GR.NIAXA DADET AND TNM' AN LCE BRANCHING NENUM HEIGHT IBD N/A WDUM '9BGXT AND P.Y PINES CARWNA IFSR HEDGE wW¢.AME ,^ PaoGCIIM.Is.Atlll.MEN INE AS nbnoAXD IE,M AND RHI. x/A III{j',vl`L$ GROUND COVER PALETTE &GPy1l uTA AFRICAN TRP IRM TBD SYANDAND GESSMFN/SIX AD N/A MEDIA SIIBDL BOARD NAME ZDANDS NAYS URN.N. FAMARRNICXIXG 1. MINIMUM ASE RETAIL WE MASTS MARKS NI A LANISCOPE BACdARD PILUUBS 'EDEN PMNT HRPR) IH IMAGING GRAMANOWD TBD NA LSM FULL/SYMMETRICAL IN NURSERY AND. AD.,FDNT DRAM OCYSTE.91 CRRUNDCOYER CONTAINER: PREMIUM SELECT GRAGE, DEN BE G. WELL-ROOTED: AS iPRFAA ORPGN.O BNA TRWT AM AN EBANDAPD MNACAPA 1.AD N/A RESIGN FIELD-ACCEPTED BY LANDSCAPE (A1fl1NRpAE) A./ ARCW TECT ERMINDAT O LANTANA'.6A' RARE FLGRBAING AN SPRIGGINGGWIOCpyER TBG N/A U. IAN. NNG.LE4ER IMV.WA TIN INE FREE AS SIANDARD ANACAPA STREET IW N/A MEAN GCECINEAI IMMIR SERPENS NI MADMAKS AN SPREAGNG DEWWCO. 1W N/A 1. .AJXpCOyEA SHRUB PALETTE VINE PALETTE bTANIC NAME CRN.NAME CARBINES YAM/NSECHM6 Uff NAMED ARE CRALL R6 NAI RENARXS ®MAPONMUS'SNOW N.NAA.EYBRIE AD HRENM.FROM 4MIB RA N/A MINIMI EULL/AYM MEIRI CAL IN NURSERY GHBEL DR.'NNIf Pd IN.NAYS LMIMXER LANNOONCNA, 1. NIDRUM AM NERALIF MAULS %MARKS SI.1F LY-CP-ME-NAE IMIZOIAS %ANPN6 FEWESCRANERI PREMIUM SG. GRADE: NEEDED BUSSNAICRA BUNKR D ANNAT IH STAND NNE ME AS N/A ..IN NLL YMMETRICAL IN NURSERY SENSE GROWTH: B LLANDSCAP 45 NR / CONTAINER. PREMIUM SELECT GRADE. U MG-ACCEPTED By LANDSCAPE ®' ARCHITECT DENSE GRONrN WELL-NOO As E AIIFNUAIA AEGAIEfEi.L BD DISSIDENT 4MD N/A ISR FELD-ALCEPIEF BY LANDSCAPE VAAGAVE RANPN6 ARLHITEL i. f1.$PUYIIA LPRPWG f1G (I STARES NXf W011 S.FENING IBD X/A NfdUN MAW ILES PLANE 'BLUE EIANEXRRID AN GSSMENI S ABA 1. N/A WY AGAVE FYANPNGS TURF LAIANSRINA RSCA PULSARS IBD 91CLIAEHI 4MIB 1. N/A XEi III G %ANSN. LOW SAB. BOTANIC HOE ME& CAMBER FAMOENAHCXIHG I AS MINIMUM SNE DETAIL REF. RUESIS PEM.MS MANUAL AF TBD N/A RIRF GW PORK N/A ®WIIIECON ORBI.UTA'IKflY SHELL'HARD ASLHREM 41AUB IW N/A LPM 'IYLPY.ELL' %GS GP PIANTNGS NPX.BIA 'CAA i.15 IT. AS WINSOME, EARN AD N/A NUT LIB1Fp- MLCCCENCRSN'CAL MNSRBIA MNTNGS ANY LM YARI NPHERSIA FESCUE ME SEM AS .COAENI EANB IBA N/A MNY EOW RSSEA' MNTAG ®RVNCHEE CUTINS'FLAP YW NQ HRRIA AS SUCCULENT SHANNI RD N/A MIT U.- "0, PIDDLE PLANT RUNLESS AN IEUCCCENLN.S°P. IFUWEIBR. IBS READY SHRUB SAMA AD N/A LOW REWINDS %IiMPSAA 'MRETM® AWOL' AS WS.SNREB ... AS N/A X/A TWISTERS DWARF HUNAD%TIS'MB TUNELESS RAPHIRGAR® WICA 'CLANI HANDS NpAX RD WELOY SXRUR CLARA RD N/A NETIIN'TIARA' XAWRYAN PLANTN. 10.1 Newport Center Condominiums PLANTING PALETTE MW } W I I T M F I f xaxPert „�axgnP Wn.n 1. ss PA2014213 AVacM1ment PC3-Project Plana SOFT SUCCULENT PALATTE 59180E BOigNIC NpNE CCW.NAME 9II ifNN/Bi1NGWXG USE MINWGN e, OCTAL NEMS MY A. NKNUN OECWUN SONNOw S. Nt SUQUIFNi SUGCLLENI-WK W N/A L. NLL/SYMMETRICAL IN NURSERY 5MNLNST' H.U. GALW.. D.TNNER; PREMIUM SELECT GRADS: MASE GROAMO ASM-TAI LAN-NLL AND FREE W SCARRING AEDMOM VM. MWS XYNAL... pt SLDVYT SUSTOLDN-W, MY N/A LMY AS IFELGiACCEPTEU 9Y LANDSCAPE GA0.NL1pVFR ALM NAGUUTq soM HUE pt SLUMMIT suCMFNi-ule Ml N/A LGA GANON.. ALK VANSOATA IIQR ALM SUWJLFNT SUCCU.ENT-ulY LBp N/A L"GRDONDM FR CNI MKNIEA CCWACT Y PLMR W1 SUWRLNT SUCCIA.X-NIX IW ./A LGW YRINY'5 COMPACT DR.. COTYIFG..SINLATA 1MAY M K2 HYDRO #i SU LENT SUCLLLEM-WF 1® NJA LOW 1WAY YpL' PpS FpR GNCVXCCGVFR WKEYP.ITIQ:N CHAII{KN£YA' "l1 SUO3.T SUCfIAENi-MIX Ml N/A WRYLM ONDMI E[HEVV A OLM ROY' BLUE ROSE HYNNN I 01WJlpi NLCULFNI-NIX 1S0 MfA 1.HENS AND.11T GflNXGCOVER ECHEVERM%ERIE KN 'EERIE KH #1 111lu..i-.x 101 N/A 1. NUREMBERG NURENNEM HITAIG GRDUN GI. ECHV A ECXIAEN'DAUM VIM WM OLLI HYBRID gt SUONUIONT SUIXYLMT-NF . N/A L. LLOW NCHMWA GADONS.FN IRAPi.EuwA .OST RANTnt 01.T Su .1-WY . N/A L. PAM.A9ENSE GAWN0.'OVFR PA.rexrnu MDONSTOMI pt sJ..T sURULENI-NIX LSO ./A NOT LI OMRAUM GAdINO[OVEA L. You.RIRNESWE ITOWD A qt SLOYMOT SUCNI INIX 180 N/A 1. CANONNM ER yNPERNWN'Iffi.11, WZOS'HYMO #1 NCO.T NCCULLNT-MIX IW ./A 1. UW-F.-EVEN .,.,A YNPFflNwu YLRIFM' WRME YO A. i SOMMENT SULCKEN w 1W N/A LOW LINE-F/A-EVER GRKNGCGVIX LU.2 Newport Center Condominiums PLANTING PALETTE } W I W T M F W S xaxRert a�axgnP ).mss PA2014-213 Atta°Mnent PC 3-Project Plans PAVING LEGEND snaca uv .rt. Ow r vvac Omxrv.reo a.vN, OPoria w war Owwc voer"tx . REurtoawauNmoN P o sm.s.w.a vnI .1 11 lll�NIo vaN "`N rrz WALL LEGEND. iry ��\i 1 _ m j swrea xry its.Twu,ry m. � O w"reu cTw TP. NP. TP. .rv.RU W. L m 'C sre �II l /n�y 'g ag —� I O ss TMP ssnT wnu FIFE:167.50 w.a At ,IH,RNM ,rP I n o ,YP t 9' I m Cf%puNPIlOW nemw well I O SITE FURNISHING LEGEND O -� • • • • • - I sa u. rauwW 'T O t I I rro. n o m ror � ax w �ws°wfavwR O ivAmNre�w coaa�vw�ae°.. wav"n cownneo aww mem a asx2cmxu.ww. rr°. m LLo � O msrv.m urz o 0 x O ca"Ru N m .ciENT v rs n: x NO0.14 � L1.0 NewportCenterCondominiums LAYOUT AND MATERIALS PLAN } P L R T N E R 5 PA2014-213 ARacM1men,PC 3-Project Plans TREE PALETTE HEDGE PALETTE wwuo EEMIEI„u „TM I I.ME .I. EYEENEEFEEM.a SITE STATE ems,. oowom IRI sw,,"vssELL oi'rcPA°�eo roo„w aw,mw num ,w. w.. P ._.. .._.._.._.._.._.. .._.._.._.._.. ._.. GROUND COVER PALETTE .. .. .. .. .. .. . _.._.. _._ _.. .._. w moi U —.. o „®n . _.._.._.._.._ _.._.._.._.. ______ ._.._.. o.„, rorov / is sun a,w.„M �. o ,Iw .N e SHRUB PALETTE SOFT SUCCULENT PALETTE ®AE. w v:aITE.Hre ®MME „M. 'TERM IIA.11 I `� oFFE:167.50 -- ®.: -,w IER ,�,[,� "a EI ®° �w�a.,. Al.a n� i ®;mM,,..w,. 11.R, �n 1. ®N.-w m E. a. „. ® . N „w � -,s�E . t �,...w� �,.a, .wm,.. wELE,. „u.„.wnwm ,. EEEEMEH...1 E.1 Mtµa„� -. wERCE- JE.-K„ wa'�°a'w. �ewv.re.n ® ..„..� a,�ro. o wN z ELCUI „” o eNrtuertuP ®uamw .00 .„ w m„s ® taws w .wNm¢rvauoEacroaz ow to ” VINE PALETTE w :_,: ♦vaurtcnfauwu� °Ii� K w p LLo �se w mmes.eewoo O o O d7771 wnL p 1— ®IIu .xNu WCPS L oF[KK J 2 w TURF `^ :, .x„.vo.. LEM-rro.E04 o ,a ,: s, ,:„ .TH L2.0 :c'A^•`a "•^'• ,,,,.. ` nv, N?: en[er Condominiums PLANTING PLAN } P L R T N E R 5 n o° a n n ewv._s Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6a: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: October 8, 2015 Planning Commission Agenda Item 6 Study Session (Newport Center Villas) 150 Newport Center Drive Dear Planning Commissioners: As a 27 year resident of Corona del Mar I have serious concerns regarding the proposed development you will be discussing on October 8, 2015. Although well-intentioned by the applicant, the proposed General Plan and Zoning Amendments, which are necessary to construct a seven-story structure on a relatively small car wash site, are a considerable departure from the intent of the City's General Plan, specifically Policies LU 6.14.4 Development Scale and LU 6.14.5 Urban form. Not only is the project proposal tantamount to illegal "spot zoning," if approved the project would set a dangerous precedent toward proliferation of high-rise structures and a significant increase in the building mass and density within this low-scale section of Newport Center. Prior to further consideration of the proposed precedent-setting project, I respectfully request that the City conduct a comprehensive General Plan Amendment/Zoning Amendment and environmental analysis to evaluate the existing and potential development pattern of this area within Newport Center. The analysis should include, but not be limited to, building heights/mass, desired uses, density, traffic/circulation, and all related environmental impacts that could result from intensification of this area. Please keep in mind that once the City approves a project that deviates to this extent from the existing development pattern in Newport Center,there is no going back. Sincerely, Carolyn Martin 3420 E.Third Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6b: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) 10 IRVINE COMPANY Since 1864 DECEIVED 9y September 29, 2015 COMMUNITY OCT 0 5 2015 City of Newport Beach Attn: Makana Nova, Associate Planner Cif DEVELOPMENT 100 Civic Center Drive OP NEwPoRI Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Newport Center Villas Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments Dear Ms. Nova: Irvine Company would like to provide the following comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration(PA2014-213)for Newport Center Villas in Block 100 of Newport Center. It should be noted that Special Land Use Restrictions (SLURS) exist between Irvine Company and Beacon Bay Enterprises, Inc. Furthermore, it is important that the record for this proposed project indicates an easement for ingress/egress only along the southern boundary of the proposed project which provides access to Block 100 from Anacapa. The easement is established through a grant deed recorded in February 1992. The easement is not affected by the SLUR termination date and the easement restrictions will remain in effect. The MND Circulation Analysis(Appendix F-2) identifies the intended use of the ingress/egress drive south of the project for parking of moving trucks and trash truck pick-ups during their operations. The Circulation Analysis states trash trucks will be unable to access the subterranean parking area and will park in the Anacapa access road while scout trucks retrieve the trash bins. It is also stated that moving trucks would park here during loading and unloading. Irvine Company disagrees that moving van parking, loading/unloading and trash collection are permitted uses for ingress/egress drive aisles on the roadway south of the project. The road is for the exclusive purpose of providing vehicle access to and from the properties within Block 100 and is not designed to accommodate moving and trash vehicle operations and other anticipated uses such as repair and maintenance vehicles. Reliance on private property is inappropriate. The Anacapa entrance to Block 100 is an important site access and delivery and utility trucks will be disruptive and potentially dangerous. 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.720.2000 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6b: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) Construction operations including staging have not been addressed in the MND. No information is provided in terms of where construction equipment will be located and where construction vehicles will be parked,the proposed routes for hauling of debris and delivery of materials and how construction activities will be kept off adjacent properties, including parking lot areas. The MND should include a detailed construction phasing plan including identifying duration of street closures. Street closures around holidays would be particularly disruptive. During construction of the proposed project,there should be no use of any portion of Block 100, in particular the Anacapa access road, for any construction-related activities including worker parking. Conclusion Irvine Company believes the MND lacks necessary detail to determine the significance of some environmental impacts. We would be happy to meet with the City and the applicant to discuss these issues to resolve the potential impacts. Thank you for this opportunity to provide the City with comments on the MND. Sincerely, Dan Miller Senior Vice President Entitlement and Public Affairs Cc: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director Subject: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED - PC MEETING - OCTOBER 8, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION —OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6c: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Jim Warren fmaiIto:iimsandrawarren(dmac.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 11:52 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Newport Center Villas Residential Project October 6, 2015 11:51 am To the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission: The area in question was designed for restricted density and zoned for lower level office buildings. There are no exterior lighted signs and no lights left on in the buildings after 5:30 pm except for safety and maintenance purposes. The proposed structure would call for a zoning change for the entire area. The established site line will have been penetrated. With this change, this particular area extending from Newport Center Circle down to Pacific Coast Highway, and from MacArthur Blvd. to Newport Center Drive would become open for high rise development, unacceptable increases in traffic, noise pollution, light pollution, and extended building heights. The hundreds of homes on the hills that bound Corona del Mar on the south side of MacArthur Blvd. will be greatly impacted by increases in traffic, noise, night light pollution and most importantly the loss of views. Most people think that only the homes facing southwest towards the Pacific Ocean and Catalina Island are view properties and enjoy sunsets. This is partially a true statement. Most of the other homes on the hills of Corona del Mar face northwest and share and have a different ocean view, a view of Long Beach, and a view all of the wonderful sunsets that occur during the wintertime or the other half of the year. Considering this, the impact of changing the height limitations of a building greatly impacts the site lines of hundreds of homes in the immediate area. Night light pollution is even worse. When tall buildings above the sight line are allowed, the problem never goes away at night. Living spaces are uncontrolled because people never leave— they live there. Office buildings are different because people go home after work. Not only are the proposed units illuminated, but the entire building is lighted on the outside for aesthettic purposes. The roof will also be lit because it is designed to be a recreation area. This will be above the proposed building height. i In a meeting with Tod Ridgeway and Barry Allen, I brought up the problem of night light pollution in our community. My suggestion to Tod was to rent three to five portable lighting machines whose poles would extend to the height limit of the building. They would all be run on electric generators. All lights would face the homes in our area (Harbor View Hills, Harbor View Broadmoor I, and Harbor View Broadmoor Il) and run for three consecutive nights. Then everyone involved would know the answer. Tod said, "No, that would not be possible." Barry's suggestion was to use a drone and shine a light from the building height towards our affected neighborhoods. Tod would have his people come to our homes and video with a computer to show us how we would not be affected by the height of his building. A person did come to our home in the daytime and took a video from our back yard. Some of my other neighbors tentatively agreed and then later said "no". The drone thing fell apart because all of my neighbors believe that a small light on a drone could not simulate the large amount of light that this building will produce. With the massive development of the new apartment complex in Newport Center by Jamboree, I find it difficult to believe that additional housing would even considered in the Newport Center area. This is the only car wash within five miles. The car wash is believed to be a part of the original plan for the development of Newport Center. We are asking that the Newport Center Villas Residential Project be denied approval. Jim and Sandra Warren 1201 Surfline Way Corona del Mar, CA 2 Subject: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED - PC MEETING - OCTOBER 8, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION—OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6d: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014213) ---Original Message----- From:Jack Hunter[mailto:iackthunter(@icloud.com] Sent:Tuesday, October 06, 2015 12:13 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Newport Center Villas Project-Opposition Makena: Thanks to your office for soliciting formal comments from affected homeowners on this proposed new project. My house overlooks this site from the Harbor View Broadmoor community. I am opposed to the height of this new residential building because in my opinion it is too high for that location and will not be in harmony with surrounding low rise structures. I also think that a residence building that tall will create too much night-time light pollution. Current businesses in that area shut down after normal work hours and don't generate too much light/noise after that time. Thanks, JH Jack Hunter 1215 Goldenrod Avenue Corona del Mar CA 92625 949/644-6151 1 Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION —OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. Be: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Carolyn Martin [mailto:cmartin4cdmftahoo.corn Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 9:37 AM To: Nova, Makana; Kramer, Kory; Brown, Tim; Koetting, Peter; Hillgren, Bradley; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; Zak, Peter Cc: Wisneski, Brenda Subject: Re: PC Agenda Item 6 - 10/8/2015 (Newport Center Villas) 150 Newport Center Drive Good morning, Planning Commissioners and Makana: In addition to the letter I forwarded yesterday regarding the proposed Newport Center Villas, I also want to clarify that I disagree with the findings of"no potential significance" under Sections X (b) Land Use Planning and XVIII (b)Mandatory Findings of Significance in the MND prepared for the proposed project. The proposed project at this location is inconsistent with the General Plan which requires the City to "Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway." The General Plan specifies "lower rise buildings and uses to the south and west" of Newport Center, and sets forth Policies LU 6.14.4 and LU 6.14.5 to ensure this intent. As proposed the seven-story height and mass of the project, to be located within a low-scale area of Newport Center, will create a significant impact by changing the expressly intended building pattern and producing growth inducing effects. Therefore, an EIR should be prepared for the proposed project. And more importantly, any General Plan and Zoning Amendments for one project at this location should be approved only if the City decides that this type of deviation from the General Plan is desirable throughout this particular area of Newport Center. Thank you for your consideration, Carolyn Martin From: "Nova, Makana" <MNova(cDnewportbeachca.gov> To: 'Carolyn Martin' <cmartin4cdm(a).vahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 6:45 PM Subject: RE: PC Agenda Item 6- 10/8/2015 (Newport Center Villas) 150 Newport Center Drive Carolyn, Thank you for your comments and I will make sure they are distributed to the Planning Commission for the meeting on Thursday. I'd also like to make sure you are aware that a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and is currently within the public comment period which closes tomorrow, October 7, 2015. The 1 document is available online through the following link and hard copies are also available at City Hall and the public libraries: htti)://www.newl)ortbeachca.gov/qovernment/departments/community-development/planning- division/projects-environmental-document-download-paae/environmental-document-download-page Please feel free to contact me if you have questions regarding this project. Thank you, Msksa•.c NoVs I ASSOCIATE PLANNER, AICP Planning Division I Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive I Newport Beach, CA 92660 P. 949.644.3249 mnova0newportbeachca.aov www.newportbeachca.gov From: Carolyn Martin fmailto:cmartin4cdm(tDvahoo.coml Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 4:38 PM To: Kramer, Kory; Brown, Tim; Koetting, Peter; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; pzak(cr-newportca.gov Cc: Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana Subject: PC Agenda Item 6- 10/8/2015 (Newport Center Villas) 150 Newport Center Drive Good afternoon, Planning Commissioners: Please review the attached correspondence with regard to the subject study session you will be conducting this Thursday evening. Thank you for your time and consideration of the proposed project and the input you receive from community members. Sincerely, Carolyn Martin 3420 E. Third Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 2 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting Attachments: SPON comments on NPT Center Villas -Final.pdf From: Cynthia Kellman [mailto:cpk(acbcearthlaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:38 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Newport Center Villas Residential Project; (PA2014-213), etc. Dear Ms. Nova, Attached please find a letter from Michelle Black, regarding the above-listed subject, for your review. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, Cynthia Kellman Chatten-Brown & Carstens 2200 Pacific Coast Highway, Ste. 318 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Tel: 310-798-2400 x6 Fax: 310-798-2402 i Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) Hermosa Beach Officef By Michelle Black Phone: (310) 798-2400 Email Address: Fax: (310) 798-2402 Chatten-Brown & Carstens LLP mnb@cbcearthlaw.com San Diego Office 2200 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 318 Phone: (858) 999-0070 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Direct Phone: Phone: (619) 940-4522 www.cbcearthlaw.com 310-798-2400 Ext. 5 October 6, 2015 Via Email mnova(d)newportbeachca.Qov Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Makana Nova, AICP, Associate Planner Community Development Department Planning Division City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Newport Center Villas Residential Project; (PA2014-213); General Plan Amendment No. GP2014-003; Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2014-008; Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2014-004; Site Development Review No. SD2014-006; Tract Map No. NT2015-003 Dear Ms. Nova and Honorable Members of the Planning Commission: These comments are submitted on behalf of Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON) regarding the Newport Center Villas Residential Project ("Project"). Founded in 1974, SPON is a non-profit public education organization dedicated to protecting and preserving the residential and environmental qualities of Newport Beach. The Project would construct 49 condominiums in a single seven-story building with three levels of subterranean parking on 1.26 acres located at the southwest comer of Newport Center Drive and Anacapa Drive. As proposed, the Project would conflict with the General Plan's designation of Regional Commercial Office, the Zoning Code district designation of Office Regional Commercial, the requirement that a Planned Community Development Plan cover 10 acres, and the existing height limit for the site. Consequently, the Project cannot be built unless the City grants amendments to both the General Plan and Zoning Code as well as a waiver of the Planned Community Development Plan requirements. Despite these conflicts with the City's governing planning documents and code, the mitigated negative declaration (MND) prepared for the purpose of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) inexplicably finds that the Project will not Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 2 of 11 have significant impacts on land use or any other potential area of environmental impact. (See, e.g, MND pp. 4-58 to 4-63.) The MND also fails to adequately disclose and mitigate the Project's likely impacts on aesthetics, nighttime lighting and glare, traffic, and air quality, and land use. As a fair argument exists that the Project will cause significant environmental impacts, the City must prepare an EIR that provides alternatives to the Project. The Newport Center Villas Project fails to comply with the City's governing land use plans and policies, and SPON respectfully requests that the Planning Commission withhold approval of the MND and deny the applicant's request for a Planned Community Development waiver for the Project. I. A Planned Community Development Plan is Inappropriate and Unnecessary for the Project. Planned Community Development Districts (PCDs) are governed by Newport Beach Zoning Code section 2.56.010, and exist to "provide for the development of land as coordinated, comprehensive projects in order to take advantage of the superior environment resulting from large-scale community planning." Further, "A Planned Community is intended to include various types of uses, consistent with the General Plan through the adoption of a development plan that identifies land use relationships." Thus, the PCD should be used to ensure consistency with existing land use plans and to provide more cohesive community planning in compliance with SB 375. For this reason, PCDs must exceed 10 acres in size. The Newport Center Villas Project application claims to "ensure substantial compliance with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code," but fails utterly to do so. While a 10-acre or larger parcel may require planning flexibility to achieve feasibility and consistency with surrounding land uses, there is no reason why a 1.26-acre parcel needs to employ the PCD to provide for a coordinated, comprehensive Project. Instead, the Applicant appears to be misusing the PCD designation to skirt regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code intended to provide consistency in land use planning. Although the Project is located in the southern section of Newport Center, which is governed by height limits, the Project would be seven stories tall and reach a height of 83 feet, 6 inches once rooftop appurtenances are included. An additional two feet in height are permissible for"architectural rooftop features." Allowing an 83-foot-tall building in the southern section of Newport Center would create a significant change to the existing overall plan for Newport Center. Such a large change, which no doubt would become precedent for future developments in the area, should not be undertaken with a waiver of the area limits for a PCD and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 3 of 11 The Project also fails to fulfill the purpose of the PCD, Zoning Code section 20.56.010 and other zoning laws that require consideration of the relationship of the proposed development plan to the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan because the Project is inconsistent with the General Plan. The applicant proposes a Planned Community Development District for the Project in an "effort to ensure broader coordination and consistency with the surrounding neighborhoods, and to include a higher level of architectural quality supporting the Newport Center environment with pedestrian connectivity." This language is meaningless, misleading, and misrepresents the Project contained in the application. Instead of providing for greater consistency, this Project would be five to six stories higher than surrounding buildings; it could not be less consistent with its surroundings. The Project would also completely change the appearance of the neighborhood. In addition to the change in height, the building is much bulkier and provides for less open space and smaller setbacks than surrounding parcels. The result is that the Project would change the visual characteristics of the area from an area of low- rise commercial and office space with considerable landscaping and large setbacks to an area more representative of central city mass, bulk, and height. An example of the change in building intensity is the Project's proposal for three stories of underground parking. Underground parking has not yet been requested in the southern, low-rise section of Newport Center because it is not needed under the existing lower-intensity land uses provided by the City's governing land use plans. If the City intends to increase the intensity and density of uses in the southern portion of Newport Center, it can only do so with the adoption of a full-scale General Plan Land Use Amendment for the southerly portion of Newport Center between Newport Center Drive and Pacific Coast Highway. Granting the Project's application for a PCD for a Project that is up to six stories higher and much more intense in use than surrounding properties, based on a policy of ensuring land use consistency, undermines the integrity of the PCD District and the Newport Beach Zoning Code. The Project's application for a PCD must be denied. II. The Project is Inconsistent with the General Plan's Land Use Element. All projects approved in a city must be consistent with the general plan and its elements. "The general plan is atop the hierarchy of local government law regulating land use." (Neighborhood Action Group v. County of Calaveras (1984) 156 Ca1.App.3d 1176, 1183.) For this reason, the General Plan has been described "the constitution for future development." (DeVita v. Napa (1995) 9 CalAth 763, 773, internal citations omitted.) The Newport Center Villas Project is inconsistent with several policies of the City's Land Use Element and cannot be approved. Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 4 of 11 Policy LU 1.6 of the Land Use Element requires the City to "Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic and visual resources that include open space, mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from public vantage points." Regarding the Project's 83-foot-plus height, the MND states, "The Project's architectural design is complementary in type, form, scale, and character with existing and proposed surrounding land uses." (MND p. 4-59.) In support, the MND points to the high-rise buildings in the upper/northerly portion of Newport Center. However, these taller buildings with which the Project would be consistent are not actually located near the Project. In order to protect views consistent with the policies of the Land Use Element, the plans for Newport Center have always provided for higher rise buildings to the north along San Joaquin Hills Road with gradually decreasing heights toward the ocean and low-rise buildings abutting Pacific Coast Highway and nearby neighborhoods. The placement of an 83-foot-tall building in an area of low-rise development would block important public views of scenic resources. For example, views of the Pacific from Fashion Island would be compromised. Thus, the Project is inconsistent with General Plan policies designed to protect and enhance such views. Policy LU 6.14.4 of the Land Use Element is focused on reinforcing "the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevation toward the southwesterly edge along Pacific Coast Highway." (MND p. 4-61.) However, as described above, the Project proposes to place a seven-story building in the southwesterly section of Newport Center. At this site, only a low-rise Project would be consistent with the City's Land Use Element and General Plan. As proposed, the Newport Center Villas Project is inconsistent with at least two policies of the City's Land Use Element and General Plan and cannot be approved in its current form. I11. The Project Will Have Significant Adverse Impacts Not Disclosed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), in Violation of CEQA. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) serves two basic, interrelated functions: ensuring environmental protection and encouraging governmental transparency. (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564.) In connection with the Project's review under CEQA, the City has prepared an initial study and mitigated negative declaration. A lead agency prepares an initial study in order to determine whether an EIR, a negative declaration, or an MND is the appropriate environmental review document. (14 CCR § 15365, herein "CEQA Guidelines".) The initial study must consider whether any aspect of a project, either Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 5 of 11 individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant adverse impact. (CEQA Guidelines § 15063(b)(1).) The purpose of the initial study is to provide the lead agency with adequate information regarding a project to determine the appropriate environmental review document and "documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a negative declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment." (Ctr.for Sierra Nevada Conservation v. County of El Dorado (2012) 202 Cal. App. 4th 1156, 1170, citations omitted.) There must be a basis within the record to support the conclusions reached by the initial study. (Lighthouse Field Beach Rescue v. City of Santa Cruz (2005) 131 Cal.App.4`h 1170, 1201.) "Where an agency. . . fails to gather information and undertake an adequate environmental analysis in its initial study, a negative declaration is inappropriate." (El Dorado County Taxpayers for Quality Growth v. County of El Dorado (2004) 122 Cal. App. 4th 1591, 1597, citations omitted.) Failure to adequately analyze all of a project's potentially significant impacts or provide evidence to support conclusions reached in the initial study is a failure to comply with the law. Further, when a fair argument exists that a Project will have a significant environmental impact, an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared. With regard to the Newport Center Villas Project, the City has failed to prepare a legally adequate initial study, improperly omitting consideration of potentially significant Project impacts and lacking evidentiary support for claims that Project impacts would be insignificant. This is particularly true regarding the Project's impacts on land use and aesthetics as a fair argument exists that the Project will have significant impacts on land use and other areas, and an EIR is required. 1. Adverse Impacts on Land Use. Where a local or regional policy of general applicability, such as an ordinance, is adopted in order to avoid or mitigate environmental effects, a conflict with that policy in itself indicates a potentially significant impact on the environment. (Pocket Protectors v. Sacramento (2005) 124 Cal.AppAth 903.) Indeed, any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable land use plans must be discussed in an EIR. (14 CCR § 15125(d); City of Long Beach v. Los Angeles Unif. School Dist. (2009) 176 Cal. App. 4th 889, 918; Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water Agency (2003) 108 Cal. App. 4th 859, 874 (EIR inadequate when Lead Agency failed to identify relationship of project to relevant local plans).) A Project's inconsistencies with local plans and policies constitute significant impacts under CEQA. (Endangered Habitats League, Inc. v. County of Orange (2005) 131 Cal.AppAth 777, 783-4, 32 Cal.Rptr.3d 177; see also, County of El Dorado v. Dept. of Transp. (2005) 133 Cal.AppAth 1376 (fact that a project may be consistent with a plan, such as an air plan, does not necessarily mean that it does not have significant impacts).) Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 6 of 11 As discussed above, the Newport Center Villas Project conflicts with at least two policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Policies LU 1.6 and LU 6.14.4. However, instead of properly admitting these inconsistencies and redesigning the Project for consistency, the MND distorts its description of the existing conditions at Newport Center in order to claim consistency. This violates the spirit of CEQA. "The fundamental goals of environmental review under CEQA are information, participation, mitigation, and accountability." (Lincoln Place Tenants Assn. v. City of L.A. (2007) 155 Cal.AppAth 425, 443-444.) These significant environmental impacts on land use require preparation of an EIR. CEQA requires full disclosure of a project's significant environmental effects so that decision-makers and the public are informed of these consequences before the project is approved, to ensure that government officials are held accountable for these consequences. (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn of San Francisco v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) Moreover, these significant land use impacts trigger the threshold for requiring preparation of an EIR. This EIR must properly disclose, analyze, and mitigate the Project's significant impacts on land use. As mentioned briefly above, the Project's proposal to use a Planned Community Development District to provide for changes in zoning that include changes in use and increased height and mass is inappropriate. At 1.26 acres in size, the Project is less than the 10 acres in size required for use of a PCD. Additionally, the Project fails to meet the requirements for a waiver of the 10-acre minimum. Therefore, any proposed use of the waiver and PGD for this Project would create a significant land use impact that must be analyzed in an EIR. By applying zone and other land use changes to a small, 1.26-acre area within the City, the Project is also an example of"spot zoning." This applicant requests a land use change to a land use that differs from that provided for surrounding parcels. Spot zoning is discouraged by the courts because it thwarts comprehensive land use planning. "Case- by-case reconsideration of regional land-use policies, in the context of a project-specific EIR, is the very antithesis of that goal." (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 572 -573.) This spot zoning is another significant land use impact that must be considered in an EIR. The Proposed spot-zoning also implicates the Project's potentially significant cumulative impacts. An EIR is required to analyze the Project's potential for cumulative impacts related to land use planning in the Newport Center region. As defined by CEQA, "The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 7 of 11 can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time." (CEQA Guidelines § 15355(b).) The cumulative impacts analysis exists to prevent cities from considering projects in a vacuum and to avoid a piecemeal approach to project decision-making. The Court of Appeal has stated than an improper cumulative impact analysis "avoids analyzing the severity of the problem and allows approval of projects which, when taken in isolation, appear insignificant but when viewed together, appear startling." (Kings County Farm Bureau, supra 221 Cal.App.3d at pp. 739-740). This Project sets a precedent for relaxing height limitations in an area that has been developed with primarily two-story buildings. If approved, the Project would also set a precedent for permitting use of PCDs to avoid existing land use restrictions for parcels as small as 1.26 acres in size. An EIR is required to analyze the impacts of relaxed height limits, spot zoning, and increases in bulk, mass, and resulting population growth in the Newport Center area. 2. Adverse Impacts on Aesthetics. CEQA requires consideration of impacts to public views. (Ocean View Estates Homeowners Assn, Inc. v. Montecito Water Dist. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 396.) The Project's height in excess of 83 feet would result in blocked views of the Pacific Ocean from Fashion Island, as well as likely cumulative impacts as nearby properties seek to use PCDs and other means to evade height and bulk restrictions in the area. Despite these potential impacts to public views, which require disclosure, analysis, and mitigation in an EIR, the MND fails to acknowledge that the Newport Center Villas Project will have any significant impacts on views. (MND p. 4-4.) This conclusion is not supported by substantial evidence. Rather, a fair argument exists that the Project will result in significant adverse impacts to views. This project will affect public and private views from Harbor View neighborhoods situated along MacArthur Blvd. as well as public roadways. Those situated in these areas will see lighted buildings and a much taller skyline when looking toward the ocean, resulting in obscured ocean views. In order to protect the City's treasured views, the City of Newport Beach adopted a Sight Plane Ordinance in 1971 (Ordinance 137 1) which provided height limitations for buildings within the Civic Center sites, known as the "Civic Center Sight Plane." The Corporate Plaza Planned Community, Ordinance 1496, was adopted in 1975 for the Civic Center site, bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, Avocado Avenue, Farallon Drive, and Newport Center Drive. Pursuant to this Sight Plane, buildings within this area are limited to 32 feet in height. The Project site is immediately adjacent to the Corporate Plaza Planned Community subject to the Sight Plane Ordinance. In addition to providing for Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 8 of 11 inconsistent land use, the Project's 83-foot-height will also result in impacts to these Sight Planes. The MND repeatedly compares the Project to buildings located in taller portions of Newport Center in order to obscure its inconsistency with the heights of other buildings in the southern portion of the development. The height of existing structures in the vicinity of this Project are: • Office buildings to the southwest: approximately 24 feet to 27 feet; • Buildings directly across Anacapa Drive to the east: 2-3 stories; • Buildings located to the north across Newport Center Drive: 23 -25 feet; • Height limits for Block 100 are 50 feet although current buildings are lower. Thus, the MND's comparison to the higher-rise buildings located in the northern part of Newport Center is misleading, at best. The Newport Center Villas Project is proposed for the southerly section of Newport Center heretofore planned as low-rise in order to maintain a Sight Plane consistent with views toward the ocean and surrounding neighborhoods. Any development to the contrary will result in significant adverse impacts on both aesthetics and land use that must be disclosed, analyzed, and mitigated in an EIR. The MND further fails to provide view simulations from public viewpoints that could be adversely impacted by the Project. A view simulation from the public park next to Macy's (and the escalators) in Fashion Island should also be provided. The public view south from this outlook, toward the ocean and directly over the existing carwash, would be dominated by the proposed Project's 83-foot-tower. This significant aesthetic impact must be disclosed to the public. Finally, the Project will create new sources of substantial light and glare which would adversely affect day and nighttime views in areas surrounding Newport Center. Nighttime lighting emanating from the building and its condominiums will be the first nighttime lighting to impact residents living east and west of the Project site. An FIR must also study the cumulative impacts of nighttime lighting if other neighboring parcels follow the City's proposed precedent of increased height and change of use in and around Newport Center. 3. Adverse Impacts on Traffic. Although construction of the Project would generate traffic associated with grading and workers, the MND contains no discussion of what these traffic impacts might be, whether they are significant, or whether they require mitigation. Considering that the Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 9 of 11 MND estimates over 250 workers would be required and 51,600 cubic yards of soil would be removed for the subterranean garage, this is a significant omission. (See MND p. 3-1.) If trucks with a capacity of 10 cubic yards are used to remove soil, 5,160 two- way trips to the site would be required. These traffic impacts may adversely affect air quality. Most large trucks used to haul dirt and demolition debris are fueled by diesel. Diesel particulate matter has been recognized as a probably carcinogen by the California Air Resources Board and is correlated with premature death, heart attacks, and acute pulmonary distress. Although temporary, these impacts must be evaluated and would likely be considered significant. CEQA requires the analysis of temporary construction impacts. (City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (2006) 135 Cal.AppAth 1392, 1425.) 4. Adverse Impacts on Air Quality. The Air Quality analysis prepared for the Project and enclosed as Appendix B to the MND is based on inaccurate information and an underestimation of the truck trips required to construct the Project, the Project's floor surface area, and the presence idling mobile sources. This underestimation results in the MND's failure to adequately disclose, analyze, and mitigate the Project's adverse impacts on air quality. The number of haul truck trips required for the demolition of the existing carwash, entered into the CaIEEMod model to estimate construction air quality impacts is understated. The MND states that demolition would produce approximately 80 tons of debris, 240 cubic yards of concrete, and 620 cubic yards of asphalt that would need to be hauled away. Assuming a weight of 1 ton per cubic yard and 20 yards per truck, the demolition would require approximately 47 truck trips, far in excess of the 8 truck trips assumed by the air quality analysis. If 10 cubic yard trucks are used to remove debris, the demolition would require 94 truck trips. The air quality analysis must be revised to accurately account for the environmental impacts of debris removal. If these impacts are significant, an EIR is required. Additionally, the "Floor Surface Area"used in CalEEMod to calculate the Project's emissions is incorrect. The MND states that the gross floor area of the proposed project is 163,260 square feet. (MND p. 3-1.) However, the surface area used in the CalEEMod analysis was 50,400 square feet, a much smaller number. The erroneous inclusion of this smaller number in the CalEEMod analysis cascades to inaccurate estimates of emissions from construction, architectural coatings, and operations and results in the MND's underestimation of the Project's overall construction and operational emissions. Thus, the air quality mitigation measures proposed in the MND are insufficient to mitigate the Project's emissions. An EIR should be prepared that thoroughly analyzes the Project's construction and operational emissions using accurate Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 10 of 11 inputs. Further, feasible, enforceable, and effective mitigation must be provided for all of the construction and operation emissions identified in the revised analysis. The air quality analysis concludes that the proposed Project does not include stationary sources and mobile sources that may idle for long periods of time. (Appendix B, p. 29.) Consequently, the MND and air quality analysis provide no operational Localized Significance Threshold (LST) analysis. Regardless, operational LST is required for this Project. Condo/Townhouse projects are listed in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology LST guidance document (Table 3.1) (revised July 2008) as projects which require LST analysis. (See, SCAQMD LST document, available at hqp://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/cega/handbook/localized-signifi cance- thresholds/final-1st-methodology-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2.) Given the air quality analysis' underestimation of Project emissions, the MND's conclusion that the Project will not have an adverse impact on air quality lacks substantial evidence. Instead, it is likely that the Project will exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for significant air quality impacts. An EIR that fully evaluates and mitigates the Project's air quality impacts is required. 5. Population and Growth-Inducing Impacts. City approval of the Newport Center Villas Project would set a precedent for a change of use to high-density housing in the area. This may have a potentially significant effect if surrounding property owners seek permits for similar projects with increased height, bulk, mass and change in use. The MND's failure to analyze this change is unsupported. The Project's population and growth-inducing impacts must be analyzed in an EIR. 6. Adverse Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impact analysis is important because "One of the most important environmental lessons evident from past experience is that environmental damage often occurs incrementally from a variety of small sources." (Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford(1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 720.) While the City has included a list of cumulative projects in the MND, this list is limited to those that are foreseeable under the current zoning and General Plan. This analysis omits any discussion of the precedent- setting nature of this Project, which would permit spot-zoning and use of a PDC to evade height and other limitations that would otherwise apply to the Project site. The Project sets a whole new precedent for heights in the lower Newport Center area. The adjacent properties in Block 100 are limited to 50 feet in height but are currently only 22 feet tall. Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6f: Additional Materials Received City of Newport Beach Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 6, 2015 Page 11 of 11 The properties immediately adjacent to Block 100 to the south are currently limited in height by the Sight Plane Ordinance. The City's proposed precedent could result in these height limits being lifted at any time, resulting in significant new growth, mass, bulk and height inconsistent with surrounding neighborhood that has not been analyzed under CEQA or in connection with the City's Land Use Element or other planning documents. The cumulative impacts analysis is therefore incomplete, as there is substantial likelihood that the increase in bulk, mass and heights of the Project will set a precedent for new applications of similar size and impact. In San Franciscans for Reasonable Growth v. City and County of San Francisco (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 61, the Court of Appeal found that, absent meaningful cumulative analysis, there would never be any awareness or control over the speed and manner of development in downtown San Francisco. In that case, the court found the city's refusal to take into account other similar development projects to be a violation of CEQA. (Id. at 634.) "Without that control, `piecemeal development would inevitably cause havoc in virtually every aspect of the urban environment."' (Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford(1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 720.) Similarly, without adequate cumulative analysis of the City's disregard for existing height and bulk limitations in Newport Center, the City will lose control over development of the area. Conclusion Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Due to the Newport Center Villas Project's failure to comply with the City's General Plan and other governing land use documents and the MND's failure to adequately disclose, analyze, and mitigate the Project's likely significant impacts on land use, aesthetics, traffic, and air quality, among others, we respectfully request that the Commission reject this Project until it is revised to comply with CEQA and the governing land use plans and policies. Compliance with CEQA will require preparation of an adequate EIR that analyzes alternatives to the seven-story residential building proposed. We look forward to reviewing the applicant's revised plans for this Project and to the Commission's action to preserve the integrity of the City of Newport Beach's planning process. Sincerely, Michelle N. Black, on behalf of Stop Polluting Our Newport Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting Attachments: Newport Villas Comment Letter.pdf From: Debbie Stevens [mailto:dstevensCcbenvaudit.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 12:55 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Comments on Newport Center Villas MND Makana: Attached herewith are my comments on the Newport Center Villas MND. Thank you for your consideration. Debbie Stevens t Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) Debbie Stevens 1120 Sea Lane Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 October 7, 2015 Makana Nova City of Newport Beach Planning Division 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Comments on Newport Center Villas Residential Project Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Nova: I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the Newport Center Villas Residential Project Negative Declaration. I would like to thank you for extending the public comment period but adequate public comment was not provided. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for a 20-day comment period on September 11, 2015, which is the minimum allowable time for the review of a MND under CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 CCR §15105(b)). MNDs that require review by state agencies must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse with a minimum review period of 30-days ((Title 14 CCR §15105(b)). On page 3-8 of the Newport Villas MND, it is stated that "The Project would require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) because NPDES permits apply to construction sites of one acre of more (CA RWQCB, n.d., p.9) and Project construction would disturb more than one acre of land." The RWQCB is a state agency, therefore: (1) the Newport Villas Project requires a permit from a state agency; (2) the MND must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review; and (3) a minimum 30-day review period is required per (Title 14 CCR §15105(b)). At the heart of CEQA, is the requirement for public participation and review. A full 30-day comment period should have been provided for an approximately 900 page CEQA document. I have the following comments on the MND. 1. Figures 2-2 and 2-3 are illegible. 2. Section 4.5.1 Aesthetics, pages 4-17 through 4-19. The MND provides view simulations from four locations and states that the project would not impact any of the public locations. The simulations are not accurate with respect to height. View Simulation 2 (page 4-17)shows the 83 foot building at the same height as the existing palm trees. The existing palm trees are about 40-50 feet in height. Therefore, the building would be approximately 30 feet HIGHER than the existing palm trees and much larger than shown in the view simulations. The view simulations must be revised and included in an EIR. 3. A view simulation from the public park next to Macy's (and the escalators) in Fashion Island should also be provided. The public view south from this outlook is towards the ocean and directly over the existing carwash and the project impacts on this view would be dominated by the proposed project and, thus, significant. A view simulation from this vantage point is attached to this letter with both existing views and the proposed project view. The view Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received M. Nova Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 7, 2015 Page 2 simulations clearly show that the height and mass of the building is much greater than any other surrounding building. The aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed project are significant and must be evaluated in an EIR. 4. Light and glare, page 4-22. The MND concludes that the "new sources of light would not represent a substantial increase of lighting levels in the surrounding areas because the Project's lighting would be similar illumination levels compared to existing lighting conditions associated with retails and restaurant buildings, hotels and theater buildings, and office buildings located throughout Newport Center" and concludes that the light and glare impacts would be less than significant. There is currently no nighttime lighting in the vicinity of the proposed project because the site is currently a carwash and is adjacent to 2-3 story office/commercial buildings. The proposed project would result in light and glare impacts up to the height of the building, approximately 83 feet where there are currently no light sources and buildings are limited to 2-3 stories. The comparison of the proposed project with the 20-story office buildings located in the northern portion of Newport Center is inappropriate as the buildings in the southern portion of Newport Center have been limited in height. Please also note that the PIMCO building is a large source of light and glare on the residential areas south of Newport Center. Therefore, the proposed project would be expected to generate significant light and glare impacts as it would extend about 50 feet higher than other surrounding buildings. 5. Section 4.5.10 Land Use and Planning, page 4-59. Policy LU 1.6 requires the protection of public views. The project would not comply with this policy as public views of the ocean from Fashion Island would not be protected. Land use impacts are significant and must be evaluated in an EIR. 6. Page 4-61, Policy LU 6.14.4 — Development Scale. This policy reinforces the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down the building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along Pacific Coast Highway. The proposed project clearly conflicts with Policy LU 6.14.4 regarding development scale, as it would be a maximum of 83 feet while buildings that surround the project are in the 2-3 story range (see attached figure). The CECA checklist asks if the project would "Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project . . . adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?" As discussed above, the proposed project would clearly conflict with Policy LU 6.14.4; therefore, land use impacts are significant and must be evaluated in an EIR. 7. Page 4-61. The height of the buildings adjacent to the proposed project are about 32 feet. The proposed project would be 83 feet tall which is substantially greater than the height of the existing structures. Comparing the proposed project to office buildings (up to 21 stories) on the northeasterly portion of Newport Center is totally inappropriate and attempts to diminish the significance of the land use impacts. The proposed project would be over 50 feet higher than the surrounding buildings and this would be a significant impact. The proposed project would Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received M. Nova Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 7, 2015 Page 3 set a new and unacceptable precedent for building heights in the lower portions of Newport Center. 8. Page 4-88 Land Use and Planning. For the reasons stated in Comment 5 above, cumulative land use impacts are significant as well and must be evaluated in an EIR. 9. MND Page 4-74 through 4-46. There is no discussion on the traffic impacts associated with construction. In other places in the MND, it is stated that over 250 workers would be required and approximately 51,600 cubic yards (yd3)of soil would require removal (see MND Page 3-1). Although temporary, these impacts must be evaluated and would likely be considered significant. 10. Appendix B, Air Quality. Air quality impacts have been underestimated. We have the following comments on Appendix B. • The number of haul truck trips (8) required for the demolition phase used in CalEEMod to estimate construction air quality impacts is understated. The MND states there would be approximately 80 tons of debris, 240 yd' of concrete, and 620 yd' of asphalt during demolition. Assuming 1 ton per yd' and 20 yd' per truck, the demolition would require approximately 47 truck trips. The air quality analysis must be revised to account for the debris removal. • The "Floor Surface Area" used in CaIEEMod for the project is incorrect. On page 3-1 (first paragraph) of the MND it is stated that the gross floor area of the proposed project is 163,260 square feet. The surface area used in the CalEEMod analysis was 50,400 square feet. This error cascades to construction emissions, architectural coatings, and operational emissions and underestimates project construction and operational emissions. • Section 3.7 (page 29 of Appendix B) concludes that the proposed project does not include stationary sources and mobile sources that may idle for long periods of time so that no operational LST analysis is required. Contrary to this statement, operational LST is required for this project. Condo/Townhouse projects are listed in the SCAQMD's Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology LST guidance document (Table 3.1) (revised July 2008) as projects which require LST analysis. The SCAQMD LST document is available at http://www.ag md.gov/docs/d efa u It-sou rce/cepa/hand boo k/loca I ized-sign ifi ca nce- thresholds/final-Ist-methodology-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Air quality impacts must be revised to include an operational LST analysis. An Environmental Impact Report must be prepared under CEQA whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a "fair argument that a proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment" (City of Redlands v. County of San Bernardino (2002) 96 Cal. App.4`' 398,405; CEQA Guidelines §15384. An agency reviewing the potential impacts of a proposed project "must consider and resolve every air argument that can be made about the possible significant environmental effects of [the) project." Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App41h 1099, 1109. Where a fair argument based on substantial evidences exists, an agency's decision to adopt a negative declaration is fully inappropriate. Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received M. Nova Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 7, 2015 Page 4 The evidence outline above points to the existence of a fair argument that the Newport Center Villas Project may have significant environmental impacts. See California Building Industry Association v. BAAQMD (2013) 218 Cal. App.41h 1171, 1182-1183 (holding that an EIR is required "whenever it can be fairly argued on the basis of substantial evidence that the project may have significant environmental impact, regardless of whether other substantial evidence supports the opposite conclusion"). The City cannot address the full range of these impacts in an MND, and it must require an EIR to meet its minimum obligations under CEQA. Respectfully submitted, AX UA tom'w�s'y''✓V Debra. Bright Stevens a Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received M. Nova Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 7, 2015 Page 5 EXISTING VIEW FROM PARK NEXT TO MACY'S Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6g: Additional Materials Received M. Nova Newport Center Villas Study Session (PA2014-213) October 7, 2015 Page 6 VIEW WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEWPORT VILLAS -- :M or m Yn irc m ai i', Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION —OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6h: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Beth Hallett [mai Ito:bethhallettCalomail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:11 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Newport Center Villas Dear Ms. Nova, I am writing to express my opposition to the Newport Center Villas Project. I believe my neighbors have already stated the reasons we oppose the project, so I will not reiterate all of their points, however, specifically, I am concerned about the following: traffic, noise and light pollution, and excessive height. This housing is not necessary and does not benefit our community; in fact, it would be a detriment. Accordingly, I respectfully request that project approval be denied. Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Elizabeth Hallett 1115 Ebbtide Road, CDM t Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION —OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6i: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Rita Berdelis [mailto:ritaberdelisC&gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:09 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: City of Newport Beach Planning Commission To the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission: When will enough be enough? There is already enough traffic, noise, and light pollution in Newport Beach, especially around Newport Center. The 524 units currently being built near Fashion Island is so excessive. Do we need more apartments/condos.? Really,2�2 How many projects will it take? We are asking that the Newport Center Villas be denied approval of their project. Please preserve our beautiful community./ 1 Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION — OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6j: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Doug Hanke [mai Ito:douglashanke(agmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:32 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Newport Center Villas Residential Project Hi, I support the email below from a fellow CDM resident in the Broadmoor community that requests the Newport Center Villas Residential Project be denied. As a homeowner in the Broadmoor Hills Community I am also concerned about additional development of Newport Center. Thanks, Doug Hanke 2715 Lighthouse Lane Corona Del Mar, Ca From: Jim and Sandra Warren from Broadmoor 1: Sent to: mnova(a)newportbeachca.gov i October 6, 2015 11:51 am To the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission: The area in question was designed for restricted density and zoned for lower level office buildings. There are no exterior lighted signs and no lights left on in the buildings after 5:30 pm except for safety and maintenance purposes. The proposed structure would call for a zoning change for the entire area. The established site line will have been penetrated. With this change, this particular area extending from Newport Center Circle down to Pacific Coast Highway, and from MacArthur Blvd. to Newport Center Drive would become open for high rise development, unacceptable increases in traffic, noise pollution, light pollution, and extended building heights. The hundreds of homes on the hills that bound Corona del Mar on the south side of MacArthur Blvd. will be greatly impacted by increases in traffic, noise, night light pollution and most importantly the loss of views. Most people think that only the homes facing southwest towards the Pacific Ocean and Catalina Island are view properties and enjoy sunsets. This is partially a true statement. Most of the other homes on the hills of Corona del Mar face northwest and share and have a different ocean view, a view of Long Beach, and a view all of the wonderful sunsets that occur during the wintertime or the other half of the year. Considering this, the impact of changing the height limitations of a building greatly impacts the site lines of hundreds of homes in the immediate area. Night light pollution is even worse. When tall buildings above the sight line are allowed, the problem never goes away at night. Living spaces are uncontrolled because people never leave— they live there. Office buildings are different because people go home after work Not only are the proposed units illuminated, but the entire building is lighted on the outside for aesthettic purposes. The roof will also be lit because it is designed to be a recreation area. This will be above the proposed building height. In a meeting with Tod Ridgeway and Barry Allen, I brought up the problem of night light pollution in our community. My suggestion to Tod was to rent three to five portable lighting 2 machines whose poles would extend to the height limit of the building. They would all be run on electric generators. All lights would face the homes in our area (Harbor View Hills, Harbor View Broadmoor I, and Harbor View Broadmoor II) and run for three consecutive nights. Then everyone involved would know the answer. Tod said, "No, that would not be possible." Barry's suggestion was to use a drone and shine a light from the building height towards our affected neighborhoods. Tod would have his people come to our homes and video with a computer to show us how we would not be affected by the height of his building. A person did come to our home in the daytime and took a video from our back yard. Some of my other neighbors tentatively agreed and then later said "no". The drone thing fell apart because all of my neighbors believe that a small light on a drone could not simulate the large amount of light that this building will produce. With the massive development of the new apartment complex in Newport Center by Jamboree, I find it difficult to believe that additional housing would even considered in the Newport Center area. This is the only car wash within five miles. The car wash is believed to be a part of the original plan for the development of Newport Center. We are asking that the Newport Center Villas Residential Project be denied approval. Jim and Sandra Warren 1201 Surfline Way Corona del Mar, CA 3 Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION —OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 6k: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Allan Horowitz [mailto:allan(damsaint.comj Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 5:19 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: These are also my thoughts I put 13 set of story poles for my home... To the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission: As residents of Corona del Mar for seventeen years we have seen a massive increase in population - more than double the growth rate for the state of California as a whole. With that has come a comes light pollution. We have seen the 'open land in perpetuity" on MacArthur become the Civic Center. structure. With that development has come additional traffic, noise, and light pollution. We now s+ underway at the corner of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road. With that will come more ti pollution. Along with our neighbors on the south side of MacArthur Blvd, our quality of life may be greatly in light pollution resulting from this development. We may also be impacted with a partial blockage c Long Beach. This issue has the potential to be dramatic as the residents of the proposed developmei day, seven days a week. Their lights, as well as the lighted recreation area proposed for the roof, wi otherwise nearly dark skyline against the sunset. In a meeting our neighbors attended with the developers, the neighbors brought up the problem of li made the suggestion that the developers rent portable lighting machines with poles extending to the building. The lights would face the homes in our area (Harbor View Hills, Harbor View Broadmoor run for three consecutive nights. Then everyone involved would determine whether or not the prop( respect to light pollution. This appears to be very reasonable as many homeowners on Corona del 1 proposed construction to let neighbors determine if there are any issues. Some type of story pole e1 developer should be required to do to better understand the potential for light pollution and view blc We are asking that the Newport Center Villas Residential Project be denied approval pending the er understand the impact this development poses on the adjacent neighbors. The erection of story poll the Commission better understand the potential negative impact posed by this development. Allan Horowitz President AMSA International Inc. t Subject: Additional Materials Received - 10/08/2015 PC Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION—OCTOBER 8, 2015 ITEM NO. 61: ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED NEWPORT CENTER VILLAS STUDY SESSION (PA2014-213) From: Mark Perlmutter fmaiIto:mark@d mpproperties.coml Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 6:09 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Newport Center Villas- 150 Newport Center Drive Dear Ms. Nova: Affiliates of our company own 180 Newport Center Drive, an office building immediately across the main driveway from the subject property. We have the following comments: -The proposed height of the project is not compatible with surrounding buildings. The proposed height is more than 50 feet over what is allowed by Code and far exceeds the height of nearby structures. Further, most buildings of this height are located at the opposite end of the Newport Center Drive "circle" which would result in a building of the proposed size looking quite out of place in this location. -We are unable to determine the impact of shadows and the blocking of views facing east from our building towards the project. More information is needed on these potential issues. -Currently we have a building id "block sign" that is located on Newport Center Drive. This sign needs to be preserved and it is unclear from the plans if this sign is being removed. -The main driveway off of Anacapa should not be used for the parking of any service vehicles servicing the proposed project. We reserve further comment pending our review of additional information on this project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Mark Perlmutter DMP Properties 250 Newport Center Drive,Suite 300 Newport Beach,CA 92660 Main: 949.720.8166 Fax: 949.720.8184 markgdmpproperties.com DMPwww.DMPPropertics.com PROPERTIES This message is confidential and is intended exclusively far the use of the party to wham it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary,privileged,subject to a confidentiality and/or non-disclosure agreement,or otherwise exempt or protected from disclosure and,as such,is not intended for disclosure to and/or use by any other person or entity.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that printing,retaining,.reproducing,copying,disclosing,disseminating or using this message or any information contained 1 herein is strictly prohibited.If you have received this message in error,please contact the sender immediately and destroy the message(including any attachments)and any copies in their entirety. 2 Newport CenterVillas Y 11 F . t �11 *JILL YF� Planning Commission Study Session (PA2014-213) October 8, 2015 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting Introduction Newport Center Villas (PA203.4-23-3) ■ General Plan Amendment No. GP2014-003 ■ Code Amendment No. CA2014-008 ■ Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2014-004 ■ Site Development Review No. SD2014-oo6 ■ Tentative Tract Map No. NT2015-003, County Tentative Tract Map No. 17915 Development Agreement No. DA2014-002 Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2015-003 Location: Newport Center area Southwest corner of Anacapa Drive and Newport Center Drive 15o Newport Center Drive 07/13/2012 Community Development Department - Planning Division 2 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 NII ting 13) 1,0 11 tj 1 40 A#t 4L- .ia. ♦ A4 �� 202 �Z.,Y � d°p � y i i TT ^^ n C Site Photographs - NCD J4 OV I f� ., . jN;� ,rte- = �•� " �. ,��: `i • * Site Photographs = Anacapa Dr. 1 ] 04, { u i Existing Car Wash 4 i ',.} fit- ::=tiyH�- • •.I ( �� -1 1i ` of S \1 „ra . -•� Tis --...��"Y■!- �.� _-_ a;�� /////// /" / Y�. }} `' •ll i 11111�ty`� 1 ///// tIere //II • 1 -'rw I .WHO CSJ +s' _ate . •-.• � Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting Development Standards Planned Community Unit density is 39 du/acre Deviations from RM standards for height and setbacks . Building setbacks are roughly 24 feet from the street frontages (exceptions for porte cochaire and minor architectural projections) . All required parking is provided on -site (z garage spaces and 0 . 5 guest parking space per unit) within the 3 level basement . 07/13/2012 Community Development Department - Planning Division 8 Planning Commission - Octoberi , 2015 13) East Elevation 831611 '� "'■"1111■"1111"'llllr�i ��1,I�� "'llll�rllll"'1111""' �'�1 107.!■■7�7..r�1�■___�7��1i__i 7.- =-� - _— _ _-- i___iln�_____■t �7■■7�_7■.7_�u■7_:Ia��i ,Ils��-�� 111 111 111 I ;yll til �� idyl 1.111 111 Illi yl yl til• I�Illll�llll�llll�l�•fl fI� !V• 1114:I�III, ' lillll.i.!1 i�illl■iri ■■ 1'•• 11 " •I 111 11111 ■ s■ IIL1 11 II �•■ 11■ 11■ .L'.1r fl■I I■.� if! r !1!! !moi ■! ■! rl�.,�r��ulm�!!l�re,.�ra ,. !!__!! .._Ir• 1!! !!!■■1 ! I■� �E:rll��I�EE� �; i[iii-X1111-:�� r�l� iilll iiilll � 1111 11111. yl yi' - - r!! ! ! r!__e!_ u •!u �.. 1111 •t1��11 �1111I��.1.,._.ii._.ii.�ii._. � Nlll�� .. �� l�.le�l��; �■-■!7S ■!71_ lglS�ta:!!__.■� i1l--rAGi■YP��aYY.r.r-■1 .1_ .■.. .--IFf__ 7f:.� 7!!•- eflr� � � 7 `I k I��1 I��1 ` 11! ..i...'f■rr . � ! - " %i �,R 7! eCi�_r`�a-n. �s.n.a��s' T I �Y.' • 3 � er��7 ■ .tl ■ t� '_. aIII�IIIai�l I �'�Illa nlhl��+�k Yi }x :. �_I�f��!I I■�ll��l�al�'�q.,!�'l��7■1, �_ 1_'��!�n1,r,�r��d.l!�.�: �� i 07/13/2012 CommunityDevelopment r ' •. • Division Roof Plan mammas � ..- _ _ "� �—i..�� — ��, �� •_ --- a ___ -_ Ir x711 � I _'iami .I li I ■■■I■I I � I. '• , � � IIS . ■■■■I �i -. � / o:�'' �4; g % opo®ol®oil®■ � � 1.1. . . EI 3 . _ Nil lk a DevelopmentDepartmentDivision 10 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting AOL 13) General Plan Analysis a a.C'dt/FORNP LU 6 . 14.4 Development Scale ■ "Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. (Imp 2 . 1, 3. 1, 4 . 1) " 07/13/2012 Community Development Department - Planning Division 11 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 Item No. 6m: Additional Materials Presented at Meeting Newport en er I las y es ion 213) Legend HEIGHT .28/33 feet Z .32 137 feet I40 feet Building/10 feet Appurtenance O S,qN 150 feet Building 1 10 feet Appurtenance enance A �7C0 Fa I ISI ®75 feet Mall Buildings 110 feet Appurtenance .>100 feet m13 OP � Newport Beach �O Country Club Gia NES C9� S9ti Block 300 �o Blo R Z Block 200 yEJ A � O P P ROW U� 26o NCD c7� J`i�OR 7CNFNTER DR Nonconforming Py at 74ft4in G„ QOPP JQF coy` 5 R W 150 Newport Center Drive \ (PA2014-213) Clry of Ne W pori 8mch 0 340 660 cls p1,0� \ > Feet Onober 07,2015 PA201A 21311eigh, Eehibllmxd Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting 13) General Plan Policy Analysis LU 1. . 6, Public Views "Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic and visual resources that include open space, mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from public vantage points. (Imp 1. 1) " 07/13/2012 Community Development Department- Planning Division 13 Figure NR3 ofthe General Plan View Simulation 4 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting 13) General Plan Policy Analysis LU 6 . 2A Residential Supply "Accommodate a diversity of residential units that meets the needs of Newport Beach 's population and fair share of regional needs in accordance with the Land Use Plan 's designations, applicable density standards, design and development policies, and the adopted Housing Element. (Imp 1. 1, 2 . 1, 25. 1) " 07/13/2012 Community Development Department- Planning Division 16 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting 13) Existing car wash generates 819 daily trips . ( based on traffic counts in the field ) Proposed : high - rise residential condo (3 -10 stories) generates 205 daily trips . Overall reduction of 63.4 daily trips . 07/13/2012 Community Development Department- Planning Division 17 Planning Commission - October1 N1 ting 13) Section 423 - "Greenlight" - IncreaseIncrease in Increase in Allowed Floor A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Allowed Area (sq. ft.) HourTrips HourTrips Dwelling Units GP2o14-003 (PA2o14- 2i3) 15o Newport Center 0 0 49 Drive PriorAmendments (80%) 1. GP2oo8-009 0 0 0 0. (PA2oo8-182) . . . 2. GP2oo8-005 (PA2oo8-152) TOTALS3.6,800 2 . 49 Section 423 . . . . 100 100 100 Thresholds Vote No NojinNo No18 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting 13) Airport Land Use Plan Project site is located in the JWA notification area but is not considered part of the " Planning Area " requiring Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) approval because the project height does not exceed the imaginary conical surface . 07/13/2012 Community Development Department- Planning Division ig Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting 13) Development Agreement Public Benefit Fee : s63, 000/unit + CPI increase adjustment = approximately s67, 000/unit = $3 . 283 million Term : lo years Payment prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy 07/13/2012 Community Development Department- Planning Division 20 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting AOL 13) CEQA Review a a.C'dt/FORNP Mitigated Negative Declaration - ND2015-003 ■ Public comment period September 11, 2015 through October 7, 2015 (extended from an initial close date of October 1, 2015) . ■ Public comments received on MND Mitigation Measures for Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, and Noise are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program . 07/13/2012 Community Development Department - Planning Division 21 Planning Commission - October 8, 2015 ting AOL 13) Next Steps � z a a.C'dt/FORN�P ■ Planning Commission Public Hearing is scheduled forOctober22, 2015 . ■ City Council Meeting is tentatively scheduled for November 24, 2015 . 07/13/2012 Community Development Department - Planning Division 22 r • a ti 4 M I For more information contact: Makana Nova,Associate Planner 949-644-3249 mnova(a newportbeachca.gov www.newportbeachca.gov View from Fashion Island �1 K - I.A .. � • — - S Q s pii�.��lUlYfii nes �.�� ; . 4: �/�`• �� ,�,�.� v+�.iz'l _yam•^ 4w..Y..:. } � �.. 'I: Fwd}•":��,I View from Fashion Island •ems! ��' i�^Y „� � 's, � ' � aim r �\ rl a 1 do \ iI I00 old . ; A a� J ` i * I f Al