HomeMy WebLinkAbout1953 - Lido House Hotel - 130 room upscale hotel with accessory restaurant, retail, spa, and meeting rooms at the former City Hall site. Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit applications not su - 3300 Newport Blvd RESOLUTION NO. 1953
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2012-002, COASTAL LAND
USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2012-001, ZONING CODE
AMENDMENT NO. CA2012-003, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
SD2014-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP2014-004, AND
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. FOR THE FORMER CITY HALL COMPLEX
LAND USE AND ZONING AMENDMENTS (PA2012-031) LOCATED AT
3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 475 32ND STREET; AND THE 130-
ROOM LIDO HOUSE HOTEL LOCATED AT 3300 NEWPORT
BOULEVARD (PA2013-217)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. On April 24, 2012, the City of Newport Beach initiated amendments of the
General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code with respect to the
former City Hall Complex (the "Property"), legally described in Exhibit A, located
at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
at 3300 Newport Boulevard and 475 32nd Street. The amendments are generally
described as follows:
a. General Plan Amendment No. GP2012-002 - The amendment includes a text
and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) designation for
the Property with a new mixed-use land use category (MU-H5) and establish
density and intensity limits within Table LU-2 of the Land Use Element by
establishing a new anomaly location.
b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2012-001 - The amendment
includes a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF)
designation for the Property with a new mixed-use land use category (MU)
and establish density and intensity limits within Table 2.1.1-1. The proposed
amendment also includes a change to Policy 4.4.2-1 to establish the policy
basis for higher height limits.
C. Zone Code Amendment No. CA2012-003 - The amendment includes a text
and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) zoning
designation for the Property with a new zone MU-LV designation (Mixed-Use-
Lido Village) to establish density and intensity limits consistent with the
proposed General Plan amendment. Development standards and allowed
uses would also be established.
2. An application was filed by R.D. Olson Development ("Applicant') with respect to a
portion of the Property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 2
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street on the Balboa Peninsula in the Lido Village
area of the City (3300 Newport Boulevard), requesting approval of a site
development review, conditional use permit, and traffic study for the development
and operation of a luxury, 130-room hotel that would include 99,625 square feet of
building area comprised of guestrooms, public areas, and back of house
(operational) areas (the Lido House Hotel). The following approvals are requested
or required in order to implement the Project as proposed:
a. Site Development Review No. SD2014-001- A site development review
application for the development of a luxury, 130-room hotel called the "Lido
House Hotel' and all appurtenant facilities including landscaping, parking, and
public open space along Newport Boulevard and 32"d Street. Redevelopment
of the Property includes the demolition of all structures on-site at 3300
Newport Boulevard but no demolition of Fire Station No. 2 and its appurtenant
facilities. The project would include the provision of necessary utility
connections to serve the proposed project and public improvements fronting
the project site along Newport Boulevard and 32"d Street.
b. Conditional Use Permit No. UP2014-004 - A Conditional Use Permit for the
operation of the proposed hotel and accessory/ancillary uses including the
sale of alcoholic beverages and the establishment of on-site parking
management including the use of valet parking services. Accessory and
ancillary uses to the hotel include, but are not limited to, retail uses,
restaurants and bars, meeting rooms, day spa facilities including massage,
and guest recreational areas.
c. Traffic Studv No. TS2014-005 - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40
(Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code.
3. Pursuant to Charter Section 423 and Council Policy A-18, proposed General
Plan amendments are reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be
required because a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects in the
same Statistical Area over the prior 10 years) exceeds certain thresholds
provided in Section 423 of the City Charter. The proposed General Plan
Amendment is located in Statistical Area B5 and this is the fifth amendment that
affects Statistical Area B5 since the General Plan update in 2006. The four prior
amendments are GP 2010-005, GP 2011-003, GP 2011-010, and GP 2012-005.
If the amendment resulted in 99 units or 99,675 square feet of commercial
development as originally proposed, it would exceed applicable thresholds and a
vote of the electorate would be required. If the amendment density and intensity
is reduced to 93 units and 98,725 square feet, a vote would not be required. The
following table shows the increases attributable to the subject amendment and
prior amendments and the totals.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 3
AM Peak PM Peak Dwelling Non-residential floor
Trips Trips units area
Prior Amendments (80%) 49 65 7 16,275
Proposed Amendment 0 0 93 23,725
Total 49 65 100 40,000
Vote No No No No
4. Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the appropriate
tribe contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were
provided notice of the proposed General Plan Amendment on October 4, 2012.
The City received an inquiry from one tribal representative. The Native American
representative indicated that he could coordinate monitoring services during
grading/construction if it is determined that such monitoring is required. The
tribal representative did not indicate any knowledge of the presence of any
significant cultural or archaeological resources on the project site. The proposed
project site is located within a highly developed area and has been completely
disturbed. As such, impacts related to archaeological resources are not
expected to occur. However, in the unlikely event that buried cultural resources
or human remains are discovered during excavation activities, Mitigation
Measure CUL-1 would be implemented requiring an archeologist and Native
American Monitor be present during earth removal or disturbance activities
related to rough grading and other excavation for utilities, and as such, a less
than significant impact would occur in this regard.
5. On April 25, 2013, the City sent a surplus land notice consistent with Government
Code §54222. No entities expressed an interest in acquiring the site for the
development of affordable housing, parks and open space, or schools.
6. On June 5, 2014, the Planning Commission held a study session for the project
in the City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, on
the DEIR and Project.
7. On July 17, 2014, the Planning Commission was scheduled to conduct a public
hearing for the project. However, to provide the public additional opportunity to
review the staff report, the item was continued to August 7, 2014. The August 7,
2014 was canceled, so a special meeting was conducted on August 11 , 2014.
8. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 11, 2014, in the City
Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in
accordance with CEQA and the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"). The
environmental documents for the Project comprising the DEIR, Final
Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") which consists of Responses to
Comments, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP"), the
draft Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings), Errata, staff report,
and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the
Planning Commission at these hearings.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 4
9. Based upon public comments indicating that potential residential use of the site
was not desirable, the Planning Commission eliminated the mixed-use,
residential use from the proposed land use plan and zoning amendments.
SECTION 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION
1. The City prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (No. ER2014-003, SCH
No. 2013111022) ("FEIR") in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines
and City Council Policy K-3, which described the Project and discussed the
environmental impacts resulting there from.
2. The Planning Commission considered the FEIR and found it considers all
potentially significant environmental effects of the Project and is complete and
adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and of the State and
local CEQA Guidelines.
3. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1952 on August 11, 2014,
recommending City Council certification of the FEIR and said resolution shall be
incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS
1. Amendments to the General Plan are legislative acts. Neither the City nor State
Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such
amendments.
2. The site is located in proximity to commercial services, recreational uses, and
transit opportunities with routine bus service provided along Newport Boulevard.
The proposed General Plan Amendment provides for variety of land uses for the
site including a luxury hotel that will to promote revitalization of the Lido Village
area while ensuring neighborhood compatibility. The proposed hotel will serve
visitors and residents and increase access opportunities in the Coastal Zone.
3. The proposed amendment of Coastal Land Use Plan Policy 4.4.2-1 to provide an
exception to the 35-foot height limit of the Shoreline Height Limitation Zone is
necessary and appropriate to accommodate the proposed intensity of use,
significant open space on the site and the project's lack of impact to public views.
This finding is based upon the public view impact analysis within Section 5.2
(Aesthetics LighbGlare) of the Lido House Hotel FEIR showing that there will not
be a significant impact to protected public views from General Plan and Coastal
Land Use Plan designated vantages. Additionally, there are no public views
through the site from abutting roadways and public spaces.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 5
SECTION 5. REQUIRED FINDINGS
Site Development Review
Finding:
A. Allowed within the subject Zoning district;
Facts in Support of Finding:
A-1 The proposed 130-room hotel including its proposed ancillary commercial uses
(restaurant, bar, lounge, retail, meeting rooms and spa) project will be consistent
with The MU-LV (Mixed-Use-Lido Village) zoning district and Section 20.22.020
(Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Land Uses and Permit Requirements) with the
adoption of Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2012-003 that will allow visitor
accommodations subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Finding:
B. In compliance with all of the applicable criteria [below]:
a. Compliance with this Section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any
applicable specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the
use or structure;
b. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious
relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent development;
and whether the relationship is based on standards of good design;
c. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures
on the site and adjacent developments and public areas;
d. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access,
including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces;
e. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use
of water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and
f. The protection of significant views from public rights)-of-way and compliance
with Section 20.30.100 (Public View Protections); and
Facts in Support of Finding:
B-1 The proposed 130-room hotel project is consistent with the proposed Mixed Use
Horizontal 5 (MU-H5) General Plan land use designation, proposed Mixed Use
(MU) Coastal Land Use Plan category, and the proposed MU-LV (Mixed-Use-Lido
Village) zoning district for the project site that provides for the horizontal or vertical
intermixing of commercial, visitor accommodations, residential, and/or civic uses.
Civic uses could include, but are not limited to, a community center, public plazas,
a fire station and/or public parking.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 6
B-2 The proposed MU-LV (Mixed-Use-Lido Village) zoning district includes setback
standards (zero to 35 feet depending on height), open space (20% of the site) and
building height standards (55 feet to flat roofs, 60 feet for sloping roofs and up to
65 feet for architectural features). The proposed hotel building will be setback more
69 feet from Newport Boulevard, more than 15 feet from 32nd Street, and more
than 62 feet from the northerly (interior) property line all in excess of the proposed
standards. The height of the sloping roof of the 4-story portion of the proposed
hotel is less 58 feet, 5 inches and all other portions of the hotel are below this
height. Lastly, the proposed site plan provides approximately 21.4% of the site as
open space consisting of hardscape and landscaping between the hotel and
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street in compliance with the proposed open space
standard.
B-3 The project is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces in
terms of bulk, scale and aesthetic treatments. The large setbacks identified in
statement B-2 above will help offset the taller portions of the proposed buildings.
Hotel buildings have been designed with a one, two and three story element along
Newport Boulevard while providing a significant setback from the street providing
areas for public access, landscaping, outdoor dining, and hotel use. The proposed
building is over 69 feet from the Newport Boulevard. The portions of the hotel
structure that will be three and four stories are located along the northerly and
easterly portion of the site away from public spaces and closer to the back of the
abutting shopping center that is developed with large buildings with heights close
to 35 feet. Additionally, these taller components will be approximately 240 feet from
planned residential uses east of Via Oporto. Based upon the project drawings, all
elevations of proposed buildings will include consistent architectural treatments,
articulation and modulation of building masses providing visual interest with a
coastal architectural theme specified by the Lido Village Design Guidelines.
B-4 The project retains the two large ficus trees designated by Council Policy G-1 as
Landmark Trees. The proposed project also retains the 10 existing tall date palm
trees, and provides pedestrian areas, seating areas, and enhanced pavement
increasing the aesthetic and use qualities of the setback area. The setback area
also provides pedestrian connections from the intersection of Newport Boulevard
and 32nd Street along the streets in furtherance of the goals of the Lido Village
Design Guidelines. Lastly, the building elevations include a lighthouse architectural
feature, simple gable roofs, tight overhangs, simple block massing, and wood
siding all with a clear coastal theme consistent with the Lido Village Design
Guidelines.
B-5 Access to the site, on-site circulation, and parking areas are designed to provide
standard-sized parking spaces consistent with the Zoning Code, 26-foot-wide, two-
way driveways, and the minimum vehicle turning radius to accommodate and
provide safe access for residents and guests (including the disabled), emergency
vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City
Traffic Engineer.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 7
B-6 The project is subject to the City's Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Chapter
14.17 of NBMC) and compliance will be confirmed at plan check prior to issuing
building permits.
B-7 Consistent with Section 20.30.100 (Public View Protections), the Draft EIR
(Section 5.2 Aesthetics/Light and Glare) provides an analysis of potential impacts
to public views from Sunset View Park, Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park.
Based upon that analysis, the proposed hotel will blend into the urban background
and not block any important focal points including the horizon within existing public
views from these vantages. Additionally, there are other taller buildings in the
vicinity suggesting that proposed building would not be out of character despite the
proposed increase in building height. Specifically, 601 & 611 Lido Park Drive and
3388 Via Lido are taller than the proposed height of the project. No significant
public views through or near the project site are present in the immediate vicinity of
the site. For these reasons, the analysis concludes that there will be no material
impact to public coastal views.
Finding:
C. The proposed development is not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly
growth of the City, or endanger jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the
public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development.
Facts in Support of Finding:
C-1 The hotel project is consistent with the Lido Village Design guidelines by providing
architecturally pleasing project with a coastal theme with articulation and building
modulation to enhance the urban environment consistent with the Lido Village
Design Guidelines. The project provides a large enhanced setback area between
the hotel and Newport Boulevard and 32rd Street that will include pedestrian paths,
seating and landscape areas that will create a community focal point and providing
connections to abutting uses.
C-2 The project site is located in a developed commercial area with limited sensitive
land uses located nearby. The overall height of the project will not materially
impact any public views from General Plan designated vantages or significantly
shade surrounding properties as demonstrated in Section 5.2 Aesthetics/Light and
Glare of the Lido House Hotel EIR.
C-3 The proposed surface parking lot provides 148 parking spaces (some tandem) and
through the use of valet parking that can facilitate additional on-site vehicles will
accommodate 100% of the project's anticipated parking demand based upon the
parking analysis contained in Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation of the Lido House EIR.
Additionally, the parking lot and vehicular access thereto has been designed to
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 8
accommodate and provide safe access for passenger vehicles, emergency
vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collection vehicles, as determined by the City
Traffic Engineer.
C-4 Direct vehicular access to Via Lido Plaza will be provided an existing driveway and
easement located just west of the intersection of Finley Avenue and Newport
Boulevard. The main entry to the hotel at Finley Avenue includes 16 parking
spaces and area to accommodate approximately 23 cars west of a proposed
parking gate to accommodate short-term registration and valet parking and vehicle
circulation without conflicting with vehicle access to Via Lido Plaza. The parking
control gate at 32nd Street is designed and setback sufficiently to accommodate 2
cars, fire vehicle access, and delivery trucks to avoid conflicts along 32nd Street.
C-5 Closing the site to unrestricted vehicular access by the public through the site to
32nd Street would discontinue direct vehicular access to Via Lido Plaza through an
existing access gate located near Fire Station No. 2. Despite the closure of this
access point, adequate vehicular access to Via Lido Plaza for cars, delivery trucks
and emergency vehicles is currently provided by an existing driveway at Finley
Avenue and an existing driveway from Via Lido. Large delivery trucks and fire
trucks can access both parking areas at Via Lido Plaza based upon information
contained in a letter from Fuscoe Engineering dated April 27, 2014, that is included
as part of the Response to Comments within the FEIR.
C-6 The project is subject to the City's Outdoor Lighting requirements contained within
Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting) of the Zoning Code.
C-7 Roof-top mechanical equipment will be fully enclosed or screened from view
consistent with the Municipal Code.
C-8 The construction will comply with all Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes. All
ordinances of the City and all conditions of approval shall be complied with.
Conditional Use Permit
Finding:
D. The use is consistent with the purpose and intent of Section 20.48.030 (Alcohol
Sales) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
D-1 The hotel with its restaurant, bar and lounges has been reviewed and conditioned to
ensure that the purpose and intent of Section 20.48.030 (Alcohol Sales) of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code is maintained and that a healthy environment for
residents and businesses is preserved. While the proposed hotel is located in an
area which has a higher concentration of alcohol licenses than some areas, the
hotel will not operate a "public premises" and appropriate licensing and
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 9
enforcement will be administered by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control. The location of the project in relationship to residential zoning districts, day
care centers, hospitals, park facilities, places of worship, schools, other similar uses
and uses that attract minors has been considered. Operational conditions
recommended by the Police Department for the sale of alcoholic beverages,
including the requirement to obtain an Operator License, will ensure compatibility
with the surrounding uses and minimize alcohol related incidents.
D-2 The subject property is located in an area with a variety of land uses including
commercial, retail, residential, and access the beach and bay. The operational
characteristics have been conditioned to maintain the compatibility of the proposed
use with surrounding land uses.
Finding:
E. The use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan.
Facts in Support of Finding:
E-1 The proposed 130-room hotel project is consistent with the proposed Mixed Use
Horizontal 5 (MU-H5) General Plan land use designation, Mixed Use (MU) Coastal
Land Use Plan category, and the MU-LV (Mixed-Use-Lido Village) zoning district
for the project site that provides for the horizontal or vertical intermixing of
commercial, visitor accommodations, residential, and/or civic uses. Civic uses may
include, but are not limited to, a community center, public plazas, a fire station
and/or public parking.
E-2 The project site is not located within a Specific Plan area.
E-3 The proposed land use and zoning amendments and hotel is consistent with the
goals and policies of the Newport Beach General Plan. The City Council concurs
with the conclusion of the consistency analysis of the proposed project with these
goals and policies provided in the FEIR. The mitigation measures specified in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been incorporated as
conditions of approval.
Finding:
F. The use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other
applicable provisions of this Zoning Code and the Municipal Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
F-1 See statements A-1, B-2, and B-7 in support of this finding.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 10
F-2 As conditioned, the proposed project will comply with applicable Newport Beach
Municipal Code standards. See also statements C-6, C-7, and C-7 in support of
this finding.
F-3 The Zoning Code specifies that parking for a hotel be specified by Conditional Use
Permit with the purpose to ensure that parking is adequately provided to meet
demand. The proposed surface parking lot provides 148 parking spaces (some
tandem) and through the use of valet parking that can facilitate additional on-site
vehicles will accommodate 100% of the project's anticipated parking demand
based upon the parking analysis contained in Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation of the
Lido House EIR. Additionally, the parking lot and vehicular access thereto has
been designed to accommodate and provide safe access for passenger vehicles,
emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collection vehicles, as determined
by the City Traffic Engineer.
F-4 The proposed hotel will provide alcohol sales in conjunction with late night hours and
as such, the operator is required to obtain an Operator License from the Police
Department pursuant to Chapter 5.25. This requirement is included in the
conditions of approval.
Finding:
G. The design, location, size, operating characteristics of the use are compatible with
the allowed uses in the vicinity.
Facts in Support of Finding:
G-1 See facts in support of Finding A, B, C, D, E and F above.
Finding:
H. The site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, operating
characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle (e.g., fire and
medical) access and public services and utilities.
Facts in Support of Finding:
H-1 The project site is approximately 4.25 acres in size and can accommodate the
proposed hotel building, and adequate parking based upon project's anticipated
parking demand based upon the parking analysis contained in Section 5.5
Traffic/Circulation of the Lido House EIR. Additionally, the site also accommodated
a large enhanced setback area comprising 21.4% of the site for public walkways,
landscaping, and open space.
H-2 The site is directly accessible from Newport Boulevard at the signalized
intersection with Finley Avenue. Additionally, the site is directly accessible from
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 11
32nd Steet. Adequate public and emergency vehicle access, public services, and
utilities exist to accommodate the proposed hotel development as concluded by
the Lido House Hotel FEIR NO. ER2014-003 (SCH#2013111022). The site
includes Fire Station No. 2 and proposed modifications to the vehicle access of the
fire station can be accommodated at Via Oporto and 32nd Street.
Findinq:
I. Operation of the use at the location proposed would not be detrimental to the
harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise
constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1-1 See facts in support of Findings A, B, C, D, E, F and H above.
1-2 The use authorized by this permit is not a nightclub and its prohibition will avoid
potential land use conflicts, nuisances, and police intervention potentially
associated with nightclubs.
Traffic Study
In accordance with Section 15.40.030 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal
Code, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
J. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this
chapter and Appendix A [Chapter 15.40].
Facts in Support of Finding:
J-1 A traffic study, titled "Lido House Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis" dated April 15,
2014, was prepared by RBF Consulting under the supervision of the City Traffic
Engineer pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and its implementing
guidelines (Appendix 11.3 to the Lido House Hotel EIR).
Finding:
K. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including
the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made:
15.40.030.8.1 Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of
project approval; and
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 12
15.40.030.8.1(a) The project will neither cause nor make an unsatisfactory level of
traffic service at any impacted intersection.
Facts in Support of Finding:
K-1 Construction of the project is anticipated to be completed in 2017. If the project is
not completed within sixty (60) months of this approval, preparation of a new
traffic study will be required.
K-2 The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic on 12 of the 20
study intersections by one percent or more during peak hour periods one year
after the completion of the project and, therefore, an Intersection Capacity
Utilization (ICU) analysis was prepared as specified by the TPO. The ICU
analysis determined that the intersections identified will continue to operate at
satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and no
mitigation is required.
K-3 Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the
traffic study, the implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor
make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary
intersection within the City of Newport Beach.
Finding:
L. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make
the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply
with all conditions of approval.
Facts in Support of Finding:
L-1 No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the
proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of
traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport
Beach.
SECTION 6. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City
Council approval and adoption of the following:
1. Findings related to the adequacy of the Final EIR in support of project approval
attached as Exhibit "B".
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1953
Page 13
2. General Plan Amendment No. GP2012-002 attached hereto as Exhibit "C and
incorporated herein by reference.
3. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2012-001 attached hereto as Exhibit "D"
and incorporated herein by reference.
4. Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2012-003 attached hereto as Exhibit "E" and
incorporated herein by reference.
5. Site Development Review No. SD2014-001, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2014-
004, and Traffic Study No. TS2014-005 based upon the findings contained in this
resolution and subject to the conditions of approval attached as Exhibit "F" and
incorporated herein by reference.
6. Project plans attached as Exhibit "G".
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014.
AYES: BROWN, KOETTING, LAWLER, MYERS, AND TUCKER
NOES: NONE
RECUSAL: HILLGREN
ABSENT: KRAMER
BY: /' J
Larry Tucker, Chairman
BY:
"VecrtY
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PORTION OF LOTS 3, 6 AND 7 IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 10
WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT FILED IN THE
DISTRICT LAND OFFICE, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF "THE HUDSON"WITH
THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 21 IN BLOCK 431
OF "LANCASTER'S ADDITION TO NEWPORT BEACH", AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED
IN BOOK 5, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTH 0'44'30"WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY
PROLONGATION 400.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY PARALLEL WITH SAID NORTHERLY
LINE AND LOT 1 IN BLOCK"A" OF SAID LANCASTER'S ADDITION TO NEWPORT BEACH
461.53 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE, AS
SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 108, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 2, PAGES 1 OF
SAID MISCELLANEOUS MAPS; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF
SAID CENTRAL AVENUE 401.79 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY OF SAID LOT 1 AND SAID
NORTHERLY LINE OF "THE HUDSON"495.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED ATTACHED TO THAT
CERTAIN RESOLUTION NO. 3284 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NEWPORT BEACH, A
CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RECORDED MARCH11, 1946 IN BOOK 1404, PAGE130 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE LAND DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN DEED TO THE
GRIFFITH COMPANY RECORDED MARCH 23, 1948 IN BOOK 1741, PAGE 174 OF SAID
OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 2:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2 IN BLOCK "A" OF "LANCASTER'S
ADDITION TO NEWPORT BEACH", AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 5, PAGE
14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE
EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WASHINGTON AVENUE, NOW KNOWN AS
32ND STREET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THAT PORTION OF THE BULKHEAD LINE
ESTABLISHED BY THE WAR DEPARTMENT IN 1936 AND SHOWN ON THE WAR
DEPARTMENT MAP OF NEWPORT BAY SHOWING HARBOR LINE, EXTENDING BETWEEN
BULKHEAD STATION NO.124 AND BULKHEAD STATION NO.125; THENCE NORTH
27'30'00"WEST ALONG SAID BULKHEAD LINE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF "THE HUDSON"AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF LANCASTER'S
ADDITION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "THE HUDSON"
TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 OF SAID BLOCK"A"; THENCE SOUTHERLY
ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 1 AND 2 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 3:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 1117, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 35, PAGES 48 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE 20.00 FOOT ALLEY AS VACATED
BY RESOLUTION NO. 3280 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A
CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RECORDED MARCH 11, 1946 IN BOOK 1400, PAGE 189 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE NORTH
0'44'30"WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3, A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 40'47'07" WEST 170.97 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF
SAID 20.00 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE SOUTH 0'44'30" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE
OF SAID ALLEY 220.89 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 907,
AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 28, PAGES 25 TO 36 INCLUSIVE OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE NORTH
89'15'30" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 907 AND SAID LOT 3,
A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE LAND DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 1 IN DEED TO THE
GRIFFITH COMPANY RECORDED MARCH 23, 1948 IN BOOK 1741, PAGE 174 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE GRIFFITH
COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 15, 1953 IN BOOK 2520, PAGE 577 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
PARCEL4:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 1117, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 35, PAGE 48 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE NORTH
0'44'30"WEST 74.46 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TO THE MOST
SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 1 IN DEED TO THE
GRIFFITH COMPANY RECORDED MARCH 23, 1948 IN BOOK 1741, PAGE 174 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 40'47'07"WEST ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE
OF SAID LAND OF GRIFFITH COMPANY, A DISTANCE OF 69.945 FEET; THENCE NORTH
89'15'30" EAST 45.00 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE SOUTH 0'44'30"
EAST 53.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 5:
LOTS ONE (2) AND TWO (2) IN BLOCK"A" OF "LANCASTER'S ADDITION TO NEWPORT
BEACH' AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORED IN BOOK 5, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS
MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
EXHIBIT "B"
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FACTS AND FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT OF THE APPROVAL OF THE
FORMER CITY HALL REUSE AMENDMENTS (PA2012-031) AND
THE LIDO HOUSE HOTEL PROJECT (PA2013-217)
1. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines (collectively,
CEQA), and in particular, Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Section 15091 of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, require that a public agency consider the
environmental impacts of a project before a project is approved and make specific
findings. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) has been certified which identifies one or more significant
environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more
written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief
explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such
changes have been adopted by such other agency or can or should be
adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified
in the final EIR.
(b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
(c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the
finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified
feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall
describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and
project alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also
adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either
required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially
lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
(e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or
other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its
decision is based.
(f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings
required by this section.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further provides:
(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project
against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to
approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
(b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to
support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record.
This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement
should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned
in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall
be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
Having received, reviewed, and considered the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(Draft EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Lido House
Hotel Project, SCH No. 2013111022 (collectively, the EIR), as well as all other
information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings and Facts
in Support of Findings (Findings) are hereby adopted by the City of Newport Beach
(City) in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency.
These Findings set forth the environmental basis for the discretionary actions to be
undertaken by the City for the development of the project. These actions include the
certification and/or approval of the following for the Lido House Hotel:
• Environmental Impact Report No. ER2014-003 (SCH#2013111022).
• General Plan Amendment No. GP2012-002
• Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2012-001.
• Code Amendment No. CA2012-003.
• Site Development Review No. SD2014-001.
• Use Permit No. UP2014-004.
• Traffic Study No. TS2014-005.
These actions are collectively referred to herein as the project.
A. Document Format
These Findings have been organized into the following sections:
(1) Section 1 provides an introduction to these Findings.
(2) Section 2 provides a summary of the project, overview of the discretionary
actions required for approval of the project, and a statement of the
project's objectives.
(3) Section 3 provides a summary of previous environmental reviews related
to the project area that took place prior to the environmental review done
specifically for the project, and a summary of public participation in the
environmental review for the project.
(4) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding the environmental impacts that
were determined to be—as a result of the Notice of Preparation (NOP),
and consideration of comments received during the NOP comment
period—either not relevant to the project or clearly not at levels that were
deemed significant for consideration at the project-specific level.
(5) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant
environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the City has determined
are either not significant or can feasibly be mitigated to a less than
significant level through the imposition of Project Design Features,
standard conditions, and/or mitigation measures. In order to ensure
compliance and implementation, all of these measures will be included in
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project
and adopted as conditions of the project by the Lead Agency. Where
potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant
levels through adherence to Project Design Features and standard
conditions, these findings specify how those impacts were reduced to an
acceptable level..
(6) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the proposed project.
B. Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for
the City's actions related to the project are at the City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California 92660. The City of Newport Beach is the custodian of the
Administrative Record for the project.
2. PROJECT SUMMARY
A. Project Location
Regionally, the project site is located near the Pacific Ocean in the west-central portion
of Orange County, within the City of Newport Beach. Locally, the project site is
generally located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street on the Balboa Peninsula in the Lido Village area of the City.
Regional access to the site is provided via State Route 55 (SR-55) and SR-1 (Pacific
Coast Highway). The primary local roadways providing access to the site are Newport
Boulevard, 32nd Street, and Finley Avenue.
B. Project Description
The proposed project consists of the requested legislative approvals (Amendments to
General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code,) for the project site, as well as
related for approvals of a, Site Development Review, Conditional Use Permit and Traffic
Study. In order to allow for the development of a 130-room hotel on the project site,
amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan are required to change
the project site land use designation to a "Mixed-Use Horizontal" designation, which
allows for the horizontal or vertical intermixing of commercial, visitor accommodations,
residential, and/or civic uses. Civic uses may include, but are not limited to, a
community center, public plazas, a fire station, and/or public parking. Subsequent
permits include a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission.
C. Discretionary Actions
Implementation of the project will require several actions by the City, including
• Environmental Impact Report No. ER2014-003 (SCH# 2013111022). An
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental impacts
resulting from the proposed project, in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources
Code Sections 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for
Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections
15000 et seq.).
• General Plan Amendment No. GP2O12-002: To allow the proposed 130-
room hotel development by changing the land use designation of the site from
Public Facilities (PF) to a new mixed-use land use category, Mixed-Use
Horizontal 5 (MU-H5), and establish density and intensity limits within Land
Use Element Table LU2, Anomaly Locations, by establishing a new anomaly
location. The MU-H5 designation provides for the horizontal or vertical
intermixing of commercial, visitor accommodations, residential, and/or civic
uses. Civic uses may include, but are not limited to, a community center,
public plazas, a fire station, and/or public parking. Approval of the General
Plan Amendment will result in the creation of a new Anomaly Location within
Table LU-2, as indicated below, and amend the Land Use Map to reflect the
MU-H5 land use designation for the project site.
Table LU2
Anomaly Locations
Anomaly Statistical Land Use Development Development Limit Additional Information
Number Area Designation Limit(sf) (other)
85 B5 MU-H5 93 dwelling Accessory commercial
units and floor area is allowed in
15,000 sf conjunction with a hotel
commercial and it is included within
or 98,725 sf the hotel floor area limit.
hotel Municipal facilities are
not restricted or included
in any development limit.
• Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2O12-001: allow the
development of a 130-room hotel by changing the land use designation of the
site from Public Facilities (PF) to a new Mixed-Use (MU) land use category,
and establish density and intensity limits within Table 2.1.1-1. The proposed
amendment also includes a change to Policy 4.4.2-1 to establish the policy
basis for higher height limits, as described below.
Table 2.1.1-1
Land Use Plan Categories
Land Use Category Uses Densityllntensity
Mixed Use—MU The MU category is intended to provide 93 dwelling units and 15,000 sf of
for the development of a mix of uses, commercial
which may include general,
neighborhood or visitor-serving or
commercial,commercial offices,visitor
accommodations,multi-family 98,725 sf of hotel
residential,mixed use development,
and/or civic uses. Municipal facilities are not restricted or
included in any development limit.
In order to establish a higher height limit, CLUP Policy 4.4.2-1 is also
proposed to be amended as reflected below:
4.4.2-1 Maintain the 35-foot height limitation in the Shoreline Height
Limitation Zone, as graphically depicted on Map 4-3, except for
the following site sites.
A. Marina Park located at 1600 West Balboa Boulevard: A
single, up to 73-foot tall architectural tower that does not
include floor area but could house screened
communications or emergency equipment. The
additional height would create an iconic landmark for the
public to identify the site from land and water and a
visual focal point to enhance public views from
surrounding vantages.
B. Back Bay Landing at East Coast Highway/Bayside
Drive: A single, up to 65-foot-tall coastal public view
tower, that will be ADA-compliant and publicly
accessible, to provide new coastal and Upper Newport
Bay view opportunities where existing views are
impacted by the East Coast Highway Bridge, other
existing structures and topography.
C. Former City Hall Complex located at 3300 Newport
Boulevard: Buildings and structures up to 55 feet in
height provided it is demonstrated that development
does not negatively impact public views Peaks _of
slo ing roofs and elevator towers may exceed 55 feet by
up to 5 feet and architectural features such as domes
towers, cupolas spires and similar structures may
exceed 55 feet by 10 feet. The purpose of allowing
buildings structures and architectural elements to
exceed 35 feet is to promote vertical clustering resulting
in increased open space and architectural diversity while
protecting existing coastal views and providing new
coastal view opportunities.
Code Amendment No. CA2012-003: To amend the Zoning Map of the
Zoning Code to replace the existing PF zoning designation for the site with a
new zone MU-LV designation (Mixed-Use-Lido Village) to establish density
Subsection B related to the Back Bay Landing site was adopted by the City Council on February 11, 2014, by
Resolution No. 2014-12 but has not been certified (approved) by the California Coastal Commission as of June
2014.
and intensity limits consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment.
Development standards and allowed uses would also be established.
Approval of the Zoning Code Amendment will result in the creation of the
following new mixed-use zoning district:
MU-LV (Mixed Use — Lido Village)
Purpose: The MU-LV designation applies to the former City Hall Complex
located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard
and 32nd Street. The MU-LV designation provides for the horizontal or
vertical intermixing of commercial, visitor accommodations, residential,
and/or civic uses. Civic uses may include a community center, public
plazas, fire station, and/or public parking.
Allowed Uses: Retail commercial offices (non-medical), visitor
accommodations, multi-unit residential, community center, fire station,
public parking facility.
Maximum density/intensity: 93 dwelling units and 15,000 sf commercial or
98,725 sf of hotel. Municipal facilities are not restricted or included in any
development limit.
Structure height: 55 feet; however, peaks of sloping roofs and elevator
towers may exceed 55 feet by up to 5 feet and architectural features such
as domes, towers, cupolas, spires, and similar structures may exceed 55
feet by 10 feet.
Building setbacks:
Subterranean' 1 foot
Newport Boulevard 16r and 2nd floor2 20 feet
Above 2nd floor3 35 feet
Subterranean' 1 foot
32nd Street 16i and 2nd floor2 1 foot
Above 2nd floor3 10 feet
Interior Subterranean' 1 foot
Above grade 5 feet
I Not more than 1 foot above abutting public sidewalk.
21-26 feet above abutting public sidewalk.
3 More than 26 feet above abuttingpublic sidewalk
Open Space: 20% of the project site to be maintained as public open
space (e.g., public plazas, pedestrian promenades, outdoor recreational
spaces, patios, landscaping, etc.).
Parking and other development standards: Subject to Zoning Code
Development Review Process: Consistent with the Zoning Code — Site
Development Review (SDR) or Planned Development Permit (PDP).
• Site Development Review No. SD2014-001 & Use Permit No. UP2014-
004: These applications would authorize the construction and operation of a
luxury, 130-room hotel. The plan includes a open space along the Newport
Boulevard and 32nd Street frontages and changes to 32rd Street including the
modification of on-street parking between Newport boulevard and Via Oporto.
• Traffic Study No. TS2014-005: A project-specific Traffic Impact Analysis
(TIA) has been prepared for the proposed 130-room hotel development
pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance.
The Final EIR would also provide environmental information to responsible
agencies, trustee agencies, and other public agencies that may be required to grant
approvals and permits or coordinate with the City of Newport Beach as a part of
project implementation. These agencies include, but are not limited to:
• Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Santa Ana RWQCB
would approve the project's compliance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Statewide General Construction Activity permit
(2009-0009-DWQ) and Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System (MS4)
permit.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Future
construction of the project would require permitting by SCAQMD for Rules
201 (permit to construct), 402 (nuisance odors), 403 (fugitive dust), 1113
(architectural coatings), 1403 (asbestos emissions from demolition), and for
future operation of the project, 1186 (street sweeping).
• California Coastal Commission (CCC). The Coastal Commission will review
the proposed Coastal Land Use Plan amendment for consistency with the
California Coastal Act. After a certification the proposed amendment as
consistent with the Coastal Act, the Coastal Commission would review an
Coastal Development Permit application for the development and operation of
the proposed Lido House Hotel.
D. Statement of Project Objectives
The statement of objectives sought by the project and set forth in the Final EIR is
provided as follows:
1. Enhance Newport Beach and Lido Village by creating a highly visible, iconic
development with distinctive architecture, significant landscaped areas, and
focal points to serve as a gateway to the Balboa Peninsula.
2. Help implement the City's goal to revitalize Lido Village by creating a
catalytic development consistent with the Lido Village Design Guidelines that
enhances economic activity and contributes to Newport Beach's reputation
as a premier destination for shopping and recreation.
3. Create a pedestrian oriented development that is physically well-connected
to the community while not significantly increasing traffic to the site when
compared to the prior use of the site.
4. Provide and enhance public access to the property by creating publically
accessible open space and visitor accommodations.
5. Provide needed services to residents and visitors including visitor
accommodations, recreational, personal services, shopping, dining, and
assembly opportunities.
6. Create a premier boutique hotel that is a financially viable operation.
7. Create City revenue through lease payments and transient occupancy tax.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Final EIR includes the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) dated April
28, 2014, written comments on the Draft EIR that were received during the 45-day
public review period, written responses to those comments, clarifications/changes to the
Final EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. In conformance with
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City conducted an extensive environmental
review of the Lido House Hotel project:
• Completion of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), which was released for a 30-day
public review period from November 6, 2013, through December 5, 2013. The
NOP was sent to all responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the Office of
Planning Research and posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder's office and
on the City's website on November 6, 2013.
• During the NOP review period, a Scoping Meeting was held to solicit additional
suggestions on the content of the Lido House Hotel EIR. Attendees were
provided an opportunity to identify verbally or in writing the issues they felt should
be addressed in the EIR. The scoping meeting was held on Wednesday,
November 20, 2013, at the City of Newport Beach former City Council
Chambers, located at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 9266.
• Preparation of a Draft EIR by the City that was made available for a 45-day
public review period (April 29, 2014 to June 13, 2014). The Draft EIR consisted of
analysis of the Lido House Hotel project and the technical appendices. On April
25, 2014, a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was mailed to property
owners and occupants within 450-feet of the project site. The NOA was also sent
to all interested persons, agencies and organizations. The Notice of Completion
(NOC) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to
public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder's
office on April 29, 2014. Copies of the Draft EIR were made available for public
review at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department,
Newport Beach Central Branch Library, Newport Beach Balboa Branch Library,
Newport Beach Mariners Branch Library, and Newport Beach Corona del Mar
Branch Library. The Draft EIR was available for download via the City's website:
http://www.newportbeachea.gov/eir.
• Preparation of a Draft Final EIR including Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR,
responses to those comments, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and
appended documents. The preliminary Response to Comments were provided
to the City Planning Commissioners on July 11, 2014, and posted on the City's
website.
• The Planning Commission held a study session on the Project on June 5, 2014,
in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A public hearing was scheduled for July 17, 2014, but to allow the
public additional opportunity to review the staff report, the hearing was continued
to August 7, 2014. The August 7, 2014 was canceled, so a special meeting was
conducted on August 11, 2014. Notices of time, place, and purpose of the public
hearing were provided in accordance with CEQA and NBMC. The Draft Final
EIR, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and
considered by the Planning Commission at this hearing. Notice for this public
hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all property owners within a
minimum of 450 feet of the project site and to all interested persons, agencies
and organizations, and posted at the project site a minimum of 10 days in
advance of the hearing, consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item
appeared on the agenda for the meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on
the City website.
• In compliance with Section 15088(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines), the City provided written Responses to
Comments to public agencies on July 21, 2014, at least 10 days prior to certifying
the Final EIR.
• The City Council held a public hearing on , 2014, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the
time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in accordance
with CEQA and NBMC. The Final EIR, staff report, and evidence, both written
and oral, were presented to and considered by the City Council at this hearing.
Notice for the meeting was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all property
owners within a minimum 450 feet of the project site and to all interested
persons, agencies and organizations, and posted at the project site a minimum of
10 days in advance of the hearing, consistent with the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for the meeting, which was posted
at City Hall and on the City website.
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project
consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
• All project application materials submitted to the City by the Applicant and its
representatives;
• NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the
proposed project;
• The Scoping Meeting notes held during the 30-day NOP period;
• The Final EIR, including the Draft EIR and all appendices, the Responses to
Comments, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and all
supporting materials referenced therein. All documents, studies, EIRs, or other
materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and Final EIR;
• Written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public during the
45-day public review comment period on the Draft EIR;
• All responses to the written comments submitted by agencies and members of
the public provided at the Planning Commission meeting on July 17, 2014,
Planning Commission public hearing on August 11, 2014, and City Council public
hearing on August_, 2014;
• The testimony provided by agencies and members of the public at the Planning
Commission meeting on July 17, 2014, Planning Commission public hearing on
August 11, 2014, and City Council public hearing on , 2014;
• All final City Staff Reports relating to the Draft EIR, Final EIR, and the project;
• All other public reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps, or other
planning documents relating to the project, the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR
prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or Responsible or Trustee
Agencies.
• The MMRP adopted by the City for the project; the Ordinances and Resolutions
adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project; and all documents
incorporated by reference therein;
• These Findings of Fact adopted by the City for the project, any documents
expressly cited in these Findings of Fact; and
• Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public
Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).
The documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings on which
these findings are based are located at the City of Newport Beach Community
Development Department. The custodian for these documents is the City of Newport
Beach. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section
21081.6(a)(2) and 14 California Code Regulations Section 15091(e).
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WERE DETERMINED NOT TO BE
POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Impacts Determined to be Less Than Significant in the DEIR
The following impacts were evaluated in the DEIR and determined to be less than
significant solely through adherence to the project design and standard conditions of the
City of Newport Beach.
Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR, and the comments
received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or
identified by the City indicating that the project would have an impact on the following
environmental areas:
(a) Aesthetic/Light and Glare: The project would not have a substantial adverse
effect on scenic vistas, or substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State
scenic highway.
(b) Air Quality: The project would not create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people.
(c) Biological Resources: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on
any special status species, sensitive natural community, federally protected
wetlands, or conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan.
(d) Cultural Resources: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource, or disturb any human remains.
(e) Geology and Soils: The project would not expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects from the rupture of a known earthquake
fault, and would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
(f) Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The project would generate greenhouse gas
emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment, and would
not conflict with the plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
(g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The project would not create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials; emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; create a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area as a result on
being within a private airstrip or an airport land use plan; interfere with an
adopted emergency response or evacuation plan; or expose people or structures
to wildland fires.
(h) Hydrology and Water Quality: The project would not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge; alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site that would result in substantial soil erosion or
flooding; create runoff water that would exceed the existing or planned capacity
of the stormwater drainage systems; place housing within a 100-year floodplain;
expose people or structures to injury or death from flooding; or result in
inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
(i) Land Use and Planning: The project would not divide an established community,
conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the City's General Plan
and Local Coastal Program CLUP, SCAG regional plans, Airport Environs Land
Use Plan, the California Coastal Act, or the City's Municipal Code) adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, or conflict with any
applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
0) Noise: Project implementation would not generate excessive vibration levels to
nearby sensitive receptors, result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels, or expose people residing/working in the project area to excessive
noise levels within the vicinity of a private airstrip or airport land use plan.
(k) Population and Housing: The project would not result in substantial increase in
population or housing.
(1) Public Services and Utilities: The project would not create significant impacts
related to fire protection, police protection, parks/recreation, schools, or library
services. In addition, the project would meet the City's parkland dedication
requirements, and physical impacts to recreational and park spaces would not be
significant. The project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements or
require the construction of new stormwater drainage/water/wastewater treatment
facilities, and would have sufficient water supplies to serve the project. Lastly,
the project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs, and would comply with
Federal, State, and local regulations related to solid waste.
(m) Transportation and Traffic: The project-generated traffic would not conflict with an
applicable congestion management program, result in a change in air traffic
patterns, substantially increases hazards due to a design feature, result in
inadequate emergency access, or conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
5. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
The following potentially significant environmental impacts were analyzed in the EIR,
and the effects of the project were considered. As a result of environmental analysis of
the project and the identification of project design features; compliance with existing
laws, codes, and statutes; and the identification of feasible mitigation measures
(together referred herein as the Mitigation Program), some potentially significant
impacts have been determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than
significant, and the City has found—in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1) and
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) (1)—that "Changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment. This is referred to herein as "Finding V' Where the City has
determined—pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(2) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a)(2)—that "Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted
by that other agency," the City's finding is referred to herein as "Finding 2."
A. Aesthetics/Light and Glare
(1) Potential Impact: Project construction activities could temporarily degrade the
visual character/quality of the site and its surroundings.
Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce visual character/quality impacts
from project construction activities to less than significant levels. The City hereby
makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is mitigated to less than
significant.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure AES-1 requires action to be taken prior to construction
activities in order to avoid adverse visual impacts from the stockpiling of
materials, construction traffic, and vehicle staging areas. Therefore, visual
character/quality impacts from construction activities would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Prior to issuance of any grading and/or demolition
permits, whichever occurs first, a Construction Management Plan
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of
Community Development. The Construction Management Plan
shall, at a minimum, indicate the equipment and vehicle staging
areas, stockpiling of materials, fencing (i.e., temporary fencing with
opaque material), and haul route(s). Staging areas shall be sited
and/or screened in order to minimize public views to the maximum
extent practicable. Construction haul routes shall minimize impacts
to sensitive uses in the City.
(2) Potential Impact: Project implementation could degrade the visual
character/quality of the site and its surroundings.
Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce long-term visual character/quality
impacts from the proposed project to less than significant levels. The City hereby
makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is mitigated to less than
significant.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure AES-2 requires action to be taken prior to construction
activities in order to avoid adverse long-term visual impacts from the proposed
Landscape Concept Plan and Plant Palette. Therefore, long-term visual
character/quality impacts from project implementation would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AES-2: Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit for
new construction, the Landscape Concept Plan and Plant Palette
shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for
review and approval. Landscaping shall complement the proposed
site design and surrounding streetscape and must also , be
consistent with the Lido Village Design Guidelines.
(3) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could generate
additional light and glare beyond existing conditions.
Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce light and glare impacts from the
proposed project to less than significant levels. The City hereby makes Finding 1
and determines that this impact is mitigated to less than significant.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure AES-3 requires action to be taken prior to construction
activities in order to avoid adverse visual impacts from light and glare from the
proposed project. Therefore, light and glare impacts from project implementation
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AES-3: All construction-related lighting shall be located and
aimed away from adjacent residential areas and consist of the
minimal wattage necessary to provide safety and security at the
construction site. A Construction Safety Lighting Plan shall be
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of the grading or building permit application.
B. Air Quality
(1) Potential Impact: Short-term construction activities associated with the proposed
project could result in air pollutant emission impacts or expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to short-term
construction air emissions to less than significant levels. The City hereby makes
Finding 1 and determines that this impact is mitigated to less than significant.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires one or more actions to be taken prior to and
during construction activities in order to avoid adverse air quality emission
impacts. Mitigation Measure AQ-2 requires action to be taken prior to
construction activities to reduce impacts from fugitive dust from the hauling of
excavated or graded material. Therefore, short-term construction air quality
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the
Community Development Department shall confirm that the
Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that, in
compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust
emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust
prevention measures, as specified in the SCAQMD's Rules and
Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires
implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive
dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of the
following measures would reduce short-term fugitive dust impacts
on nearby sensitive receptors:
• All active portions of the construction site shall be watered
every three hours during daily construction activities and
when dust is observed migrating from the project site to
prevent excessive amounts of dust;
• Pave or apply water every three hours during daily
construction activities or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all
unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas.
More frequent watering shall occur if dust is observed
migrating from the site during site disturbance;
• Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt, or other dusty material
shall be enclosed, covered, or watered twice daily, or non-
toxic soil binders shall be applied;
• All grading and excavation operations shall be suspended
when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour;
• Disturbed areas shall be replaced with ground cover or paved
immediately after construction is completed in the affected
area;
• Track-out devices such as gravel bed track-out aprons (3
inches deep, 25 feet long, 12 feet wide per lane and edged by
rock berm or row of stakes) shall be installed to reduce
mud/dirt trackout from unpaved truck exit routes.
Alternatively a wheel washer shall be used at truck exit
routes;
• On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour;
• All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently
watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of
dust prior to departing the job site; and
• Trucks associated with soil-hauling activities shall avoid
residential streets and utilize City-designated truck routes to
the extent feasible.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2: All trucks that are to haul excavated or graded
material on-site shall comply with State Vehicle Code Section
23114 (Spilling Loads on Highways), with special attention to
Sections 23114(b)(F) and (e)(4) as amended, regarding the
prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall
coordinate with the Community Development Department on
hauling activities compliance.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to air quality that are applicable to the proposed project at this time;
however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to the
project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review,
tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction process.
C. Biological Resources
(1) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could interfere with
the movement of a native resident or migratory species.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is
less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 requires all vegetation removal activities to be
scheduled outside of the nesting season to avoid potential impacts to nesting
birds; however, if vegetation removal is to occur during the nesting season, a
survey for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist would be
required. Further action is required if active nests are found on-site during
nesting season. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measures BIO-1 would
reduce potential impacts to migratory birds to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 13I0-1: To the extent feasible, all vegetation removal
activities shall be scheduled outside of the nesting season (typically
February 15 to August 15) to avoid potential impacts to nesting
birds. However, if initial vegetation removal occurs during the
nesting season, all suitable habitat shall be thoroughly surveyed for
the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist prior to
commencement of clearing. If any active nests are detected, a
buffer of at least 300 feet for raptors shall be delineated, flagged,
and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete as determined by
the City.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project at this
time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to
the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development
review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction
process.
(2) Potential Impact: The project could conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is
less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires the City to locate an existing Ficus benjamina
tree or other suitable tree into a City park and dedicate the tree in the name of
William Lawrence "Billy" Covert. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires the City shall
to an existing tree in a very prominent location within a City park or at the new
Civic Center and dedicate it as The Freedom Tree. Mitigation Measure BI04
requires the City to locate an existing tree within a City park and dedicate it in the
name of Walter and Cordelia Knott, and locate an existing tree in a prominent
location within a City park or at the new Civic Center and dedicate it in honor of
the State of California. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measures BIO-2
through BI04 would reduce potential impacts to biological resources to less than
significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 13I0-2: The City shall locate an existing Ficus benjamina
tree or other suitable tree into a City park and dedicate the tree in
the name of William Lawrence "Billy" Covert. Should an
appropriate tree not be found, the City shall attempt to transplant
the existing tree or plant a new tree of the same variety at an
appropriate location. The re-dedicated tree shall have a permanent
marker or plaque. Every effort shall be made to involve the Covert
family in this process.
Mitigation Measure 13I0-3: Because the Freedom Tree also cannot be
effectively transplanted, the City shall locate an existing tree in a
very prominent location within a City park or at the new Civic
Center and dedicate it as The Freedom Tree. An appropriate
permanent marker or plaque shall be provided and the dedication
should be accomplished with community and veterans groups'
participation.
Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Because the Walter Knott Tree and the California
Bicentennial Tree cannot be effectively transplanted, the City shall
locate an existing tree within a City park and dedicate it in the name
of Walter and Cordelia Knott. The City shall also locate an existing
tree in a prominent location within a City park or at the new Civic
Center and dedicate it in honor of the State of California. The
re-dedicated trees shall have permanent markers and every effort
shall be made to involve the Knott family and the community in the
process.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project at this
time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to
the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development
review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction
process.
D. Cultural Resources
(1) Potential Impact: The proposed project may cause a significant impact to
unknown archaeological resources that could occur on-site.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is
less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 requires a professional archaeologist and a Native
American Monitor to be retained to monitor ground-disturbing activities,
determine potential to disturb cultural resources, and halt construction activities if
necessary. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would
reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: An archaeologist and a Native American Monitor
appointed by the City of Newport Beach shall be present during
earth removal or disturbance activities related to rough grading and
other excavation for utilities. If any earth removal or disturbance
activities result in the discovery of cultural resources, the Project
proponent's contractors shall cease all earth removal or
disturbance activities in the vicinity and immediately notify the City
selected archaeologist and/or Native American Monitor, who shall
immediately notify the Director of Community Development. The
City selected archaeologist shall evaluate all potential cultural
findings in accordance with standard practice, the requirements of
the City of Newport Beach Cultural Resources Element, and other
applicable regulations. Consultation with the Native American
Monitor, the Native American Heritage Commission, and
data/artifact recovery, if deemed appropriate, shall be conducted.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
The following City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval would
apply to the proposed project:
• The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified
archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to
establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and
recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been
prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of
the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures above.
(2) Potential Impact: The proposed project may cause a significant impact to
unknown paleontological resources that could occur on-site.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is
less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure CUL-2 requires an Orange County Certified Paleontologist to
be appointed by the City of Newport Beach, and to prepare a Paleontological
Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Program prior to earth removal or
disturbance activities at the project site. The requirements set forth in Mitigation
Measure CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: An Orange County Certified Paleontologist
appointed by the City of Newport Beach shall prepare a
Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Program prior
to earth removal or disturbance activities at the project site. The
City selected paleontologist shall be present during earth removal
or disturbance activities related to rough grading and other
excavation for utilities. Paleontological monitoring shall include
inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within
sensitive geologic sediments. If any earth removal or disturbance
activities result in the discovery of paleontological resources, the
Project proponent's contractors shall cease all earth removal or
disturbance activities in the vicinity and immediately notify the City
selected paleontologist who shall immediately notify the Community
Development Director. The City selected paleontologist shall
evaluate all potential paleontological findings in accordance with
the Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Program
Monitoring, standard practice, the requirements of the City of
Newport Beach Historic Resources Element, and other applicable
regulations. Upon completion of the fieldwork, the City selected
paleontologist shall prepare a Final Monitoring and Mitigation
Report to be filed with the City and the repository to include, but not
be limited to, a discussion of the results of the mitigation and
monitoring program, an evaluation and analysis of the fossils
collected (including an assessment of their significance, age,
geologic context), an itemized inventory of fossils collected, a
confidential appendix of locality and specimen data with locality
maps and photographs, and an appendix of curation agreements
and other appropriate communications.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
The following City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval would
apply to the proposed project:
• The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified
archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to
establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and
recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been
prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of
the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures above.
E. Geology and Soils
(1) Potential Impact: The proposed project may expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking.
(2) Potential Impact: The proposed project may expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects associated with seismically induced
liquefaction and settlement.
(3) Potential Impact: Development of the proposed project could be located on a
geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of
the project.
(4) Potential Impact: The proposed project may be located on expansive soil
creating substantial risks to life or property.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that these impacts
are less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation
measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Given the highly seismic character of the Southern California region and
proximity to active and potentially active faults, the project site would be likely to
be subject to significant ground motion, strong seismic ground shaking, and a
moderate potential for liquefaction due to seismic-induced settlement. Mitigation
Measure GEO-1 requires that all grading operations and construction associated
with the proposed project be conducted in conformance with the
recommendations included in the geotechnical investigation for the project, and
the City of Newport Beach and California Building Codes. In addition, the
geotechnical investigation provides recommendations to reduce impacts from
compressibility/static settlement, and expansive soils to less than significant
levels. Compliance with Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would ensure that risks
associated with strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, unstable geologic
units, and expansive soils are reduced to acceptable levels. As such, impacts
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: All grading operations and construction shall
be conducted in conformance with the recommendations included
in the geotechnical report for the proposed project site prepared by
GMU Geotechnical, Inc., titled Report of Geotechnical Investigation,
Lido House Hotel — City Hall Site Reuse Project, 3300 Newport
Boulevard, City of Newport Beach, California (December 4, 2013)
(included in Appendix 11.6 of this EIR and incorporated by
reference into this mitigation measure). Design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of Newport Beach Building Code and the
California Building Code applicable at the time of grading,
appropriate local grading regulations, and the recommendations of
the project geotechnical consultant as summarized in a final written
report, subject to review by the City of Newport Beach Building
Official or designee prior to commencement of grading activities.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to geology and soils that are applicable to the proposed project at this
time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to
the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development
review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction
process.
(5) Potential Impact: Development of the proposed project could encounter
corrosive soils potentially resulting in damage to foundations and buried
pipelines.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that these impacts
are less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation
measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
According to the geotechnical investigation for the project site, the soils on-site
would be very mildly corrosive to ferrous metals and possess a negligible sulfate
exposure to concrete. Consequently, metals structures in contact with the soil
may be subject to slight corrosion. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 provides
recommendations for reducing corrosion potential due to soil and groundwater.
Mitigation Measure GEO-2 requires a corrosion engineer to be consulted during
preparation of the Final Soils/Geotechnical Engineering Report for the project.
Compliance with Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2 would reduce potential
impacts associated with corrosive soils to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: All grading operations and construction shall be
conducted in conformance with the recommendations included in
the geotechnical report for the proposed project site prepared by
GMU Geotechnical, Inc., titled Report of Geotechnical Investigation,
Lido House Hotel — City Hall Site Reuse Project, 3300 Newport
Boulevard, City of Newport Beach, California (December 4, 2013)
(included in Appendix 11.6 of this EIR and incorporated by
reference into this mitigation measure). Design, grading, and
construction shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of the City of Newport Beach Building Code and the
California Building Code applicable at the time of grading,
appropriate local grading regulations, and the recommendations of
the project geotechnical consultant as summarized in a final written
report, subject to review by the City of Newport Beach Building
Official or designee prior to commencement of grading activities.
Mitigation Measure GEO-2: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of
Newport Beach Building Official or designee shall verify that the
City has retained the services of a licensed corrosion engineer to
provide detailed corrosion protection measures. Where steel may
come in contact with on-site soils, project construction shall include
the use of steel that is protected against corrosion. Corrosion
protection may include, but is not limited to, sacrificial metal, the
use of protective coatings, and/or cathodic protection. Additional
site testing and final design evaluation regarding the possible
presence of significant volumes of corrosive soils on site shall be
performed by the project geotechnical consultant to refine and
enhance these recommendations. On-site inspection during
grading shall be conducted by the project geotechnical consultant
and City Building Official to ensure compliance with geotechnical
specifications as incorporated into project plans.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to geology and soils that are applicable to the proposed project at this
time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to
the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development
review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction
process.
F. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(1) Potential Impact: The proposed project could create a significant hazard to the
public or environment through accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-5 address known and potential
hazardous materials conditions on the project site, and would require future
characterization and remediation of hazardous materials that may exist on the
property. Implementation of applicable mitigation measures would reduce risks
associated with on-site hazardous materials to an acceptable level. Impacts,
therefore, would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to demolition activities, an asbestos survey
shall be conducted by an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act (AHERA) and California Division of Occupational Safety and
Health (Cal/OSHA) certified building inspector to determine the
presence or absence of asbestos containing-materials (ACMs). If
ACMs are located, abatement of asbestos shall be completed prior
to any activities that would disturb ACMs or create an airborne
asbestos hazard. Asbestos removal shall be performed by a State
certified asbestos containment contractor in accordance with the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule
1403.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: If paint is separated from building materials
(chemically or physically) during demolition of the structures, the
paint waste shall be evaluated independently from the building
material by a qualified Environmental Professional. If lead-based
paint is found, abatement shall be completed by a qualified Lead
Specialist prior to any activities that would create lead dust or fume
hazard. Lead-based paint removal and disposal shall be performed
in accordance with California Code of Regulation Title 8, Section
1532.1, which specifies exposure limits, exposure monitoring and
respiratory protection, and mandates good worker practices by
workers exposed to lead. Contractors performing lead-based paint
removal shall provide evidence of abatement activities to the City
Engineer.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Any transformers to be removed or relocated
during grading%construction activities shall be evaluated under the
purview of the local utility purveyor (Southern California Edison) in
order to confirm or deny the presence of PCBs. In the event that
PCBs are identified, the local utility purveyor shall identify proper
handling procedures regarding potential PCBs.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-4: The Contractor shall verify that all imported soils,
and on-site soils proposed for fill, are not contaminated with
hazardous materials above regulatory thresholds in consultation
with a Phase II/Site Characterization Specialist. If soils are
determined to be contaminated above regulatory thresholds, these
soils shall not be used as fill material within the boundaries of the
project site, unless otherwise specified by a regulatory agency that
has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous substance cleanup (e.g.,
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality
Control Board, Orange County Health Care Agency, etc.).
Mitigation Measure HAZ-5: If unknown wastes or suspect materials are
discovered during construction by the contractor that are believed
to involve hazardous waste or materials, the contractor shall
comply with the following:
Immediately cease work in the vicinity of the suspected
contaminant, and remove workers and the public from the
area;
Notify the Building Official of the City of Newport Beach;
Secure the area as directed by the Building Official; and
Notify the Orange County Health Care Agency's Hazardous
Materials Division's Hazardous Waste/Materials Coordinator
(or other appropriate agency specified by the Community
Development Director). The Hazardous Waste/Materials
Coordinator shall advise the responsible party of further
actions that shall be taken, if required.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to existing hazardous materials contamination that are applicable to the
proposed project at this time; however, future project-specific conditions of
approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary
approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design,
and/or construction process.
G. Hydrology and Water Quality
(1) Potential Impact: Grading, excavation, and construction activities associated
with the proposed project could impact water quality.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Construction activities for the proposed project could generate soil erosion as
well as on- and off-site transport via storm run-off or mechanical equipment.
Poorly maintained vehicles and heavy equipment leaking fuel, oil, antifreeze, or
other vehicle-related fluids on the project site could create stormwater pollution
and soil contamination impacts. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2
require the project to prepare and submit a Notice of Intent, and a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the State Water Resources Board,
respectively. Mitigation Measure HWQ-3 requires the project applicant to submit
a Notice of Termination (NOT) to the SWRCB upon completion of project
construction. Implementation of applicable mitigation measures would reduce
impacts to water quality from short-term construction activities acceptable levels.
Impacts, therefore, would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: Prior to Grading Permit issuance and as part of the
project's compliance with the NPDES requirements, a Notice of
Intent (NOI) shall be prepared and submitted to the State Water
Resources Quality Control Board (SWRCB), providing notification
and intent to comply with the State of California General Permit.
Mitigation Measure HWQ-2: The proposed project shall conform to the
requirements of an approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) (to be applied for during the Grading Plan process)
and the NPDES Permit for General Construction Activities No.
CAS000002, Order No, 2009-0009-DWQ, including implementation
of all recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs), as
approved by the State Water Resources Quality Control Board
(SWRCB).
Mitigation Measure HWQ-3: Upon completion of project construction, the
project applicant shall submit a Notice of Termination (NOT) to the
State Water Resources Quality Control Board (SWRCB) to indicate
that construction is completed.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to hydrology and water quality that are applicable to the proposed project
at this time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be
applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site
development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or
construction process.
(2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could potentially result
in increased run-off amounts and degraded water quality.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
The project site would likely experience pollutant generation due to the proposed
land uses, potentially increasing the generation of suspended solids/sediments,
nutrients, heavy metals, pathogens, pesticides, oil and grease, toxic organic
compounds, and trash and debris. Due to the fact that the Lower Newport Bay is
listed on the 303(d) list for chlordane, copper, DDT, indicator bacteria, nutrients,
PCBs, pesticides, and sediment toxicity, and has a TMDL for metals, nutrients,
pathogens, pesticides, priority organics, and siltation, the proposed development
could have a significant adverse impact to storm water quality. Mitigation
Measure HWQ-4 requires the project applicant to submit a Final Water Quality
Management Plan to ensure long-term operational water quality impacts form the
proposed project are mitigated to acceptable levels. Therefore, impacts would
be less than significant with implementation of the applicable mitigation
measures.
Mitigation Measure HWQ-4: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project
applicant shall submit a Final Water Quality Management Plan for
approval by the Building Official that complies with the
requirements of the latest Orange County Public Works Drainage
Area Management Plan.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to hydrology and water quality that are applicable to the proposed project
at this time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be
applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site
development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or
construction process.
H. Noise
(3) Potential Impact: Grading and construction within the area could result in
significant temporary noise impacts to nearby noise sensitive receivers.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Construction activities associated with the proposed project could temporarily
increase noise levels in the project vicinity and along nearby roadways.
Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce short-term construction noise impacts by
requiring mobile equipment to be muffled and requiring best management
practices for hauling activities. Mitigation Measure N-1 would also implement the
City's Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, requiring construction activities to be
conducted during the City's allowable construction hours. With implementation of
applicable mitigation, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure N-1: Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit or Building
Permit for new construction, Community Development Department
shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and
specifications stipulate that:
• All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other
State required noise attenuation devices.
• The Applicant shall provide a qualified "Noise Disturbance
Coordinator." The Disturbance Coordinator shall be
responsible for responding to any local complaints about
construction noise. When a complaint is received, the
Disturbance Coordinator shall notify the City within 24-hours of
the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint
(e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall implement
reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed
acceptable by the City Development Services Department.
The contact name and the telephone number for the
Disturbance Coordinator shall be clearly posted on-site.
• When feasible, construction haul routes shall be designed to
avoid noise sensitive uses (e.g., residences, convalescent
homes, etc.).
• During construction, stationary construction equipment shall
be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from
sensitive noise receivers.
• Construction activities that produce noise shall not take place
outside of the allowable hours specified by the City's Municipal
Code Section 10.28.040 (7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on
weekdays, 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; construction
is prohibited on Sundays and/or federal holidays).
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
The following City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval would
apply to the proposed project:
• The project must comply with the exterior noise standards for
residential uses of the Noise Ordinance. The exterior noise level
standard is 65 dBA between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM
and 60 dBA between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. An
acoustic study shall be performed by a qualified professional that
demonstrates compliance with these standards of the Noise
Ordinance. This acoustic study shall be performed and submitted to
the Community Development Department as part of the Site
Development Review permit application for each residential
structure. If the exterior noise levels exceed applicable standards,
additional mitigation shall be required, which may include the
installation of additional sound attenuation devices as
recommended by the acoustic study and subject to the approval of
the Community Development Director.
• The operator of the proposed commercial uses shall be responsible
for the control of noise generated by the subject facility including,
but not limited to, noise generated by patrons, food service
operations, and mechanical equipment. All noise generated by the
proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26
and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no
more than noise limits specified in Table 5.10-3 for the specified
time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher.
• All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent
properties and adjacent public streets for each residential structure,
as authorized by a Site Development Review permit, and shall be
sound-attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control.
• The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 10.32, Sound-
Amplifying Equipment requires a permit for use of any sound-
amplifying equipment and regulates the volume so sound-
amplifying equipment is not a nuisance to persons. The use of
sound-amplifying equipment is prohibited outdoors between the
hours of 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM.
I. Transportation and Traffic
(1) Potential Impact: Project construction would not cause a significant increase in
traffic for existing conditions when compared to the traffic capacity of the street
system.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate
traffic as a result of equipment being transported to the site and vehicular traffic
related to construction works and delivery of materials to the project site.
Construction related trips associated with trucks and employees traveling to and
from the project site may result in minor traffic delays within the project area.
Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would require implementation of a construction
management plan, consisting of a variety of measures to minimize traffic and
parking impacts upon the local circulation system. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure TRA-1 would reduce potential short-term traffic impacts from project
construction to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Prior to Issuance of any grading and/or demolition
permits, whichever occurs first, a Construction Management Plan
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community
Development Department/City Traffic Engineer. The Construction
Management Plan shall, at a minimum, address the following:
• Traffic control for any street closure, detour, or other disruption
to traffic circulation.
• Identify the routes that construction vehicles will utilize for the
delivery of construction materials (i.e., lumber, tiles, piping,
windows, etc.), to access the site, traffic controls and detours,
and proposed construction phasing plan for the project.
• Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur
and methods to mitigate construction-related impacts to
adjacent streets.
• Require the Applicant to keep all haul routes clean and free of
debris, including but not limited to gravel and dirt as a result of
its operations. The Applicant shall clean adjacent streets, as
directed by the City Engineer (or representative of the City
Engineer), of any material which may have been spilled,
tracked, or blown onto adjacent streets or areas.
• Hauling or transport of oversize loads shall be allowed
between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM only, Monday
through Friday, unless approved otherwise by the City
Engineer. No hauling or transport will be allowed during
nighttime hours, weekends, or Federal holidays.
• Use of local streets shall be prohibited.
• Haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times
yield to public traffic.
If hauling operations cause any damage to existing pavement,
streets, curbs, and/or gutters along the haul route, the
applicant shall be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs
shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
All constructed-related parking and staging of vehicles shall be
kept out of the adjacent public roadways and shall occur on-
site or in public parking lots.
This Plan shall meet standards established in the current California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device (MUTCD) as well as City
of Newport Beach requirements.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to project construction traffic that are applicable to the proposed project at
this time; however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied
to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development
review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction
process.
(2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the project would not conflict with the
requirements of Newport Beach municipal code chapter 20.40, off-street parking.
Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact
would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the
proposed mitigation measures.
Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure TRA-2 requires the implementation of a Parking Management
Plan that would include restricted parking, time limit parking, parking guide
signage, and addresses staff parking to ensure that parking is managed on-site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-2 would reduce potential impacts
associated with parking supply during peak demand to a less than significant
level.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure TRA-2: Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, the
applicant shall submit a Parking Management Plan for review and
approval by the Community Development Department. The
Parking Management Plan shall, at a minimum, include the
following and be implemented at all times:
• Restrict all on-site parking spaces to either a time limit or a
valet parking arrangement.
• Restrict access to on-site parking areas (with the exception of
visitor parking by the hotel lobby) to either valet staff, or guests
and visitors only through a manned gate, a gate with intercom
access, or a gate that reads the room keys.
• Restrict parking for in-demand parking spaces by time limits.
The time limit should apply from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday
through Friday.
• Post signs at locations where motorists can be redirected from
curb parking or desirable parking areas to convenient off-
street lots and structures.
Encourage on-site employee parking by providing free parking
on-site or providing incentives for using alternative modes of
transportation, such as providing free or discounted bus
passes; an employee bike rack, entering employees who take
the bus, carpool, walk, or ride a bicycle in a monthly raffle;
providing a monthly stipend for bicycle commuting; providing
carpool parking spaces, or other incentives.
City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions
There are no specific City-adopted standard operating conditions of approval
related to parking that are applicable to the proposed project at this time;
however, future project-specific conditions of approval may be applied to the
project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review,
tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and/or construction process.
6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
A. Alternatives Considered and Rejected During the Scoping/Project
Planning Process
In addition to the guidance cited above regarding purpose and contents of an analysis
of alternatives to a proposed project, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) states that
an EIR should identify alternatives that were considered for analysis but rejected as
infeasible and briefly explain the reasons for their rejection. According to the CEQA
Guidelines, the following factors may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed
consideration: the alternative's failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, the
alternative's infeasibility, or the alternative's inability to avoid significant environmental
impacts. One alternative that has been considered and rejected as infeasible is
discussed below.
• One alternative that has been considered and rejected as infeasible is the
Alternative Location Alternative. The project site is available for development
because it is a vacant and underutilized site within the City of Newport Beach.
It is unlikely that the Applicant would be able to acquire another property
within the City on which to develop a project of similar size and scale to that
currently proposed. In addition, no significant and unavoidable impacts have
been identified to be associated with the proposed project. Therefore,
considering development of the project at an alternative location would serve
no purpose. Furthermore, it is a key objective of the proposed project, and a
key aspect of its design, to enhance the Lido Village area. As such, this
alternative has been rejected from further consideration by the City.
B. Alternatives Selected for Analysis
Based on the criteria listed above, the following three alternatives have been
determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives that could potentially attain
most of the basic objectives of the project and have the potential to avoid or
substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects of the project. These
alternatives are analyzed in detail in the following sections.
• No Proi.ect/No Build Alternative
• No Project/Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Alternative
• Reduced Density Alternative
• Mixed Use Alternative
An EIR must identify an "environmentally superior" alternative, and where the No
Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is required to
identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated.
Each alternative's environmental impacts are compared to the proposed project and
determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior. However, only significant
and unavoidable impacts are used in making the final determination of whether an
alternative is environmentally superior or inferior to the proposed project. However, no
impacts analyzed in the Draft EIR were found to be significant and unavoidable.
Subsection 7.4 in Chapter 7, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR identifies the environmentally
superior alternative.
The proposed project is analyzed in detail in Chapter 7 of the DEIR.
1. Alternatives Comparison
Table 1, Comparison of Impacts Associated with the Alternatives and Impacts of the
Proposed Project, below, provides a summary matrix that compares the impacts
associated with the project with the impacts of each of the proposed alternatives.
Table 1
Comparison of Impacts Associated with the Alternatives and Impacts of the Proposed Project
Alternative 2:
No Project/Existing
Alternative 1: General Plan Land Alternative 3: Alternative 4
Project Impact No ProjectlNo Build Use Designation Reduced Density Mixed use
Aesthetics/Light Less Than Significant Less Less Similar Similar
and Glare with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Air QualityLess Than Significant Less Less Less
with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than Greater(Potentially
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant Impact)
Biological Less Than Significant Less Similar Similar Similar
Resources with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Cultural Less Than Significant Less Similar Similar Similar
Resources with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Geology and Less Than Significant Less Similar Similar Similar
Soils with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Greenhouse Gas Less Less Less
Emissions Less Than Significant (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than Greater(Potentially
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant Impact)
Alternative 2:
No Project/Existing
Alternative 1: General Plan Land Alternative 3: Alternative 4
Project Impact No Project/No Build Use Designation Reduced Density Mixed use
Hazards and Less Similar Similar Similar
Hazardous Less Than Significant Less Than
Materials with Mitigation (Less Than Significant) (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Si 9 ) Significant) Significant)
Hydrology and Less Than Significant Greater(Potentially Similar Similar Similar
Water Quality with Mitigation Significant Impact) (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant)
Land Use and Less Less Similar Similar
Relevant Less Than Significant (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Planning Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Less Than Significant Less Less Similar
Noise Less Than Greater(Potentially
with Mitigation (Less Than ( (Less Than Significant Impact)
Significant) Significant) Significant) g p )
Public Services Less Similar Similar Similar
and Utilities Less Than Significant (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant)
Traffic and Less Than Significant Less Similar Less
Circulation with Mitigation (Less Than (Less Than (Less Than Greater(Potentially
Significant) Significant) Significant) Significant Impact)
a) No Project/No Build Alternative
Description: In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No Build
Alternative for a development project on an identifiable property consists of the
circumstance under which the project does not proceed. Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) of
the CEQA Guidelines states that, "in certain instances, the No Project/No Build
Alternative means 'no build' wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained."
Accordingly, for purposes of this analysis, the No Project/No Build Alternative
(Alternative 1) assumes that no new development would occur within the project site.
The No Project/No Build Alternative would retain the project site in its current condition.
With this Alternative, the City Hall Complex would remain vacant and unimproved
although the City would likely continue very limited use of existing buildings suitable of
occupancy. The existing 60,600 square feet of administration/office floor area would not
be removed. The existing landscaping would be retained and maintained. Public open
spaces consisting of pedestrian plazas, landscape areas, and other amenities would not
be constructed along Newport Boulevard or 32nd Street. None of the improvements as
part of the Lido House Hotel would be constructed. Under the No Project/No Build
Alternative, the land use, zoning, and CLUP categories would not be amended.
Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project/No Build Alternative's
environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project is set forth in Subsection
7.1.1 in Chapter 7, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by
reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the No
Project/No Build Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics/light and glare, air
quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas
emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and relevant planning, noise,
public services and utilities, and traffic and circulation. Water quality impacts under this
Alternative would be greater than the proposed project. Overall, the No Project/No Build
Alternative would have less environmental impacts than the proposed project.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The No Project/Development Alternative would
not attain any of the project's basic objectives. An iconic development that would revitalize
the Lido Village and create a pedestrian oriented development would not be constructed.
Shopping, dining, assembly opportunities, publically accessible open space, and visitor
accommodations for visitor and residents of Newport Beach would not be provided on the
project site. The No Project/No Build Alternative would also not create City revenue
through lease payments and transient occupancy tax.
Feasibility: Since the No Project/No Build Alternative would allow the existing City Hall
Complex to remain vacant and unimproved, the feasibility of this Alternative would rely
on the economic feasibility of indefinite operation of these uses. No changes to the
existing conditions would occur, and all operations would continue indefinitely.
Finding: In comparison to the proposed project, the No Project/No Build Alternative
would reduce impacts to aesthetics/light and glare, air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and
hazardous materials, land use and relevant planning, noise, public services and utilities,
and traffic and circulation. Water quality impacts under this Alternative would be greater
than the proposed project. This alternative would fail to fully meet any of the project
objectives. Overall, the No Project/No Build Alternative would have fewer environmental
impacts than the proposed project, making it the environmentally superior alternative.
However, since the No Project/No Build Alternative fails to meet any of the project
objectives, it has been rejected by the City in favor of the proposed project.
b) No Project/Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Alternative
Description: The "No Project/Existing General Plan Land use Designation" Alternative
proposes development of what would be reasonably expected to occur in the
foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on the property's current
General Plan land use and zoning designations of "Public Facilities." The Public
Facilities Zoning District is intended to provide for areas appropriate for public facilities,
including community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities,
libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools. Neither the General Plan
or the Zoning Code (Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code) identifies a
maximum development density or intensity for this use, but requires a Minor Use Permit
(MUP). The City does not currently have a need for municipal offices at this location
and does not plan to relocate the police station to the project site. Additionally, the City
sent a notice of surplus land to the school district, affordable housing advocates, and
park districts in accordance with Section 54222 of the Government Code and did not get
a response. Therefore, this Alternative will assume a development of 60,600 square
feet of municipally-sponsored uses that could include government offices, community
meeting rooms, and parking necessary to support on-site uses of a similar development
intensity as the former City Hall Complex. The development associated with this
alternative would include the demolition of the existing outdated structures, and would
construct a new modern facility that would serve the community for meetings,
recreation, and ancillary uses.
Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project/Existing General Plan Land
Use Designation Alternative's environmental impacts compared to those of the
proposed project is set forth in Subsection 7.1.2 in Chapter 7, Alternatives, of the Draft
EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project,
as shown above in Table 1 , the No Project/Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics/light and glare, air quality, greenhouse
gas emissions, land use and relevant planning, and noise. Biological resources, cultural
resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water
quality, public services and utilities, and traffic and circulation impacts would be similar
to the proposed project.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative
would not attain the project's fundamental objective to revitalize the Lido Village and create
a pedestrian oriented development. Shopping, dining, assembly opportunities, publically
accessible open space, and visitor accommodations for visitors and residents of Newport
Beach would not be provided on the project site.
Feasibility: Although the No Project/Existing General Plan Land Use Alternative would
be physically feasible, it may not be economically feasible. It is uncertain whether this
Alternative would yield a reasonable return on investment, as The No Project/No Build
Alternative would also not create City revenue through lease payments and transient
occupancy tax.
Finding: This Alternative would not meet any of the project's objectives. It would reduce
environmental impacts to aesthetics/light and glare, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
land use and relevant planning, and noise. However, it would result in similar impacts
related to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and
hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, public services and utilities, and traffic and
circulation. Also, because it does not include the development of a hotel, this Alternative it
would not require a General Plan Amendment, CLUP Amendment, Zoning Code
Amendment, or a Conditional Use Permit. Moreover, it would not create City revenue
through lease payments and transient occupancy tax, and may be economically infeasible.
For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this
Alternative.
c) Reduced Density Alternative
Description: Under the Reduced Density Alternative, proposes the development of a
hotel use on the project site that would have approximately 108 rooms and would be three
floors. The Reduced Density would have the same basic building footprint, architecture,
open space areas, and vehicular access as the proposed project. The development
associated with this alternative would include the demolition of the existing outdated
structures. Under the Reduced Density Alternative, the land use, zoning, and CLUP
categories would still need to be amended similar to the proposed project.
Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the Reduced Density Alternative's
environmental impacts compared to those of the proposed project is set forth in
Subsection 7.2 in Chapter 7, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated
by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the
Reduced Density Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas
emissions, and traffic and circulation. Aesthetics/light and glare, biological resources,
cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology/water quality, land use and relevant planning, noise, and public services and
utilities impacts would be similar to the proposed project.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The Reduced Density Alternative would attain
all of the project's objectives provided it is financially viable. As with the proposed
project, a reduced density hotel project would help revitalize the Lido Village area and
create a pedestrian oriented development. Shopping, dining, assembly opportunities,
publically accessible open space, and visitor accommodations for visitors and residents
of Newport Beach would also be provided on the project site but to a lesser degree
when compared to the proposed project.
Feasibility: As with the proposed project, the Reduced Density Alternative would be
economically feasible. However, the Reduced Density Alternative would create less City
revenue through lease payments and transient occupancy tax.
Finding: The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce impacts to air quality,
greenhouse gas emissions, and traffic and circulation. Impacts related to
aesthetics/light and glare, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils,
hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use and relevant
planning, noise, and public services and utilities would be similar to the proposed
project. While this Alternative would attain all of the project's objectives provided it is
financially feasible, it would create less City revenue through lease payments and
transient occupancy tax. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is
preferred over this Alternative.
d) Mixed Use Alternative
Description: The Mixed Use Alternative would remove the existing City Hall Complex and
include the development of 99 multifamily dwelling units and 15,000 square feet of
commercial uses on the project site. Based on the number of dwelling units and
commercial space, the potential building footprint would likely be similar to the proposed
project and building heights would also be similar. This alternative would amend the
General Plan, CLUP, and Zoning Code designations from "Public Facilities" for the project
site.
Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the Mixed Use Density Alternative's
environmental impacts compared to those of the proposed project is set forth in
Subsection 7.3 in Chapter 7, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated
by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the
Mixed Use Alternative would result in greater impacts related to air quality, greenhouse
gas emissions, noise, and traffic and circulation. Aesthetics/light and glare, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology/water quality, land use and relevant planning, and public services and utilities
impacts would be similar to the proposed project. This Alternative would not reduce any
impacts compared to the proposed project.
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The Mixed Use Alternative would attain the
project's objective to revitalize the Lido Village by creating a pedestrian-oriented
development; however, it would have a lesser overall economic impact to the
community. Shopping, dining, assembly opportunities, publically accessible open
space, and visitor accommodations for visitors and residents of Newport Beach would
not be provided on the project site.
Feasibility: As with the proposed project, the Mixed Use Alternative would be
economically feasible. However, the Mixed Use Alternative would not create City
revenue through the transient occupancy tax.
Finding: The Mixed Use Alternative would result in greater impacts related to air
quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and traffic and circulation. Impacts related to
aesthetics/light and glare, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils,
hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use and relevant
planning, and public services and utilities impacts would be similar to the proposed
project. While this Alternative would attain all of the project's objectives, it would have a
lesser overall economic impact to the community, and would not create City revenue
through the transient occupancy tax. For these reasons, the City finds that the
proposed project is preferred over this Alternative.
EXHIBIT 'V,
General Plan Amendment No. GP2012-002 (PA2012-031)
A. Amend Table LU1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to add the
following land use category:
"Mixed Use Horizontal 5 (MU-H5)
The MU-1-15 designation applies to the former City Hall complex located at the northeast
corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. The MU-H5
designation provides for the horizontal or vertical intermixing of commercial, visitor
accommodations, and/or civic uses. Civic uses may include, but are not limited to, a
community center, public plazas, a fire station and/or public parking."
B. Amend Table LU-2 to add Anomaly Location #80 as shown in the following
table:
Table LIJ2 Anomaly Locations
Anomaly Statistical Land Use Development Development Limit Additional Information
Number Area Designation Limits Other
Accessory commercial
floor area is allowed in
conjunction with a hotel
and it is included within
85 B5 MU-H5 98,725 sf of hotel the hotel development
limit. Municipal facilities
are not restricted or
included in any
development limit.
All existing provisions within Table LU-2 remain unchanged
C. Amend Figure LU6 (Land Use Map) as it relates to 3300 Newport Boulevard &
475 32nd Street only as depicted in the following diagram:
~ ^~3$31
\507 512 3421 X12
510 h 341
508 ~---2!15
o� Q_5086 11 a3
RT-D ~3405 CG-B 33R
g04
-53Soo �
2
331 FIN[�f':Y AVE 33�
') X101/2
b1d, 4081/2 3345 0 3955. 'v
3341 K 1, %$
4061/2 3337 IL
X404— 3333 > RM-D 335
402 3325
1 -3315
400 1/2
J 400 ' 3305 3300 M U-W '3p9
CC-A
VIA MALAGA
/�o• + N I _ ,.. - - ..., .475 w
RT-E .' 32ND ST -N
p 3116
3112 II MU-H
3110
r
`�. E o ( - -
CV-A pp
O j
i N C :
`oma CN i
i
All related maps or diagrams within the General Plan shall be amended to maintain
consistency with the new land use category and Anomaly Location #85 as shown
above. Additionally, any maps or diagrams within the General Plan that label the site
as "City Hall" shall be removed from the General Plan upon relocation of City Hall
operations from the site to the new City Hall site located at 100 Civic Center Drive.
Labeling the new City Hall site as "City Hall" on any General Plan map or diagram is
also authorized.
EXHIBIT "D"
Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2012-001 (PA2012-031)
A. Amend the Table 2.1.1-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan add the following land
use category:
Table 2.1.1-1 Land Use Plan Categories
Land LJse Category Uses pensityJlntensity
The MU category is intended to
provide for the development a mix 98,725sfofhotel
of uses, which may include zeneral,
Mixed use—Mu neighborhood or visitor-serving
commercial, commercial offices, Municipal facilities are not restricted
visitor accommodations, mixed-use or included in any development limit
development and/or civic uses
All existing provisions within Table 2.1.1-1 remain unchanged.
B. Amend Coastal Land Use Plan Map 1, Figure 2.1.5-1, as it relates to 3300
Newport Boulevard & 475 32nd Street only as depicted in the following
diagram:
507 10 512- X3421
15 /
`s
-508
ro o, S ~- 3411
a X06 m sQ
RTD`�'34os o CG-B 33r
CD-soy M by g3b9
500
FJNLe Y Aye
_40a I/j'7 3345
406112`^! i 3341 p
3337 a
404 3333 O
402 i 3325 RM
-D
ik400 1!2~3315
400 3305 3300 MU
SCC-A
If VIA MALAGA
° PI-B
bio 475
ef
4 R r 32ND ST
u.
Z $ i
O 3116 I°° p T CO 0 N Q� O
3112 p� MU-H
y 3110 I II
Cv- p
I j >
A O � pl pl pl•NI pl pl p I �
CN 1 ± W N O p N
1 II V I N N II W N W
-.�_Vn�.�1 A ft
All related maps or diagrams within the Coastal Land Use Plan shall be amended to
maintain consistency with the new land use category as shown above. Additionally,
any maps or diagrams within the Coastal Land Use Plan that label the site as "City
Hall" shall be removed from the General Plan upon relocation of City Hall operations
from the site to the new City Hall site located at 100 Civic Center Drive. Labeling the
new City Hall site as "City Hall" on any Coastal Land Use Plan map or diagram is
also authorized.
C. Amend Policy 4.4.2-1 as follows with deleted language in sF.o�o.0 and new
language underlined:
4.4.2-1. Maintain the 35-foot height limitation in the Shoreline Height Limitation Zone,
as graphically depicted on Map 4-3, except for the following sites.
A. Marina Park located at 1600 West Balboa Boulevard: A single, up to 73-foot
tall architectural tower that does not include floor area but could house
screened communications or emergency equipment. The additional height
would create an iconic landmark for the public to identify the site from land
and water and a visual focal point to enhance public views from surrounding
vantages.
B. Back Bay Landing at East Coast Highway/Bayside Drive: A single, up to 65-
foot-tall coastal public view tower, that will be ADA-compliant and publicly
accessible, to provide new coastal and Upper Newport Bay view opportunities
where existing views are impacted by the East Coast Highway Bridge, other
existing structures and topography.2
C. Mixed Use (MU) area located at 3300 Newport Boulevard (former City Hall
Complex): Buildings and structures up to 55 feet in height provided it is
demonstrated that development does not materially impact public views
Peaks of sloping roofs and elevator towers may exceed 55 feet by up to 5 feet
and architectural features such as domes towers cupolas spires and similar
structures may exceed 55 feet by 10 feet. The purpose of allowing buildings
structures and architectural elements to exceed 35 feet is to promote vertical
clustering resulting in increased publically accessible on-site open space and
architectural diversity while protecting existing coastal views and providing
new coastal view opportunities
Subsection B related to the Back Bay Landing site was adopted by the City Council on February 11, 2014, by
Resolution No. 2014-12 but has not been certified (approved) by the California Coastal Commission as of June
2014.
EXHIBIT "E"
Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2012-003 (PA2012-031)
Section 1: Amend Section 20.14.020 (Zoning Districts Established) to establish the
"MU-LV" within Table 1-1 as highlighted in Section "A" below. All existing provisions of
Section 20.14.020 and Table 1-1 remain unchanged.
Section 2: Amend Section 20.14.010 (Zoning Map Adopted by Reference) to change
the zoning district of 3300 Newport Boulevard and 475 32nd Street and establish
Anomaly #85 as depicted in Section "B" below. All related zoning maps or diagrams
shall be amended to maintain consistency with the new zoning district as shown above.
Additionally, any maps or diagrams within Zoning Code that label the site as "City Hall,"
said label shall be removed from the Zoning Map upon relocation of City Hall operations
from the site to the new City Hall site located at 100 Civic Center Drive. Labeling the
new City Hall location as "City Hall" on any Zoning Map or diagram is also authorized.
Section 3: Amend Section 20.22.010 (Purposes of Mixed-Use Zoning Districts) to
add Subsection G as provided in Section "C" below. All existing provisions of Section
20.20.010 remain unchanged.
Section 4: Amend Subsection C of Section 20.22.020 (Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
Land Uses and Permit Requirements) to add allowed uses and establish permit
requirements for the MU-LV zoning district within Table 2-9 as highlighted in Section "D"
below. All existing provisions of Section 20.20.020 remain unchanged.
Section 5: Amend 20.22.030 (Mixed-Use Zoning Districts General Development
Standards) to add development standards for the MU-LV zoning district within Table 2-11
as highlighted in Section "E" below. All existing provisions of Section 20.20.030 remain
unchanged.
Section "A"
Amend Section 20.14.020 (Zoning Districts Established) to establish the "MU-LV"
within Table 1-1 as follows:
Table 1-1
Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
MU-V Mixed-Use Vertical MU-V Mixed-Use Vertical
MU-MM
MU-DW
MU-CV/15th Street Mixed-Use MU-H Mixed-Use
MU-LV
MU-W1
MU-W2 Mixed-Use Water MU-W Mixed-Use Water-Related
Section "B"
Amend Section 20.14.010 (Zoning Map Adopted by Reference) to change the
zoning district of 3300 Newport Boulevard and 475 32nd Street and establish
Anomaly #80 as follows.
J531
507 12~' -3421 �n 334
-510
47
so ,508
S r Q y506 3411
-� �r
='
404 3405 3311
330
—�
_502 v
500 3161
,, FINLEY qVp '�
7� 410 1/2 , I
a� 408 1/2-1 3345
3341 P�
4061/2 i 1 °
'�- 3337 d
4043333 < �6
40
2� X331$ RM 2178 SA/DU
400 112'
aoo 3305 3300 MU-LV
,0o
CC 0.5 FAR
VIA MALAGA
12, r^ CG 0.T5 FA
° Ap=
0 1 a7s
R_2 32ND ST
2
NO,
6 CO a
12
110 33AMU-CV/1�I
STH ST
m
CD No
';.
CV 0.5 FAR
CN 0.3 FAR 1:4 45 w
Anomaly Development Development Limit(Other) Additional Information
Number Limit s
Accessory commercial floor area is allowed in
conjunction with a hotel and it is included
85 98,725 sf of hotel within the hotel development limit.
Municipal facilities are not restricted or
included in any development limit.
Section "C"
Amend Section 20.22.010 (Purposes of Mixed-Use Zoning Districts) to add
Subsection G as follows:
"G. The MU-LV (Mixed-Use-Lido Village) zoning district. This district applies to the
former City Hall complex located at the northeast corner of the intersection of
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. The MU-LV designation provides for the
horizontal or vertical intermixing of commercial, visitor accommodations, and/or
civic uses. Civic uses may include a community center, public plazas, fire station
and/or public parking."
Section "d'
Amend Subsection C of Section 20.22.020 (Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Land Uses
and Permit Requirements) to add allowed uses and establish permit requirements
for the new MU-LV zoning district within Table 2-9 highlighted as follows:
TABLE 2-9 Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT Permit Requirements
REQUIREMENTS P Permitted by Right
CUP Conditional Use Permit(Section 20.52.020)
MUP Minor Use Permit(Section 20.52.020)
LTP Limped Term Permit(Section 20.52.040)
— Not allowed"
Land Use
See Part 7 of this title for land use definitions. MU-W1(5)(6) MU-W2 MU-LV Specific Use Regulations
See Chapter 20.112 for unlisted uses.
Industry,Manufacturing and Processing,Warehousing Uses
Handicraft Industry p P P
Industry,Marine-Related P P
Research and Development p p —
Recreation,Education,and public Assembly Uses
Assembly/Meeting Facilities
Small-5,000 sq.ft.or less(religious assembly may be largerthan CUP CUP .MUP
5,000 sq,ft.
Commercial Recreation and Entertainment CUP CUP P
Cultural Institutions p P
Parks and Recreational Facilities CUP CUP P
Schools,Public and Private CUP CUP
Residential Uses
Single-Unit Dwellings
Located on rat floor —
Located above tat floor -71) P(2) — Section 20.48.130
Multi-Unit Dwellings
Located on 1 at floor — —
Located above 1st floor P(1) P(2) — Section 20.48.130
Two-Unit Dwellings
Located on lstfloor — —
Located above 1st floor P(1) P(2)
Home Occupations P P(2) — Section 20 48.110
Care Uses
Adult Day Care
Small(6 or fewer) P P
Child Day Care
Small(8 or fewer) P P Section 20.48.070
Day Care,General — MUP Section 20 48.070
TABLE 2.9 Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT Permit Requirements
REQUIREMENTS P Permitted by Right
CUP Conditional Use Permit(Section 20.52.020)
MUP Minor Use Permit(Section 20.52.020)
LTP Limited Term Permit(Section 20.52.040)
— Not allowed'
Land Use
See Part 7 ofthis title for land use definitions, MU-W1 (5)(6) MU-W2 MU-LV Speeigc Use Regulations
See Chapter 20.12 for unlisted uses.
Retail Trade Uses
Alcohol Sales(off-sale) MUP MUP MUPSection 20.48.030
Alcohol Sales(off-sale),Accessory Only P P p:..'.
Marine Rentals and Sales
Boat Rentals and Sales P p P
Marine Retail Sales P P P
Retall Sales p P P
Visitor-SerNng Retail P P P
Seace Uses—Business, Financial, Medical, and Professional
ATMs P p P.
Emergency Health Facilities/Urgent Care — P
Financial Institutions and Related Services(above 1st floor only) P P P
Financial Instituti0ns and Related Services(1st floor) — —. P
Offices—Business P P P
Offices—Medical and Dental(above 1 at floor only) — p
Offices—Profession P P _
Service Uses—General -
Animal Retail Sales MUP MUP — Section 20 48,050
Artists'Studios P P P
Eating and Drinking Establishments
Accessory Food Service(open to public) P P `P Section 20.48.090
Fast Food(no late hours)(3)(4) P/MUP P/MUP l,/MUP Section 20.48.090
Fast Food(with late hours)(3) MUP MUP MUP Section 20.48.090
Food Seance(no alcohol,no late hours)(3)(4) P/MUP P/MUP P/MUP. Section 20.48.090
Food Service(no late hours)(3) MUP MUP MUP Section 20.48.090
Food Service(with late hours)(3) CUP CUP CUP Section 20.48.090
Take-Out Service—Limited(3)(4) P/MUP P/MUP PIMUP Section 20.48.090
Health/Fitness Facilities
Small-2,000 sq. q.or less P P P
Maintenance and Repair Sennces P p P
Marine Services
Boat Storage CUP CUP
Boat Yards CUP CUP
Entertainment and Excursion Services P P
Marine Service Stations CUP CUP
Water Transportation SeMces - P P
Personal Seances
Massage Establishments MUP MUP 'MUP Chapter 5.50
Section 20.48.120
Massage SeMces,Accessory MUP MUP MUP Section 20.48.120
Nail Salons P P P
Personal SeMces, General P P P
Personal Services, Restricted MUP MUP
Smoking Lounges —
TABLE 2-9 Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT Permit Requirements
REQUIREMENTS P Per ltted by Right
CUP Conditional Use Permit(Section 20.52.020)
MUP Minor Use Permit(Section 20.52,020)
LTP Limited Term Permit(Section 20.52.040)
— Not allowed`
Land Use
See Part 7 ofthistitle for land use definitions. MU-W1 (5)(6) MU-W2 MU-LV SpeclFlc Use Regulations
See Chapter 20.12 for unlisted uses.
Visitor Accommodations
Hotels, Motels, Bed and Breakfast Inns,and Time Shares CUP CUP CUP
Transportation,Communications,and Infrastructure
Parking Facilities MUP MUP MUP
Communication Facilities p P p
Heliports and Helistops(7) CUP CUP
Marinas Title 17.
Marina Support Facilities MUP MUP
Utilities, Minor p P p
Utilities, Major CUP CUP .CUP
Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Chapter 15.70
Other Uses
Accessory Structures and Uses MUP MUP .MUP
Outdoor Storage and Display MUP MUP MUP Section 20.48.140
Personal Property Sales P P - P Section 20.48.150
Special Events Chapter 11.03
Temporary Uses LTP LTP LTP Section 20.52.040
Uses Not Listed.Land uses that are not listed In the table above,or are not shown in a particular wring district,are not allowed,except as otherulse pmvded by.
Section 20.12 020(Rules of Interpretation).
(1) May only be located on lots with am inimum oftwo hundred(200)lineal feel offrontage on Coast Highway.Refer to Section 20.48.130(Mixed-Use Projects)for
additional development standards.
(2) May only be located above a commercial use and not a parking use Refer to Section 2048,130(Mind Use Projects)for additional developm ant standards.
I(3) Late Hours.Facilities with late hours shall mean facilitiesthat offer service and are open to the public past 11:00 p.m.any day ofthe week.
_ . .. . _.
(4) Perm iHetl or Minor Use Permit Required.
a A minor use permit shall be required for any use located within five hundred(500)feet,property line to property line,of any res Inertial tuning district.
b. Am inor use perm it shall be required for any use that maintains late hours.
(5) Approval ofd minor site development revew,in compliance with Section 20.52.080,shall be required innorto anydevelopmenllo ensure thatthe uses are fully
'integrated and that potential impacts from their differing adMties are fully m ltlgated.
'..(6) Am inimum_offifty(50)percent ofthe square footage of a mind-use development shall be used for nonresidential uses.
I(7) Applicants for City approval of a heliport or helistop shall provide evidence that the proposed heliport or helistop complies fullywlth State of California permit
'..procedures and with anyand all conditions of approval Imposed bythe Federal ANafion Administration(FAA),the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County
(A-UC),and bythe Caltrans DiNsion of Aeronautics.
Section "E"
Amend 20.22.030 (Mixed-Use Zoning Districts General Development Standards) to
add development standards for the new MU-LV zoning district within Table 2-11
highlighted as follows:
ML)lmenslons(l)(2)nsions(1)(2) Minimum dimensions requiretl for each newly created lot.
use structures 20,000 sq.ft. 2,500 sq.ft. 20,000 sq.ft.
xed-use structures 10,000 sq,ft. 2,500 sq.ft. .10,000.sq.ft.huse structures 200 ft. 25 ft. 200 ft.
xed-use structures 50 ft. 25 ft. 50 ft,
(4) Minimum/maximum allowable density range for resitlential uses.
requiretl per unit Minimum:7,260 sq,ft.per unit Minimum:1,631 Maximum:2,167 N/A
Floor Area Ratio(FAR)(5) N/A
Mixed-use development Min.0.35 and Max.0.5 for Min.0.35 and Max.0.5 for N/A
nonresidential uses. nonresidential.
Max.0.5 for residential uses.(3) Max 0.75 for residential uses.
Max, 1.0 for mixed-use projects Lido Marina Village
Min.0.35
Max 07fornonres1denlial and
0.6 residential
Nonresidential only 0.5 commercial only(3) 10.5 commercial only 198.725 sf of hotel
Setbacks The distances below are minimum setbacks required for primary structures.See Section 20.30.110(Setback Regulations and
Exceptions)for setback measurement,allowed projections Into setbacks,and exceptions.
Fount 0 0 Newport Boulevard:
7 ft.for below grade structures
20 fl.for structures up to 26
_ feet in height
35 ft.for structures ower 26
feet in height
Side 0 0 32nd Street:
7 ft.for below grade structures
1 ft.for structures up to 26 Met
in height _
10 ft.for structures ower 26
feet in height
Interior
t ft.for below grade structures
5 ft for above grade structures
Side adjoining a residential 5ft. 5ft. '5ft.
district
Rear 0 0 5 ft.
Rear residential portion of N/A 5 ft. 5 ft.
mixed use
Rear nonresidential adjoining a N/A 5 ft. .5 ft.
residential district.
Rear adjoining an t0 alley N/A ft. 70 fl.
Bulkhead setback 10 ft. t0 ft, 10 ft,
TABLE 2-11
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR WATERFRONT
MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICTS
Open Space N/A I N/A 1 20%of property
Common open space Minimum 75 square feet/dwelling unit,(The minimum dimension(length and width)shall be 15 feet.)
Private open space 5%of the gross floorarea far each dwelling unit.(The minimum dimension(length and width)shall be 6 feet.)
Minimum distance between detached structures on same lot.
Separation Distance 10 ft. loft, 0 ft.
Height Maximum allowable height of structures without discretionary approval.Sae Section 20.30.060(Height Limits and Exceptions)for height
measurement requirements.See Section 20.30.060(C)(Increase In Help ht Limit)for possible increase in height limit.
26 R.with flat roof,less than 3/12 roof pitch 55 ft.with flat roof,less than 3/12.
roof pitch(6)'.
31 h.with sloped roof,3/12 roof pitch or greater 60 ft.with sloped roof,3/12 roof
pitch or.greater(6)
Fencing See Section 20,30.040(Fences,Hedges,Walls,and Retaining Walls).
Landscaping See Chapter 20.36(Lantlscaping Standards).
Lighting See Section 20.30.070(Outdoor Lighting).
Outdoor Storage/Display See Section 20.48.140(Outdoor Storage,Display,and Activities).
Parking See Chapter 20.40(Off-Street Parking).
Satellite Antennas See Section 20.48.190(Satellite Antennas and Amateur Radio Facilities).
Signs See Chapter 20.42(Sign Standards).
Notes:
(1) All development and the subdivision of land shall comply with the requirements of Title 19(Subdivisions).
(2) The standards for minimum lot area and lot width are intended to regulate sites for development purposes only and are not Intended to establish minimum dimensions forth.weatlon of
ownership or leasehold(e.g.,condominium)purposes.
(3) A minimum of fifty(50)percent of the square footage In a mixed-use development shall be used for nonresidential uses.
(4) For the purpose of determining the allowable number of units,portions of legal lots that are submerged lands or tidelands shall be included In land area of the site.
(5) Portions of legal lots that are submerged lands or tidelands shall be included in the net area of the lot for the purpose of calculating the allowable floor area of structures.
(6) Architectural features suoh as domes towers,cupolas splre6 and similar structures may exceed 55 feet by ID feet.
EXHIBIT "F"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Site Development Review No. SD2014-001
Conditional Use Permit No. UP2014-004
Traffic Study No. TS2014-005
Planning Division
1. The hotel development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans
attached as Exhibit G of this Resolution except as modified by applicable conditions
of approval.
2. Site Development Review No. SD2014-001 and Conditional Use Permit No.
UP2014-004 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of
approval of a Coastal Development Permit unless an extension is otherwise
granted by the Community Development Director or the Planning Commission by
referral or appeal.
3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, approval from the California Coastal
Commission is required.
4. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards,
unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
5. Development shall be implemented in compliance with all mitigation measures
contained within the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program of the
Lido House Hotel, Final Environmental Impact Report No. ER2014-003
(SCH#2013111022).
6. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Violation of any
of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for modification or
revocation of Site Development Review No. SD2014-001 and Conditional Use
Permit No. UP2014-004.
7. Approval of this Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit authorizes
a hotel which is intended for occupancy by transients for dwelling, lodging, or
sleeping purposes for periods of thirty (30) days or less. The selling of
timeshares or any other form of fractional ownership of the hotel shall be
prohibited. Additionally, no portion of the hotel shall be rented or otherwise used
for residential purposes.
8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the
Planning Division.
9. A copy of the Resolution approving Site Development Review No. SD2014-001
Conditional Use Permit No. UP2014-004, including the conditions of approval
within Exhibit "A" shall be incorporated into the final approved Building Division
and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building permits.
10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape
and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall
incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and
the plans shall be approved by the Planning Department and the Municipal
Operations Department. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent
underground automatic sprinkler irrigation system of a design suitable for the
type and arrangement of the plant materials selected. The irrigation system shall
be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an on-site moisture-
sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a
continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be
located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the
Traffic Engineer.
11. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained
in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be
maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning,
fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of
weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including
adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance.
12. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever available, assuming it is economically
feasible.
13. Water leaving the project site due to over-irrigation of landscape shall be
minimized. If an incident such as this is reported, a representative from the Code
and Water Quality Enforcement Division of the City Manager's Office shall visit
the location, investigate, inform and notice the responsible party, and, as
appropriate, cite the responsible party and/or shut off the irrigation water.
14. Watering shall be done during the early morning or evening hours (between 4:00
p.m. and 9:00 a.m.) to minimize evaporation the following morning.
15. Water should not be used to clean paved surfaces such as sidewalks, driveways,
parking areas, etc. except to alleviate immediate safety or sanitation hazards.
16. Prior to the final of building permits, the applicant shall schedule an inspection by
the Planning Division to confirm that all landscaping was installed in accordance
with the approved plan.
17. All proposed signs shall be in conformance with applicable provisions of the
Zoning Code and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer if located
adjacent to the vehicular ingress and egress. The final location of the signs shall
be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall conform to City Standard 110-
L to ensure that adequate sight distance is provided. All signs shall be
architecturally compatible and made with high quality, durable materials. Can
signs are prohibited.
18. Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code.
Exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No
direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or
create a public nuisance. "Walpak" type fixtures are not permitted. Parking area
lighting shall have zero cut-off fixtures and light standards shall not exceed 20
feet in height.
19. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall prepare photometric
study in conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning
Division.
20. The property shall be illuminated for security and the site shall not be excessively
illuminated based on the luminance recommendations of the Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the Community
Development Director, the illumination creates an unacceptable negative
nuisance to surrounding property. The Community Development Director may
order the dimming of light sources or other remediation upon finding that the site
is excessively illuminated.
21. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall schedule an
evening inspection by the Planning Division to confirm control of light and glare
as required by applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and the conditions of
approval.
22. The operator of the facility shall be responsible for the control of noise generated
by the subject facility including, but not limited to, noise generated by patrons and
any events conducted on the project site, food service operations,
delivery/loading operations, and mechanical equipment. All noise generated by
the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 and other
applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code
23. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of consistent with the
Zoning Code and shall be sound attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control.
24. Trash receptacles for patrons shall be conveniently located both inside and
outside of the facility and shall be routinely emptied. All trash shall be stored
within the building or within trash bins stored within trash enclosure(s).
25. The exterior of the business shall be maintained free of litter and graffiti at all
times. The owner or operator shall provide for daily removal of trash, litter debris
and graffiti from the premises and on all abutting sidewalks within 20 feet of the
premises as necessary.
26. Storage of any materials outside of the buildings or in parking areas property
shall be prohibited.
27. The trash enclosure shall accommodate a minimum of four, 4-foot by 6-foot trash
bins and shall include doors and a roof structure to screen the contents of the
enclosure. The applicant shall ensure that the trash dumpsters and/or
receptacles are maintained to control odors. This may include the provision of
either fully self-contained dumpsters or periodic steam cleaning of the dumpsters,
if deemed necessary by the Planning Division.
28. The construction and equipment staging areas shall be located in the least
visually prominent area on the site and shall be properly maintained and/or
screened to minimize potential unsightly conditions.
29. A six-foot-high screen and security fence shall be placed around the construction
site during construction. Construction equipment and materials shall be properly
stored on the site when not in use.
30. Traffic control and truck route plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Public Works Department before implementation. Large construction vehicles
shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets as determined by the Public Works
Department. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by
movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic
control equipment and flagman.
31 . Construction activities which produce loud noise that disturb, or could disturb a
person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the vicinity, shall be limited
to the weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., and Saturdays
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. No such noise occurrences shall
occur at anytime on Sundays or federal holidays.
32. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold
harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers,
employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations,
damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties,
liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees,
disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may
arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of the
Lido House Hotel project (PA2013-217) and Former City Hall Reuse Amendments
(PA2012-031) including, but not limited to, the General Plan Amendment No.
GP2012-002, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2012-001, Zoning Code
Amendment No. CA2012-003, Site Development Review No. SD2014-001,
Conditional Use Permit No. UP2014-004, Traffic Study No. TS2014-005; and/or the
City's related California Environmental Quality Act determinations and the
certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report No ER2014-003
(SCH#2013111022). This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to,
damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other
expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or
proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or
bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's
costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the
indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the
City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification
requirements prescribed in this condition.
Building Division
33. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building
Division and Fire Department for demolition and construction. The construction
plans must comply with the most recent, City-adopted version of the California
Building Code. The construction plans must meet all applicable State Disabilities
Access requirements. The construction plans must comply with the California
Green Building Standards Code.
34. A grading bond shall be required prior to grading permit issuance.
35. A geotechnical report shall be submitted to the Building Division for review prior
to grading permit issuance.
36. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the General Permit for
Construction Activities shall be prepared, submitted to the State Water Quality
Control Board for approval and made part of the construction program. The
project applicant will provide the City with a copy of the NOI and their application
check as proof of filing with the State Water Quality Control Board. This plan will
detail measures and practices that will be in effect during construction to
minimize the project's impact on water quality.
37. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the
approval of the Building Department and Code and Water Quality Enforcement
Division. The WQMP shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to ensure that no violations of water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements occur.
38. A drainage and hydrology study shall be submitted prior to grading permit
issuance.
39. A wheelchair accessible path of travel shall be provide from Finley Ave, Newport
Blvd, and 32nd street including public transportation areas to all guest rooms and
facilities. Proposed wood shingles shall be Class A.
40. Fire Sprinkler System shall be Type 13.
Fire Department
41. A fire flow determination consistent with Newport Beach Fire Department
Guideline B.01 "Determination of Required Fire Flow" shall be required for the
proposed buildings prior to the issuance of a building permit. The fire flow
information shall be included on final building drawings.
42. All weather access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and
during time of construction.
43. Fire hydrants shall be required to be located within 400 feet of all portions of the
building subject to the review and approval of the Newport Beach Fire
Department. Additional hydrants may be required dependant on fire flow
calculations. All existing and proposed fire hydrants within 400 feet of the project
site shall be shown on the final site plan.
44. Blue hydrant identification markers shall be placed adjacent to fire hydrants
consistent with Newport Beach Fire Department guidelines.
45. A fire apparatus access road shall be provided to within 150 feet of all exterior
walls of the first floor of the building. The route of the fire apparatus access road
shall be approved by the Fire Department. The 150 feet is measured by means
of an unobstructed route around the exterior of the building. Newport Beach Fire
Department Guideline C.01 "Emergency Fire Access: Roadways, Fire Lanes,
Gates and Barriers."
46. Minimum width of a fire access roadway shall be 20 feet, no vehicle parking
allowed. The width shall be increased to 26 feet within 30 feet of a hydrant, no
vehicle parking allowed. Access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical
clearance of not less than 13 feet, 6 inches. Newport Beach Fire Department
Guideline C.01.
47. Apparatus access roads must be constructed of a material that provides an all
weather driving surface and capable of supporting 72,000 pounds imposed load
for fire apparatus and truck outrigger loads of 75 pounds per square inch over a
two foot area. Calculations stamped and signed by a registered professional
engineer shall certify that the proposed surface meets the criteria of an all
weather driving surface and is capable of withstanding the weight of 72,000
pounds, Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline C.01.
48. Vehicle access gates or barriers installed across fire apparatus access roads
shall be in accordance with the Newport Beach Fire Department Guidelines and
Standards C.01 "Emergency Fire Access: Roadways, Fire Lanes, Gates, and
Barriers." The minimum width of any gate or opening necessary or required as a
point of access shall be not less than 14 feet unobstructed width. As amended
by Newport Beach, California Fire Code Section 503.6.1.
49. All security gates shall have a Knox-box override and an approved remote
opening device. Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline C.01.
50. Fire lanes shall be identified as per Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline
C.02.
51. An automatic fire sprinkler system will be required and shall be installed as per
California Fire Code Section 903.
52. The underground fire line will be reviewed by the fire department. A separate
submittal is required which requires an "F" Permit. The underground fire line is a
separate submittal (cannot be part of the overhead fire sprinkler plans, nor
precise or rough grading plans) and must be designed as per N.B.F.D. Guideline
F.04 "Private Hydrants and Sprinkler Supply Line Underground Piping."
53. Standpipes systems shall be provided as set forth in California Fire Code Section
905.
54. Hood Fire Suppression system will be required for cooking appliances and plans
must be submitted to the fire department for approval prior to installation.
55. A fire alarm system will be required and shall be installed as per California Fire
Code Section 907.
56. Fire extinguishers are required and shall be located and sized as per the
California Fire Code.
57. Public Safety Radio System Coverage (800 MHz firefighter's radio system) shall
be provided as per Newport Beach Fire Department Guideline D.05.
58. Premises identification shall be provided as City of Newport Beach amended
California Fire Code Section 505.1.1. Addresses shall be placed above or
immediately adjacent to all doors that allow fire department access. In no case
shall the numbers be less than four inches in height with a one-half inch stroke.
59. Fire places and fire pit clearances shall be provided as per manufacturer's
recommendations and/or California Mechanical Code requirements.
60. Awnings and canopies shall be designed and installed as per California Building
Code Section 3105 with frames of noncombustible material, fire-retardant-treated
wood, wood of Type IV size, or 1-hour construction with combustible or
noncombustible covers and shall be either fixed, retractable, folding or
collapsible.
61. All building and structures with one or more passenger service elevators shall be
provided with not less than one medical emergency service elevator to all
landings. The medical emergency service elevator shall accommodate the
loading and transport of an ambulance gurney or stretcher 24 inches by 84
inches with not less than 5-inch radius corner in the horizontal position. The
elevator car shall be of such a size to accommodate a 24-inch by 84-inch
ambulance gurney or stretcher with not less than 5-inch radius corners, in the
horizontal, open position, shall be provided with a minimum clear distance
between walls or between walls and door excluding return panels not less than
80 inches by 54 inches and a minimum distance from wall to return panel not
less than 51 inches with a 42-inch side slide door as per California Building Code
Section 3002.
62. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan check and approval prior
to the issuance of building permits.
Public Works Department
63. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public
Works Department.
64. Construct new planned improvements along 32nd Street between Newport Blvd
and Lafayette Ave, including but not limited to, sidewalk, curb/gutter, striping,
signage, driveway, street light relocation, parking meter post relocation, and
roadway improvement. All work shall be per City Standards and approved by the
Public Works Director. The cost shall borne by the applicant.
65. The public pedestrian easement along Newport Blvd shall be a minimum of Met
in width and clear of any obstructions, unless otherwise approved by the Public
Works and the Community Development Departments.
66. Reconstruct the existing broken and/or otherwise damaged concrete sidewalk
panels, curb and gutter, and driveway approaches along the Newport Blvd and
32nd Street frontages.
67. All existing curb ramps along the project frontages shall be upgraded to current
ADA standards.
68. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities and all non-standard
improvements within the public right-of-way and public property.
69. All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. The
project driveways shall be designed to accommodate adequate vehicular sight
distance per City Standard STD-110-L. Walls, signs, and other obstructions shall
be limited to 30 inches in height and planting shall be limited to 24 inches in
height within the limited use areas.
70. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development
site by the private construction, additional reconstruction within the public right-
of-way could be required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
71. All on-site drainage shall comply with the latest City Water Quality requirements.
72. All unused water services to be abandoned shall be capped at the main
(corporation stop) and all unused sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be
capped at property line.
73. All new and existing water services (ie. domestic, landscaping, or fire) shall have
its own water meter and shall be protected by a City approved backflow
assembly.
74. All new and existing sewer laterals shall have a sewer cleanout installed per
STD-406-L.
75. Water and Wastewater demand studies shall be prepared and submitted for
review and approval prior to approval of the Grading Plan. If studies show that
there are impacts based on the peak demand flows calculated, improvements to
the City's infrastructures will be required at the cost of the development.
76. All parking stalls and drive aisle widths shall be per City Standards 805-L-A and
805-L-B.
77. A Valet Operations Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic
Engineer and the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy. Future changes to the plan shall also require the review
and approval.
78. All valet operation shall be accommodated on-site.
79. Tandem parking spaces shall be signed and used for valet parking only. They
may be used for long term reserved parking. They should not be used for public
parking.
80. All landscaping, hardscape, ground cover, and trees within the project site and
along the Finley Ave, Newport Blvd, and 32nd Street frontages shall be
maintained by the applicant.
81. Remove pendant lighting along Finley Ave to provide adequate vertical
clearance.
Police Department
82. State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control license types classified as
"Public Premises" shall be prohibited.
83. If required by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, the applicant
shall provide the Chief of Police a statement of facts showing why the issuance
of alcohol licenses for the proposed project would serve public convenience or
necessity.
84. Approval of this Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit does not
permit the hotel or its restaurants, bars, lounge, or assembly areas to operate as
a nightclub as defined by the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless the
Planning Commission first approves such permit.
85. Prior to the issuance of final building permits, the operator as well as future
operators of the hotel shall obtain an Operator License pursuant to Chapter 5.25
(Operator License) of the Municipal Code. The Operator License may be subject
to additional and/or more restrictive conditions to regulate and control potential
late-hour nuisances associated with the operation facility.
86. Prior to occupancy and operation of the proposed hotel and its ancillary uses, a
comprehensive security plan shall be submitted to the Newport Beach Police
Department for review and approval.
87. There shall be no exterior advertising or signs of any kind or type, including
advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the
availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages or
signs which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this
condition.
88. No "happy hour" type of reduced price alcoholic beverage promotion shall be
allowed except when offered in conjunction with food ordered from the a full service
menu.
89. No games or contests requiring or involving the consumption of alcoholic
beverages shall be permitted.
90. All persons selling alcoholic beverages shall be over the age of 21 and undergo
and successfully complete a certified training program in responsible methods and
skills for selling alcoholic beverages. The certified program must meet the
standards of the California Coordinating Council on Responsible Beverage Service
or other certifying/licensing body, which the State may designate. Records of each
owner's, manager's and employee's successful completion of the required certified
training program shall be maintained on the premises and shall be presented upon
request by a representative of the City of Newport Beach.
91. The operator of the facility shall be responsible for the control of noise generated by
the subject facility including, but not limited to, noise generated by patrons, food
service operations, and mechanical equipment. All noise generated by the
proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 and other
applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Pre-
recorded music may be played in the tenant space, provided exterior noise levels
outlined below are not exceeded. The noise generated by the proposed use shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 (Community Noise Control) of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code.
92. That no outdoor sound system, loudspeakers, or paging system shall be
permitted in conjunction with the hotel, hotel restaurant or lounge facility.
93. The operator is required to take reasonable steps to discourage and correct
objectionable conditions that constitute a nuisance within the facility, adjacent
properties, or surrounding public areas, sidewalks, or parking lots of the restaurant,
during business hours, if directly related to the patrons of the establishment
surrounding residents.
94. No alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the
licensed premises under the control of the licensee.
95. A Special Events Permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside
the normal operational characteristics of the approved use, as conditioned, or
that would attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include
any form of on-site media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the
Newport Beach Municipal Code to require such permits.
96. There shall be no on-site radio, televisions, video, film, or other electronic media
broadcasts, including recordings to be broadcasted at a later time, which include
the service of alcoholic beverages, without first obtaining an approved Special
Event Permit issued by the City of Newport Beach.
97. Any event or activity staged by an outside promoter or entity, where the
applicant, operator, owner or his employees or representatives share in any
profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person
based upon money collected as a door charge, cover charge or any other form of
admission charge is prohibited.
98. The operator of the establishment shall not share any profits or pay any
percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person based upon monies
collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge,
including minimum drink orders or the sale of drinks.
EXHIBIT "G"
Project Plans
Available at httl2://www.newportbeachca.,qov/eir- in Lido House Hotel folder
And on file with the Community Development Department