• Development Agreement ("DA") -A development agreement, pursuant to Section
15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC; and
• Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 9") - An addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7 with a residential overlay; WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required; WHEREAS, the Property is located in the Airport Area Environs ("Airport Area") and is one of the 62 new housing opportunity sites allocated in the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element;
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the City Council approved Resolutions Nos. 2023-72 and 2023-73 and Ordinances Nos. 2023-20 and 2023-21, authorizing amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 60) (6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments) to update the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 ("EIR No. 617"), allowing residential units identified by the certified 6th Cycle Newport Beach Housing Element to be located within the 65 decibel ("65 dBA") Community Noise Equivalent Level ("CNEL") noise contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617, and incorporating additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport ("JWA"); 22-153
Resolution No. 2024-
WHEREAS, the Property is located within the 60 dBA noise contour CNEL as a shown in the updated noise contour maps adopted as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 23, 2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2024-008 by a majority vote (4 ayes, 1 nay) recommending the City Council approve the Project;
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP");
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2024, the ALUC determined (6 ayes, 0 nays) the Project is inconsistent with the following provisions of the AELUP:
A. Section 2.1.1 (Aircraft Noise), which provides that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport";
B. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones), which provides "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA"; and
C. Section 3.2.1 (General Policy), which provides that "[w]ithin the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP [if it] ... (1) [p]laces people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise [or] (2) concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... "; 22-154
Resolution No. 2024-
WHEREAS, the ALUC's determination is attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by reference;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on July 9, 2024, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-45 by unanimous vote (5 ayes, 2 recusals) to notify the ALUC and State Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to override the ALUC's inconsistency finding;
WHEREAS, a notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-45 was sent via certified mail and emailed to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on July 10, 2024; WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676 which are attached hereto as Exhibits "C" and "D" respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on August 27, 2024, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting. 22-155
Resolution No. 2024-
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds the Project consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the CPUC and the AELUP to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses and hereby overrides ALUC's determination that the Project is inconsistent with the AELUP.
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings
A. The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP.
The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of JWA and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards are intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.
Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards, and Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 of the AELUP define the noise exposure in the 60 dBA to 65 CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2) as "Moderate Noise Impact". Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential uses as "normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour. The Project is located within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown on the updated noise contour maps as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown on the AELUP. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC.
Additionally, as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA, and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote clearer air without the opening of windows. These conditions of approval mitigate noise issues for the Project and are consistent with the 45 dBA interior noise standards, pursuant to Section 3.2.3 of the AELUP.
22-156
Resolution No. 2024-
B. The proposed Amendments are consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP.
Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth zones depicting which land uses are acceptable in various portions of JWA environs. Allowed uses in Safety Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence.
The Project is located within Safety Zone 6 and residential uses are allowed in that zone.
The City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones in providing, "S 8.6 John Wayne Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA) Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular, future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Figure S5) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with aircraft operations."
The Project complies with the policies and regulations within the JWA Airport Planning Area and follows the safety standards of the AELUP as it is located within Safety Zone 6 and is not within the JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone.
C. The Project is consistent with the height standards of the AELUP.
Section 2.1.3 (Building Height Restrictions) of the AELUP sets forth building height restrictions. Section 2.1.3 provides that ALUC consider only one standard as provided in 14 Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") Part 77 (also referred to as the Federal Aviation Regulations). Section 2.1.3 provides that the Federal Aviation Regulations are the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used. Section 2.1.3 identifies the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") as the single authority for analyzing project impact on airport or aeronautical operations, or navigational -aid siting, including interference with navigational -aids or published flight paths and procedures along with reporting results of such studies and project analyses.
The FAA conducted an aeronautical study for the Project consistent with the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA issued a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation on October 24, 2023, thereby finding the development does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. The FAA reviewed the proposed 22-157
Resolution No. 2024-
height of the project assuming an existing site elevation ("SE") of 54 feet, with a proposed building that is 100 feet above ground level ("AGL"), and 154 feet above mean sea level ("AMSL"). The FAA further found that marking and lighting of the Project are not necessary for aviation safety. Any increase in height of the structure above the proposed 100-foot building height would require a revised Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation from the FAA. Additionally, there are other buildings in the vicinity of the project that are tallerthan the Project including the adjacent building at 4100 Newport Place Drive that is approximately 234 feet AMSL and the nearby building at 4545 MacArthur (Hyatt Regency) that is approximately 225 feet AMSL.
Section 2: Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 was prepared for the Project in compliance with CEQA set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in California Code of Regulations ("CCR") Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) to ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased environmental impacts. On the basis of the entire environmental record, the Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEiR for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attomeys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger.
Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. 22-158
Resolution No. 2024-
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 27th day of August, 2024.
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
-wit--ku-
Aaro C. Harp
City Torney
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Orange County Airport Land Use Commission
Inconsistency Determination dated June 25, 2024
Exhibit C — Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use Commission dated August 8, 2024
Exhibit D — Comment Letter from California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program dated August 7, 2024 22-159
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 7770, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 299, PAGES 15 AND 16 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FULL RIGHTS AND ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER
UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY OR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND
OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 10328, PAGE 506 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
22-160
Exhibit "B"
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated June 25, 2024
22-161
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
ORA�COUIITI
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
.1 U� 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626. 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 June 25, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach Community Development
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: ALUC Determination for the Residences at 1600 Dove Street - City of Newport Beach General Plan (Land Use) Amendment
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
During the public meeting held on June 20, 2024, the Airport Land Use Commission {ALUC} for Orange County considered the subject item. The matter was duty discussed, and with a 6-0 vote (Bresnahan, Monin, Murphy, Beverburg, Sustarsic, Klerna), the Connnission found the Residences at 1600 Dove Street - City of Newport Beach General Plan (Land Use) Amendment to be Inconsistent with the Airport Environs Laud Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (AELUp for JWA) per:
1. Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport."
2. Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
3. 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents..."
You may contact us at (949) 252-5170 or at jfitch Roc_ainc_om if you have any questions regarding this proceeding.
Sincerely,
Julie Fitch
Executive Officer
cc: ALUC
22-162
Exhibit "C"
Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use Commission dated August 8, 2024
22-163
/ OI.MTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
ORANGE C
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.2S2.SI70 fax: 949.252.6012 August 8, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission Determination Regarding Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Dear Ms. Westmoreland,
We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated July 10, 2024, and City Council Resolution No. 2024-45 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed 1600 Dove Street Residences. In ace'rdance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule ` findings ',for the above - referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to overrule the ALUC.
Please be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states:: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to ovemile the commission's action or recommendation."
Background
On June 20, 2024, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Residences at 1600 Dove Street to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport (JPVA) on a 6-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 3.2.1. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.
22-164
1600 DDve Steeat Residences
August 8, 2024
Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. The City's proposed project would increase the maximum height and density of residential uses within the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), and within Safety Zone 6, This would result in exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP.
ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included in Resolution No. 2024-45.
Response to Finding and Fact in Sut)Dort A - Re2ardinv Noise Standards:
Finding of Fact A correctly states that the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP and that the AELUP identifies residential uses as " normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour.
The ALUC appreciates that, "as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of windows." However, Section 2,1.1 of the AELUP states "... aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport," and the ALUC believes that increasing the intensity and height of residential uses in the proposed location would subject future residents to excessive noise.
Response to Fact in Support B - ReRardina Safety:
Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near TWA."
The proposed project is located in Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone. According to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in Safety Zone 6. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report which show a high number of flights adjacent to the proposed project site, Considering the proposed density, increased height, and proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, this project is an inappropriate use for the site.
Response to Fact in Supp A C - Regardine "Intent of the AELUP":
By virtue of being clearly stated in AELUP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0 "Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC 22-1
1600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed 1600 Dove Street Residences to be inconsistent with the AELUP for ,IWA.
We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to deciding whether to overrule ALUC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these conuuents.
Sincerely,
Gerald Bresnahan
Gerald Bresnahan
Chairman
cc; Airport Land. Use Commission for Orange County
Jonathan Huff, CattranslDivision of Aeronautics
Signature. —6eYaig &1EMLY,
Geraldllfewahn0 Mug 9,2N4092aPp71
22-1
Exhibit "D"
Comment Letter from California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program dated August 7, 2024
22-167
CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR California Department of Transportation ,
la
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS 4r*
P.O. BOX 942873, MS-40 aeww,
SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001
(916) 654-4959
W W W .¢ot.c a. 4oy
August 7, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner Electronically Sent
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics (Division) thanks the City of Newport Beach (City) for providing the Notice of Intent, dated July 10, 2024, to overrule a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has reported that the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project (Project) is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2024--45 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support" related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling the ALUC's determination, the Division is providing the following comments pursuant to California Public Utilifies Code (PUC) Section 21676. The Division supports the position of the ALUC in noting that the City has provided insufficient support for an overrule.
The ALUC has noted the following reasons this Project update is incompatible with the AELUP:
Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport."
Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." Section 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... "
The Division notes that the intent of the California Airport Lane Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) guidance aims to ensure the safety of both the aviation community and the community members surrounding an airport. Within this framework, the ALUC has determined that the City has inadequately addressed the safety concerns related to the proposed significant increase of housing density within airport safety zones. "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network tIna f serves a]I people and respects the environment" 22-168
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
August 7, 2024
The Division notes of the 282 proposed units on the 2.49 acre parcel, all are within the 60 CNEL noise contour. While this is nominally allowed by the AELUP, the Division strongly recommends that the Lead Agency or authority having jurisdiction require developers to adequately design structures to ensure interior noise levels below 45 dB and to hold final permitting until the developer can demonstrate adequate interior noise attenuation. Separate from interior noise reduction is exterior noise, which cannot be mitigated, and must be addressed through avigation easements to ensure that airport operations are not adversely impacted by noise complaints from new residents.
The Division concurs with the ALUC's determination that the Housing Element Implementation Program Amendments Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. This conclusion is based on insufficient findings by the City and the safety concerns for public health and welfare posed by allowing housing in incompatible safety zones and noise contours.
The Division also notes that this is the seventh proposed overrule since 2020 for a component of a larger redevelopment development program in Newport Beach. This ongoing pattern of overrules raises concerns about the cumulative impact on safety. Each overrule potentially compromises the safety of both aviation users at Jahn Wayne Airport (JWA) and the new residents of Newport Beach, by allowing developments that may not fully account for the necessary safety and noise considerations.
In addition, PUC Section 21675.1(f) provides: If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision(d) with respect to a publicly owned airport that the city or county does not operate, the operator of the airport is not liable for damages to property or personal injury resulting from the city's or county's decision to proceed with the action, regulation, or permit.
Please note: These comments are to be included in the public record of any decision to overrule the ALUC. If you have questions or if we may be of further assistance, please contact me by email at [email protected] or call (916) 879-6528.
Sincerely,
Originally signed by
Jonathan Huff
Associate Transportation Planner
Caltra ns Aeronautics
c: Julie Fitch, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ;
Matthew Friedman, Chief of Aviation Planning, Caltrans Aeronautics m o tth ew. fried ma n@d ot. ca.pov>
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" 22-169
Attachment E
Planning Commission Staff Report (No Attachments)
22-170
PO CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
n PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
�GoftH'P�,
SUBJECT: Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
■ General Plan Amendment
■ Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
■ Traffic Study
■ Development Agreement
■ Environmental Impact Report Addendum
SITE LOCATION: 1600 Dove Street
APPLICANT: The Picerne Group
OWNERS: 1600 Dove LP and GS 1600 Dove LLC
May 23, 2024
Agenda Item No. 4
PLANNER: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
949-644-3234, Westmoreland(a)_newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), Traffic Study, and Development Agreement (DA) for the future development of a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units at 1600 Dove Street, in the Airport Area (Project). No specific design for the Project is included in this application. The Project would require a future Site Development Review by the Planning Commission prior to building permit issuance.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing;
2) Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project; and
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-008 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council adoption of Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9, and approval of General Plan Amendment, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study, 1 22-171
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
and Development Agreement, for the Project located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022- 0297).
2 22-172
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
m
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
3 i y° qO 11 - i
12 mu 12 —�—CC 11
ANOMAL Qp
mu R
MllM s 3 R
4 PG 11 3
3 C Q�av
ea WPv:,z. 1 n u �n6
t?J
14 MUM2 yj e Y
LOCATION
ON -SITE
GENERAL PLAN
Mixed Use Horizontal
MU-H2
ZONING
Newport Place Planned
CommunityPC-11
CURRENT USE
Office
NORTH
MU-H2
PC-11
350-unit Newport Crossings
(graded site
SOUTH
MU-H2
PC-11 =F
-Parking structure and office
EAST
MU-H2
PC-11
Medical office
WEST
General Commercial
Office (CO-G)/MU-H2
PC-11
Office
S 22-173
4 Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting
The 2.49-acre project site is located within the Residential Overlay zone of Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) and currently improved with one 4-story, 60,675- square-foot office building and a surface parking lot. The property is somewhat rectangular in shape, with a primary frontage on Dove Street to the west, bordered by the approved Newport Crossings Residential Project (PA2017-107) and Martingale Way to the north, Dolphin -Striker Way to the south, and an existing commercial development to the east.
Project Description
The Applicant, the Picerne Group, seeks the following approvals that would allow future development of a seven -story, multiple -unit residential development consisting of up to 282 apartment units:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA)- A request to add 49 dwelling units above the current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating the 49 residential dwelling units to the Property;
• Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density including a request for three development standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall residential density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
• Development Agreement (DA) — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City;
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report (Addendum No. 9) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC.
5 22-175
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
The applicant has provided conceptual exhibits showing the anticipated design types and possible site plan that may be presented as part of the future Project (Attachment 4). Figures 1 and 2 show the conceptual plans. Should the applications be approved by the City Council, future development of the Project would be required to comply with the Residential Overlay development standards set forth in the PC-11 and subject to Site Development review by the Planning Commission. The applicant's full project description and letters of support are provided as Attachment No. PC 2.
CJSv`\' 4�. Rr SIAi YTI�LL �PA111YFNi5 / y
�� V 4i ririiii arNirr ��Y'il� c
r
• � � iJ o
� m
1� DOLPHIN -STRIKER WAY LEGEND
F
6 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL
_. ._ .. - as-.f .ra•.r .y OVER PARKIN
J COURTYARD
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
0 22-176
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
XWOM
M o n r tR
��r ryry q • bi s
4. j1 � lll�r L A3 Y* 1
fill
RAI
.06
�.
Figure 2: Conceptual Elevations
DISCUSSION
General Plan Consistency
The subject property is located in the Airport Area and is currently designated as Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land Use Element. The Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses to a majority of properties in the Airport Area. The MU-H2 designation also allows a maximum of 2,200 residential units as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or industrial uses at a maximum density of 50 units per net acre. Any eligible density bonus allowed by Government Code Section 65915 (State density bonus law) and NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) are not included in the 2,200-unit policy allowance.
While the proposed Project is allowed by the General Plan, the applicant is requesting an amendment to Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to increase the number of dwelling units allocated to the project site by 49 dwelling units, for a total of 188 dwelling units. The base density currently allotted to the property is 139 dwelling units. This density is based on the conversion of the existing 60,675-square- foot office building, consistent with the City's adopted land use conversion factors. The applicant also proposes a 50% density bonus to increase the total unit count to 282 7 22-177
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20. 32 (Density Bonus) and Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law). The dwelling unit calculations are summarized below in Table 1.
Table 1 — Dwelling Unit Summary
Units Based on Existing Nonresidential Uses
139
Additional Units Requested via GPA
49 Total Base Units
188
Density Bonus(50%
94 Total Units Allowed
282
Total Units Proposed
282
Presently, there are a total of 209 units remaining and available to be entitled in the Airport Area 2,200-unit policy allowance. The requested 49 GPA units would be in addition to the 2,200-unit policy allowance. With the approval of this project, there would be 70 (209-139=70) dwelling units remaining (exclusive of density bonus units and units authorized through General Plan Amendments). Residential units approved, proposed, and remaining within the MU-H2 designation of the Airport Area are listed in the Table 2 below.
Airport
Base Units
Project
Density
Totals with
Residential Development Allocation
Replacement
Additive
Transferred
Bonus
Density
Units
Units
Units
Total Units
Units
Bonus*
General Plan Unit Limit (MU-H2)
1,650
550
0 2,200
Approved Projects
Uptown Newport
632
290
-77
845
322
1,167
Newport Crossings
259
0 0
259
91 350
Residences at Airport Village
329
0 0
329
115
444
Residences at 4400 Von Karman
260
0 260
52 312
Residences at 1300 Bristol
77 0
+77
154
39 193
Residences at 1400 Bristol
89 0
0 89
77 229**
Residences at 1401 Quail
52 0
0 52
15 67
Projects Under Review
Residences at 1600 Dove
139
0 0
139
94 282***
Remaining Development Allocation
70 0
70 *Project totals reflect actual proposed project inclusive of density bonus units and any GPA units. However, the density bonus units and GPA units are not restricted by the 2,200 residential unit limit identified in the 2006 General Plan.
**Total includes GPA for 64 dwelling units.
***Total includes GPA for 49 dwelling units.
2 22-178
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
The future residential development as envisioned is consistent with existing surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, as it would introduce additional residential land uses in the Airport Area which includes a diverse mix of land uses including the gradual multiple residential opportunities.
The GPA to increase dwelling units does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the subject property's size, location, and surrounding uses. The existing office building on -site was built in the 1970's and there are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs of the community. The Project would increase the City's housing stock including the provision of 28 units that will be affordable to lower incomes.
The General Plan contains a number of policies that provide for the orderly evolution of the Airport Area, from a business park to a mixed -use district with cohesive residential villages integrated within the existing fabric of office, industrial, retail, and airport -related businesses. This project site was identified as a site for mixed -use development within the General Plan.
Housing Element
The Housing Element identifies adequate sites to accommodate its fair share allocation for the 6th Cycle Housing Element to accommodate housing growth needs by income categories. The project site is identified as a Housing Inventory Site 80. Figure B-3 of the Housing Element (below) displays the capacity and opportunity within the Airport Area which can help accommodate a portion of the City's Regional Housing needs Allocation (RHNA). Ultimately, the anticipated residential development implements the certified Housing Element and aids the City in its goal to provide new housing opportunities.
9 22-179
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Figure B-3: Airport Area Environs —Sites Inventory
Site Inventory:
Airport Area Environs
LEGEND
[ity Boundary
O sth Cycle Sites
Pipeline Praiects
u Opportunity sites
Key Map
Feet
NO H 0 500 1,000
Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination
The project site is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP), therefore, the overseeing agency, Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), must review the proposed GPA pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council acting on the Project. Staff anticipates review of the project by the ALUC on June 20, 2024.
Staff believes the Project is consistent with the requirements and standards in the AELUP. The project site is located within the 60 decibel (dBA) community noise equivalent level (CNEL) contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan and in the AELUP, where residential development is allowed.
Additionally, the subject site is located within John Wayne Airport Safety Zone 6 which allows residential uses. Lastly, the future residential development at the subject site will be required to comply with the noise -related development standards set forth in Section
20.30.080(F) of the NBMC applicable to residential uses proximate to John Wayne Airport.
The draft Planning Commission resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) includes facts in support of a finding of consistency of relevant Airport Area policies. Furthermore, the EIR Addendum includes a comprehensive analysis of all relevant General Plan policies.
The Project, as proposed, is consistent with all relevant General Plan policies except as 10 22-180
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
waived through the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) pursuant to State Density Bonus Law and NBMC Section 20.42 (Density Bonus) (see AHIP discussion below).
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
The Project is the second General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L1 within the last 10 years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The proposed amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. Density bonus units are not included in Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
The 49 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and 19 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE 11th Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the Charter Section 423 thresholds. A summary of the analysis is provided below in Table 3.
11 22-181
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Table 3 — Charter 423 Analvsis
Projects
Description
Thresholds
Nonresidential
Dwelling
AM Peak
PM Peak
SF Change
Unit
Hour
Hour
Change
Change
Change
Prior Amendments
Residences at 1400
General Commercial (CO-G)
0 64
24 25
Bristol Street
to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -
(PA 2022-0296)
H2) and GPA for 64 additional
Approved April 9, 2024
units
100% Totals
0 64
24 25
80% Totals
0 51
19 2
Remaining Capacity
40,000
49 66
65 Without a Vote
Residences at 1600
GPA for 49 additional units
0 49
18 19
Dove Street
Subject Project
Thresholds
-
No
No
No
Exceeded?
As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA.
Tribal Consultation (SB-18)
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 23, 2023.
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period, which expired on April 26, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes: the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Based on consultation with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of approval have been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources.
Newport Place Planned Community (Zoning Code) Consistency The project site is located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) in the Residential Overlay.
The Overlay allows for multi -unit residential development as a stand-alone use provided that it includes a minimum of 15% of the base density for lower income households. The future development project, as currently proposed, would provide this minimum number 12 22-182
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
of affordable units by providing 28 dwelling units as affordable for very -low-income households (188 base units x 15% = 28.2 = 28 units). The Overlay also contains development standards for multi -unit residential development, including density, height, setbacks, parking, signage, airport noise compatibility, amenities, and landscaping.
The Overlay limits the density for a residential development to be between 30 and 50 dwelling units per acre. The Project includes 139 base units or 55.8 dwelling units per acre, not including density bonus units or the requested units through the requested GPA. The base density with the requested GPA results in a density of 75.5 dwelling units per acre. The overall density of the project including the density bonus units is 113 units per acre. Both the base density and density bonus units are not consistent with the PC Text density requirement; however, the Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver pursuant to the NBMC and State Density Bonus Law. Furthermore, the proposed building will likely exceed the 55-foot maximum height allowed by PC-11, and therefore a development standard waiver is requested for this height restriction to allow future development of up to 100 feet.
The future residential development is subject to a Major Site Development Review and will be required to comply with all other development standards of the PC-11 Residential Overlay.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The applicant has prepared a draft Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), dated April 22, 2024 (Exhibit D of Attachment No. PC 1) to illustrate compliance with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community and density bonus allowances pursuant NBMC Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus Code) and Government Code Section 65915-65918 (Density Bonus Law). Because the Project has not been designed yet, additional incentives or development standards may be requested as part of a future site development review and subject to approval of any changes through an AHIP amendment.
Consistent with the affordable housing requirements of the Residential Overlay, 15% or 28 units of the Project's 188 base units would be set aside as affordable units to very - low -income households for 55 years.
Incentive/Concession Requests. -
The 15% allocation of very -low-income households makes the Project entitled to a density bonus of 50% (94 units) above the maximum number of units allowed by the General Plan and requested GPA increase.
In addition to the 94 density bonus units requested, the Project is entitled to receive three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The applicant requests the following two incentives at this time:
is 22-183
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
1. Partial In -Lieu Park Fee Waiver. Pursuant to General Plan Policy General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13, the Applicant is required to dedicate 0.50 acre of land for a neighborhood park or pay an in -lieu fee for the City to acquire and improve parks in the Airport Area. The applicant is required to pay $1,837,500 for the in -lieu park fee (0.50-acre park equivalent). The Applicant is contributing approximately $714,212 for this purpose; therefore, an incentive/concession is required to waive the remaining fee. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would allow the applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while providing identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable units feasible. Because the request includes a waiver of a City imposed fee, the Council has the discretion to approve, deny, or modify this concession pursuant to Density Bonus Law.
2. Affordable unit mix that does not meet NBMC Section 20.32.110 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units). This section requires affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the residential development as a whole. See previous discussion regarding unit mix. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental subsidy costs associated with the two -bedroom units and affording additional rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
Development Standard Waivers
In addition to the density bonus units and financial concessions, the Project is entitled to receive unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards, including parking reductions, if the development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density. In this case, the Applicant requests waivers of the following three development standards:
1. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires a public park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.49- acre project site is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park. The City has granted this dedication waiver four times previously with the Newport Airport Village Planned Community, the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street, Residences at 1400 Bristol, and Residences at 1401 Quail projects.
2. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 and PC-11 limits residential density between 30-50 units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion units, the density would not comply at 55.8 dwelling units per acre. Including the proposed GPA units, the conversion units, and density bonus the resulting density would be 113 units per acre exceeding the limit and a waiver is necessary to implement the project. Again, the City has previously granted this policy waiver allowing excess density three times with the Newport Airport Village 1 4 22-184
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Planned Community, the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street, and Residences at 1400 Bristol projects.
3. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is necessary to accommodate 282 residential units within seven stories. The Project is anticipated to have a height of 100 feet from established grade.
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Pursuant to General Plan Implementation Program 12.1, a fiscal impact analysis was prepared for the project by Applied Development Economics dated April 17, 2024 (Attachment PC 3). The fiscal impact model used in the report calculates public service impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees.
The report concludes that the future residential rental project would generate a positive fiscal impact for the City, compared to the negative fiscal impact of the existing office use of the site. Annually, the existing office use generates a negative fiscal impact of about $104,661 per year and the residential development would anticipate generating a positive fiscal impact of approximately $41,732. This is based on the expected socio- economic profile of the future tenants. A positive fiscal impact for a for -rent property is not consistent with the original fiscal analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General Plan, although in recent years some other very high value luxury residential projects have shown a positive fiscal benefit. If the anticipated resident profile (i.e. demographic profile of residents) turns out to be more like the average Newport Beach demographic (e.g. older population), or if it changes in that direction over time, then the residential development would have a lower, or possibly negative impact on the City budget.
However, even so, the 2006 General Plan anticipated an increased development potential for commercial and lodging uses, in addition to the new residential units it would permit. The net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7 million per year.' Thus, any negative fiscal impacts of future residential development can potentially be mitigated as long as commercial development keeps pace elsewhere throughout the City.
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.a (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, a development agreement is required as the proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and the development of 50 or more residential units.
Additionally, the project will be required to pay public benefit fees as part of the 'Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis Land Use Element Amendment, April 4, 2014. p. 3. 1 5 22-185
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
Development Agreement. The project would also provide much needed housing opportunities in the City in furtherance of the certified Housing Element including 28 rental units affordable to very -low income households.
The applicant requests a 10-year term of agreement. The agreement provides assurance that the applicant may proceed with the proposed project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of approval. Additionally, the agreement helps the applicant avoid a waste of resources and escalated costs of the proposed project while encouraging a commitment to private participation in comprehensive planning. Staff supports the requested 10-year term.
The DA provides vested rights to develop the project and the City will finalize the payment of negotiated public benefit fees per each residential dwelling unit. The total fee will have three components: a public safety fee, a reduced park in -lieu fee, and a general public benefit fee (Table 4, below). The public safety fee will assist the City with the costs of an additional ambulance unit that will be stationed at Fire Station No. 7 that will serve this area or other public safety needs. The park fee will be used consistent with City Council Policy B-1 (Park Fee Policy) or for the future acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the Airport Area. The public benefit fee will be used solely at the City Council's discretion. The public benefit fee would be subject to annual adjustments, based on the CPI Index after two years, and would be payable at building permit issuance or prior to occupancy.
Table 4: Projected Public Benefit Fees
Category
Fee
Public Safety
$285,760
Reduced Park In -Lieu
$714,212
General Public Benefit
$3,555,268
Total
$4,555,240
Finally, the agreement includes all mandatory elements, including public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO)
NBMC Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) requires a traffic study to be prepared prior to issuance of building permits if a proposed project generates in excess of 300 new average daily trips (ADT).
Ganddini Group Inc. has prepared a traffic study dated August 14, 2023 (Exhibit F of Attachment No. PC 1), under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer, pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and its implementing guidelines. The traffic study is focused on the conditions one year after project occupancy, or five years after project 1-0 22-186
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
approval for larger projects not expected to be complete within five years. Baseline traffic conditions for a TPO traffic study include previously approved projects in the City.
The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 14 existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 622 daily trips, including 12 peak a.m. trips and 22 peak p.m. trips. When these trips are distributed to these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS). Additionally, the Traffic Study includes vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for informational purposes only. An analysis of VMT was not required as a part of the CEQA Addendum because the adopted Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), adopted in 2006, did not utilize VMT analysis.
Nonetheless, the informational analysis concludes that the project is in an area mapped with low residential VMT per capita. Therefore, the project is presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT since it satisfies the City established screening criteria.
Furthermore, the TPO requires findings that, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, the proposed project complies with the TPO. Findings related to the preparation of the traffic study are provided in the draft resolution for project approval (Attachment No. PC 1).
Environmental Review
On July 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75, thereby certifying the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with the CEQA set forth in the California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines) and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan, and the goals and policies of 10 general plan elements.
Additionally, on November 22, 2011, the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003, thereby approving the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update (2008-2014) and its associated Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration.
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR or prior Negative Declaration has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or other analysis is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1-7 22-187
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The City contracted with an environmental consultant (Psomas, Inc.) to prepare an Addendum to the PEIR. The entire Addendum and its technical appendixes are available online at the City's website at: www.newportbeachca.gov/cega . The conclusion of the Addendum analysis supports the finding that no additional environmental documentation is required by CEQA.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) or the Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. All potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in either the PEIR or Negative Declaration that have been appropriately mitigated. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either 12 22-188
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
the PEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the project.
Summary
Staff believes the findings for project approval can be made, with specific conditions of approval for the AHIP and TPO Study. The proposed Project is consistent with the existing MU-H2 General Plan Land Use designation and its land use policies related residential developments in the Airport Area. The proposed project is also consistent with the recently updated Noise Element and AELUP.
The existing Newport Place Residential Overlay allows multi -unit uses subject to approval of a site development review, which would be requested once the Project is designed. The site development review will ensure the design of the future project will be implemented consistent with all applicable development and design standards.
Ultimately, the Project will lead to the redevelopment of underperforming office with a multi -unit residential apartment development that will include affordable units consistent with the Overlay and in furtherance of the adopted 611 Cycle Housing Element.
Alternatives
1. The Planning Commission has the discretion to recommend changes to the proposed Project to address any areas of concern.
2. The Planning Commission can also recommend denial if the Project's consistency with the MU-H2 and/or other applicable Airport Area policies are not in evidence. If the Planning Commission chooses to deny the project, findings must be made consistent with the Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.5) and Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915).
Therefore, if after consideration of all written and oral evidence presented, the Planning Commission desires to either disapprove or impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density or with any other conditions that would adversely impact feasibility of the proposed project, the Planning Commission must articulate the factual basis for making the following findings and direct staff to return with a revised resolution incorporating the articulated findings and factual basis for the decision:
a. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
19 22-189
Residences at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297)
Planning Commission, May 23, 2024
b. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to affordable households financially infeasible.
Piihlir. NntirP
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways) including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website.
Prepared by:
Liz Wes moreland, AICP
Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS
Submitted by:
J*6e Murillo, AICP
Acting Deputy Community Development Director
PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2 Applicant's Project Description and Letters of Support PC 3 Fiscal Impact Memorandum
PC 4 Conceptual Exhibits
20 22-190
Attachment F
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
22-191
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING — 6:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER- 6:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Langford
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Tristan Harris, Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, and Commissioner David Salene
ABSENT: Commissioner Lee Lowrey
Staff Present: Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Acting Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murillo, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Senior Planner Liz Westmoreland, Associate Planner Joselyn Perez, Department Assistant Savannah Martinez, and Department Assistant Jasmine Leon
I PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
V. UEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None
VI. CONSE ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1 UTES OF APRIL 18, 2024
Recommended Action: Approve and file
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Secretary Harris to approve the minutes of April 18, 2024.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Lang"'
rd, Kosene, and Salene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Lowrey
ITEM NO. 2 PETTEY FAMILY TRUST ENCROACH ENT (PA2024-0067) Site Location: 521 Larkspur Avenue
Summary:
A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 to retain existing and cori-struct new non -compliant private improvements consisting of 3-foot-tall vinyl fencing and 6-font-tall vinyl fencing encroaching up to 6-feet and 2-foot 6-inches, respectively, within the 50-foot vide Third Avenue public right-of-way. The Third Avenue right-of-way is approximately 10 feet from #iie face of curb to the property line. City Council Policy L-6 prohibits the existing and proposed new vinyl fencing to a 1-foot projection into the right-of-way and limiting encroachments to 36-inches maxo�ium.
Recommended Actions:
Pagel of 7
22-192
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) (Preliminary Review), and Section 15303 Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
2. Waive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, to retain existing and construct new non -compliant private improvements consisting of 3-foot-tall and 6- foot -tall vinyl fencing that encroach into the Third Avenue public rights -of -way, contingent Pon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process being met (Attachment No. PC 1 . and
3. Ado Resolution No. PC2024-009 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving Encroa\Publ
mit No. N2024-0154.
City Traffic Engineer layed the request by the homeowner for private improvements in the public right-of-walocation, project scope, findings from a review by Public Works, support of the waiverorks, and condition of approval for anencroachment agreement within a year of appro
In response to Secretary Harris'\question, City Traffic Engineer Sommers stated that the encroachment agreement will allow th�City to take the land back for public improvements at the expense of the homeowner.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's questioN City Traffic Engineer Sommers clarified that the 6-foot fence is being relocated on the property to Im ove the sight distance coming out of the driveway.
There were no ex-parte communications disclose\byCd
mmissioners.
There was no public comment.
Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and secondeissioner Salene to approve the item as recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Rosene, and S lene
NOES:
None
RECUSED:
None
ABSENT:
Lowrey
ITEM NO. 3 SMITH FAMILY TRUST ENCROACHMENT (PA2
Site Location: 3015 Cliff Drive
Summary:
A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 to retain private improvements cons)�ting of a various retaining walls, steps, and pilasters with lights that encroach up to 4 feet within t e 40-foot-wide La Jolla Drive public right-of-way and up to 13 feet within the 80-foot-wide Cliff Dri public right- of-way. The La Jolla Drive public right-of-way is approximately 5-foot wide from the ce of curb to property line and the Cliff Drive right-of-way is approximately 13-foot wide from t face of curb to the property line. City Council Policy L-6 prohibits retaining walls, steps, and ' asters with lights since structures are limited to a one 1-foot projection into the right-of-way, max um height of 36-inches, and prohibits lighting.
22-193
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2ESC4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Recommended Actions:
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) (Preliminary Review) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
2. Wive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, to retain non- compli-ant private improvements consisting of varying height retaining walls, steps, and pilasters vvit.h lights that encroach into the La Jolla Drive and Cliff Drive public rights -of - way, conting-rat upon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process being met (Attachment No`-F C 1); and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-010 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving Encroachment Permit No. N2024-0163.
City Traffic Engineer Sommers relayed the quest by the homeowner related to private improvements in the public right-of-way, findings frOm, a review by Public Works, and condition of approval for an encroachment agreement within a yearXapproval.
There were no ex-parte communications disclosed by the Commissioners.
There was no public comment.
Motion made by Secretary Harris and seconded by Commissioner Salene approve the item as recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Rosene, and Salene
NOES:
None
RECUSED:
None
ABSENT:
Lowrey
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 4 RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297) Site Location: 1600 Dove Street
Summary:
The Applicant is requesting approval of the following entitlements for the future development of a multi -unit residential project consisting of up to 282 dwelling units at 1600 Dove Street (Project):
General Plan Amendment (GPA) - A request to add 49 dwelling units above the current General Plan allowance for the Airport Area, and amend Anomaly 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) allocating the 49 residential dwelling to the Property;
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density including a request for three development standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall residential density along with two development concessions related to the payment of partial park in -lieu fees and mix of affordable units pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach
22-194
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2ESC4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Municipal Code (NBMC) and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
Development Agreement (DA) — A Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City; Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report (Addendum No. 9) - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC.
The Project would require a future Site Development Review approval prior to building permit issuance as no specific design for the Project is included.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119), and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration (collectively, the PEIR); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-008 recommending the City Council adoption of Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9, and approval of General Plan Amendment, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, Traffic Study, and Development Agreement, for the project located at 1600 Dove Street (PA2022-0297).
Secretary Harris recused himself from the item due to a business interest conflict Senior Planner Westmoreland used a presentation to review the project location, land use and zoning, project description, entitlements requested, dwelling unit summary, conceptual elevations, density bonus and AHIP, development agreement, CEQA addendum and traffic study, Charter Section 423 Analysis, recommendation, and next steps.
In response to Commissioner Salene's question, Senior Planner Westmoreland stated that the reduced park fee is based on a negotiated number.
Commissioners Barto and Langford disclosed ex parte communication by speaking with the representative from the developer, while the remaining Commissioners had none.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Satish Lion, representing The Picerne Group, utilized a presentation to review the project team, sponsor, and context map, current condition, product evolution, and community support and commitment. He agreed to the recommended conditions.
22-195
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Langford thought the project was thoughtful.
Commissioner Salene thought the project is pushing the density and expressed concern for the starting base density, additional bonuses, and an aggressive approach.
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Chair Ellmore to approve the item as recommended by staff.
AYES:
Barto, Ellmore, Langford, and Rosene
NOES:
Salene
RECUSED:
Harris
ABSENT:
Lowrey
ITEM NO. 5 FLETCHER JONES AIRPORT SHUTTLE AND PARKING FACILITY (PA2023- 0172)
\ Site Location: 20071 Birch Street
mmary:
request for a conditional use permit to relocate the existing Fletcher Jones Motorcars Pr rred Owners Airport Shuttle Facility from its current location at 2172, 2192, and 2222 South�ristol Street to a new site at 20071 Birch Street. If approved, the new site will be develope with an approximately 1,134 square -foot, single -story, reception office and surface pa g for 83 cars. Accessory improvements include security fencing and perimeter walls, site Iightl hardscaping, and landscaping. No late hours are proposed. The request is one phase of a rger future effort by Fletcher Jones Motorcars to redevelop 2172, 2192, and 2222 South Bri -ol Street and the adjoining property at 20052 Birch Street into an automotive inventory fa 'lity with accessory parking. With approval of this application, the conditional use permit for lication PA2022-128 would be rescinded.
Recommended Actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the Califo Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Con uction or Conversion of Small Structures), Section 15332 under Class 32 (In -Fill Dev pment Projects), and Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, G eral Plan, or Zoning) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a si ificant effect on the environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-011 approving the conditl al use permit filed as PA2023-0172.
Associate Planner Perez used a presentation to review the vicinity map, surroundland use and zoning, existing airport shuttle facility, future redevelopment plans for the existing shu facility site, the proposed relocation project, site improvements for the new airport shuttle facility, de ibed why a conditional use permit is required, reviewed compatibility findings and conditions of app val for the project, recommended adding three additional conditions of approval to the resolution, proled an overview of the environmental review and CEQA, and recommended approval.
22-196
DocuSign Envelope ID: A2E5C4B1-D372-4743-8464-A330B600FE9A Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 23, 2024
Acting Deputy Corrir -n i / Development Director Murillo noted that the next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for June 5 I cial Meeting.
ITEM NO. 8 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSE - one
IX. ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, the meeting was adjourned it Ellmore at 6:40 p. M.
The agenda for the May 23, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, May 16, 2024, at 3:30 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Thursday, May 16, 2024, at 3:33 p.m.
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
TVisf avu RAMS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
22-197
Attachment G
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2024-008 (No Exhibits) 22-198
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C RESOLUTION NO. PC2024-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ADDENDUM NO. 9 TO THE 2006 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND 2008-2014
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND TRAFFIC
STUDY FOR THE RESIDENCES AT 1600 DOVE PROJECT
LOCATED AT 1600 DOVE STREET (PA2022-0297)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by The Picerne Group ("Applicant"), with respect to the property located at 1600 Dove Street, and legally described in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property").
2. The Applicant requests approvals to that would allow future development of a seven -story apartment complex consisting of up to 282 apartment units ("Project"), which requires the following approvals:
General Plan Amendment ("GPA")- A request to add 49 dwelling units above the General Plan allowance, and amend Anomaly Number 12 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to allow 49 residential dwelling units at the Property; Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP")- A preliminary plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density including a request for three development standard waivers related to height, park dedication requirement, and overall residential density along with two development concessions related to the payment of park in -lieu fees and affordable unit mix pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law");
• Development Agreement ("DA") —A development agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and to provide negotiated public benefits to the City; 22-199
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 2 of 24
• Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC.
• Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report ("Addendum No. 9") - Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; and
3. The Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan Land Use Element and located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Zoning District Professional and Business Office Site 7.
4. The Property is not located within the coastal zone, therefore amending the Local Coastal Program or obtaining a coastal development permit is not required.
5. A public hearing was held on May 23, 2024, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M.
Brown Act"), and Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75 on July 25, 2006, thereby certifying the adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as a Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR"). This PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of a citywide land use plan and the goals and policies of 10 general plan elements.
2. The City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. GP2008-003 on November 22, 2011, thereby approving the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update and its associated Housing Element and Initial Study/Negative Declaration under CEQA.
3. The City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 2007-79 and 2012-62 on December 11, 2007 and July 24th, 2012, respectively, approving Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR to analyze changes to the development intensities within the North Newport Center Planned Community ("NNCPC") Development Plan.
4. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-78 on September 8, 2020, approving Addendum No. 3 (ER2020-002), to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation of the Newport Airport Village project located 4341, 4361, and 4501 Birch Street; 4320, 4340, 4360, 4400, 4500, 4520, 4540, 4570, 4600, and 01-17-23
22-200
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 3 of 24
4630 Campus Drive; and 4525, 4533, and 4647 MacArthur Boulevard, from Airport Office and Supporting Uses (AO) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and amend Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) to add Anomaly No. 86 to allow for the development of 329 dwelling units, exclusive of any permitted density bonus, and 297,572 square feet of commercial uses. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 3.
5. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-2 on January 26, 2021, approving Addendum No. 4 (ER2020-003), to the PEIR to amend Planned Community Development Plan No. 15 (Koll Center Newport Planned Community) for the creation of a residential overlay zone and a park overlay zone to allow for residential use and a public park within the Koll Center Newport Professional and Business Office Site B, including a major site development review, traffic study, lot line adjustment, affordable housing implementation plan, and development agreement for the Residences at 4400 Von Karman Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 4.
6. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-19 on March 22, 2022, approving Addendum No. 5 (ER2022-001), to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1300 Bristol Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 5.
7. The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. PC2022-011 on May 12, 2022, approving Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002), to the PEIR to approve the Ritz Carlton Residences Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No.
6. 8. The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-22 on April 9, 2024, approving Addendum No. 7 (PA2022-0296) to the PEIR to approve the Residences at 1400 Bristol Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 7.
9. The City Council approved Resolution No. 2024-25 on April 9, 2024, approving Addendum No. 8 (PA2022-0040), to the PEIR for the consideration of the Residences at 1401 Quail Street Project. No analysis specific to the Property was included in Addendum No. 8.
10. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 01-17-23
22-201
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 4 of 24
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
11. Addendum No. 9 to PEIR was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) of the CEQA Guidelines.
12. The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum includes analysis of new topics that were not included in the previous EIRs; specifically, it includes a new Energy, Wildfire, and Tribal Cultural Resources section. These additional analyses are appropriate for inclusion in Addendum No. 9, but none result in new or increased significant impacts that would require preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
13. On the basis of the PEIR and entire environmental review record, including Addenda Nos. 1-9, the Project (inclusive of recommended conditions of approval) will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR. Addendum No. 9, which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and includes Addenda Nos. 1-8, confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in either the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 to the PEIR nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more 01-17-23
22-202
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 5 of 24
severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR, including Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested applications for the Project, the data presented in the PEIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 to the PEIR as augmented by Addendum No. 9 for this Project, are considered part of the record.
14. Addendum No. 9 is hereby recommended for approval by the Planning Commission given its analysis and conclusions. Addendum No. 9 and related and referenced documentation, constitute the administrative record upon which this decision was based, are on file with the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
15. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time-consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges.
As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that may be awarded to a successful challenger.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
General Plan Amendment
An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., set forth any required findings for approval of such amendments.
Finding and Facts in Support of Findings:
1. The Property is designated Mixed Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) by the General Plan. The Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation applies to properties located in the Airport Area. It provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses that may include regional commercial office, multifamily residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary neighborhood commercial uses. No changes are proposed to the underlying land use designation of the Property.
2. The GPA and the resulting increase in dwelling units is compatible with the existing surrounding uses and planned land uses identified by the General Plan, because the Project would introduce additional residential units in the Airport Area, within an area that already allows residential development. The Airport Area includes a diverse mix of land uses including the gradual development of residential multifamily dwellings. The additional residential development would consolidate growth and support commercial properties within the Airport Area.
01-17-23
22-203
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 6 of 24
3. The requested GPA to add 49 dwelling units within the Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) designation does not eliminate existing or future land uses to the overall detriment of the community given the site's size, location, and surrounding uses. The existing office building on -site was built in the 1970's and there are sufficient office facilities in the Airport Area to support the business needs of the community. The proposed change to allow additional residential density would increase the City's housing stock including the provision of units that will be affordable to lower incomes, as required by the PC-11 Residential Overlay.
4. The Property is located in an area of the city that has sufficient utility systems to serve the Project. No off -site improvements other than typical utility connections are currently proposed or required as part of the Project.
5. The Project is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach General Plan policies that establish fundamental criteria for the formation and implementation of new residential villages in the Airport Area with additional policy analysis included in the EIR Addendum No. 9:
a. Land Use Element Policy LU 1.1 (Unique Environment): Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and view sheds.
The Project enhances the distinct, urban character of the Airport Area by providing a means for replacing parking lots and a 1970's era office building with functional residential development, in line with the General Plan goal of transitioning the Airport Area to a mixed -use community. The Property is not in or near any of the City's areas that feature the harbor, unique topography, or view sheds. The proposed project would introduce residential units to the Property consistent with the uses and urbanized character of the Airport Area and the existing Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU- H2) designation.
b. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of Residential Choices). Provide opportunities for the development of residential units that respond to community and regional needs in terms of density, size, location, and cost. Implement goals, policies, programs, and objectives identified within the City's Housing Element.
The Project includes up to 282 multi -family residential units, inclusive of 139 base units from the conversion of 60,675-square-foot office building, 49 added units from the requested GPA, and 94 units from the requested 50% density bonus. Of the 282 residential units, 28 or 15% will be set aside for very low-income households. The Project responds to market needs and diversifies the City's housing stock by adding additional dwelling units to the Airport Area.
c. Land Use Element Policy LU 3.8 (Project Entitlement Review with Airport Land Use Commission) - Refer the adoption or amendment of the General Plan, Zoning Code, specific plans, and Planned Community development plans for land within the John 01-17-23
22-204
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 7 of 24
Wayne Airport planning area, as established in the JW4 Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP'), to the Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC') for Orange County for review, as required by Section 21676 of the California Public Utilities Code. In addition, refer all development projects that include buildings with a height greater than 200 feet above ground level to the ALUC for review.
The Project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"), therefore, the overseeing agency, ALUC, must review the proposed GPA pursuant to Government Code Section 65302.3 and Public Utilities Code Section 21676. The purpose of ALUC's review is to determine whether the Project is consistent with the AELUP prior to the City Council taking action on the Project. The Project is located within the City's updated 60 decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan as well as the 60 dBA contour identified in the AELUP, where residential development is allowed. As a result, the Project will be required to comply with the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC. Further, the Project site is located within Safety Zone 6, which allows residential development. d. Land Use Element Policy 6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility). Require that all development be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and that residential development shall be allowed only on parcels with noise levels of less than John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area.
The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan as well as the 60 dBA contour of the AELUP, where residential development is allowed, subject to the development standards set forth in Section 20.30.080(F) (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the NBMC.
e. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.5 (Residential and Supporting Uses).
Accommodate the development of a maximum of 2,200 multi -family residential units, including work force housing, and mixed -use buildings that integrate residential with ground level office or retail uses, along with supporting retail, grocery stores, and parklands. Residential units may be developed only as the replacement of underlying permitted nonresidential uses. When a development phase includes a mix of residential and nonresidential uses or replaces existing industrial uses, the number of peak hour trips generated by cumulative development of the site shall not exceed the number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses. However, a maximum of 550 units may be developed as infill 01-17-23
22-205
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 8 of 24
on surface parking lots or areas not used as occupiable buildings on properties within the Conceptual Development Plan Area depicted on Figure LU22 provided that the parking is replaced on site.
General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.5 established a development limit of 2,200 maximum dwelling units for the Airport Area. Of the 2,200 residential units allowed, 1,650 units may be developed as replacement of existing office, retail, and/or industrial uses. The remaining 550 units are classified as additive units meaning they are not required to replace other units and they may be constructed as "in -fill" units to existing commercial or office development within the Conceptual Development Plan Area ("CDPA") of the Airport Area. Any eligible density bonus allowed by Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC are not included in the 2,200-unit allowance.
The 550 additive units have been previously allocated to the Uptown Newport and Residences at 4400 Von Karman projects. Considering the dwelling unit sum of the previously approved projects, the remaining and available development allocation within the Airport Area would be 209 dwelling units. With the development of this Project, there would be 70 dwelling units (209-139=70) remaining, exclusive of density bonus units and units authorized through a GPA.
The Property is developed with an existing 4-story commercial office building totaling 60,675 square feet. Since the Project can be developed only as the replacement of the underlying nonresidential office use (without a GPA), and the number of peak hour trips generated by cumulative development of the Property shall not exceed the number of trips that would result from development of the underlying permitted nonresidential uses, a conversion rate of 2.29 dwelling units per 1,000 square feet of commercial floor area is required. This results in a total of 139 dwelling units. The Project includes a request for a GPA to increase the base units by 49 dwelling units, which results in a total base unit count of 188 dwelling units. With the application of a 50% density bonus (i.e. 94 units), a maximum of 282 units could be constructed.
Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages). Allow development of mixed -use residential villages, each containing a minimum of 10 acres and centered on a neighborhood park and other amenities (as conceptually illustrated in Figure LU23). The first phase of residential development in each village shall encompass at least 5 gross acres of land, exclusive of existing rights -of -way.
This acreage may include multiple parcels provided that they are contiguous or face one another across an existing street. At the discretion of the City, this acreage may also include part of a contiguous property in a different land use category, if the City finds that a sufficient portion of the contiguous property is used to provide functionally proximate parking, open space, or other amenity. The "Conceptual Development Plan" area shown on Figure LU22 shall be exempt from the 5-acre minimum, but a conceptual development plan described in Policy LU 6.15.11 shall be required.
The Property is 2.49 acres in size. The Residential Overlay of PC-11 allows residential development on sites containing less than 10 acres if housing units 01-17-23
22-206
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 9 of 24
affordable to lower income households are provided. The Project will allocate a minimum of 15% of the base dwelling units as affordable for very -low income households. Therefore, the Project will be exempt from General Plan Policy LU
6.15.6 (Size of Residential Villages).
g. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 (Overall Density and Housing Types). Require that residential units be developed at a minimum density of 30 units and maximum of 50 units per net acre averaged over the total area of each residential village. Net acreage shall be exclusive of existing and new rights -of -way, public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks. Within these densities, provide for the development of a mix of building types ranging from townhomes to high-rises to accommodate a variety of household types and incomes and to promote a diversity of building masses and scales.
The Project proposes 188 base units at a density of 75.5 dwelling units per acre on the 2.49 net -acre site. A waiver from Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 regarding maximum density is requested as part of the AHIP. The base density does not include the 50% density bonus (94 units) that is allowed by the State Bonus Density law and Section
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC. Altogether, the Project would reach an overall maximum density of 113 dwelling units per acre, which is exclusive of rights -of -ways, public pedestrian ways, and neighborhood parks.
The Project is a for rent apartment building with up to 282 units. There will be a mixture of unit types, ranging from studios to two -bedroom units, and possibly 3- bedroom units, accommodating a variety of household types and incomes. Of the dwelling units, 28 units will be affordable to very -low income households and the remaining units will be market -rate housing, which will increase the City's overall housing stock for various household income levels.
h. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.8 (First Phase Development Density). Require a residential density of 45 to 50 units per net acre, averaged over the first phase for each residential village. This shall be applied to 100 percent of properties in the first phase development area whether developed exclusively for residential or integrating service commercial horizontally on the site or vertically within a mixed -use building.
On individual sites, housing development may exceed or be below this density to encourage a mix of housing types, provided that the average density for the area encompassed by the first phase is achieved.
The Project would be developed in one phase on an individual site with a maximum density of 113 units per acre. The Project provides a mixture of residential unit types that include 28 units of affordable housing to very -low-income households. The proposed density is above the required minimum of 45 units per acre and the Applicant is requesting a development standard waiver allowed by State Density Bonus Law to exceed the maximum density of 50 units per acre. i. Land Use Policy LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and Density). Subsequent phases of residential development shall abut the first phase or 01-17-23
22-207
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 10 of 24
shall face the first phase across a street. The minimum density of residential development (including residential mixed -use development) shall be 30 units per net acre and shall not exceed the maximum of 50 units per net acre averaged over the development phase.
See finding LU 6.15.9 First Phase Development Density above.
Tribal Consultation (SB 18)
6. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on February 23, 2023.
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project will not be heard by the City Council until after the 90-day period, which expired on April 26, 2023. The City participated in consultations with three tribes: the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation-Belardes, and the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California. Based on consultation with the participating Native American Tribes, conditions of approval have been included to address potential concerns regarding the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources.
Charter Section 423 Analysis
Finding:
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by more than 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80% of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding 10 years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
Facts in Support of Findings:
01-17-23
22-208
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 11 of 24
The Project is the second General Plan Amendment in Statistical Area L4 within the last 10 years that included additional dwelling units or non-residential floor area. The proposed amendment results in 49 additional dwelling units and no change in the square footage of non-residential floor area. Conversions of existing commercial development is allowed by the current General Plan (2,200 in -fill units maximum in the Airport Area based on conversion of existing commercial floor area). Reductions in commercial floor area are not tracked as part of the Charter Section 423 analysis. Density bonus units are not included in Charter Section 423 analysis nor the General Plan Anomaly calculations.
2. The 49 additional dwelling units result in a net increase of 18 a.m. peak hour trips and 19 p.m. peak hour trips based on the "Multifamily Housing (Mid Rise) Not Close to Rail" ITE 11th Edition trip rate for the proposed use, as provided in Council Policy A-18. No credit is given to the existing non-residential uses on -site because the existing office floor area was converted to residential dwelling units so that the proposed Project (less the density bonus and GPA units) is traffic neutral. Therefore, the Project individually does not exceed the Greenlight thresholds.
3. There has been one other relevant GPA within Statistical Area L4 within the last 10 years, which resulted in an increase of 64 dwelling units at 1400 Bristol Street (PA2022-0296).
Considering 80% of the prior amendments (80% of 64 dwelling units) results in 51 dwelling units. The Project includes a GPA for 49 dwelling units. Therefore, cumulative development of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10 years coupled with the Project results in an increase of 100 dwelling units. In terms of peak hour trips, the prior GPA resulted in a net increase of 24 a.m. peak hour trips and 25 p.m. peak hour trips. Considering 80% of the prior amendment, results in 19 and 20 a.m. and p.m. peak hour trips, respectively. Therefore, cumulative development of 80% of prior GPAs from the last 10 years coupled with the proposed project results in a change of 37 and 39 a.m. and p.m. peak hour trips, respectively. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the requested GPA.
Affordable Housing Implementation Plan
The AHIP is consistent with the intent to implement affordable housing goals within the City pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915-65918 (State Density Bonus Law), and Chapter
20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC for the following reasons:
Consistent with the requested 50% density bonus, 28 units (15% of the base units) would be set aside as affordable units to lower income households. Lower income households are defined as households with 80% or less of the area median income, adjusted for family size for minimum term of 55 years for very low-income households. The Project is consistent the provisions of the Residential Overlay of Newport Place Planned Community, which requires a minimum of 15% of base units to be set aside for lower income households.
2. The State Density Bonus Law and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) provide for an increase in the number of units above the General Plan and zoning limits for projects that include a minimum of 15% of the base units affordable to very -low-income households earning 50% or less of area median income. The Project's inclusion of 28 very -low-income units, which 01-17-23
22-209
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 12 of 24
is 15% of the base unit count of 188 units makes the Project eligible for 94 additional units.
Inclusive of all base units, density bonus units, and affordable units the total project includes 282 units.
3. In addition to the 94 density bonus units, the Project is entitled under California Government Code Section 65915(d) and Section 20.32.070 of the NBMC, to receive up to three incentives or concessions that would result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The Project includes a development concession for the proposed affordable unit mix that does not meet Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC.
Section 20.32.070 (Design and Distribution of Affordable Units) of the NBMC requires affordable units in a density bonus project reflect the same range of unit types in the residential development as a whole. In this case, the Project would provide a higher percentage of affordable studio units and fewer affordable two -bedroom units and three - bedroom compared to market rate units. Granting this incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual project cost reductions by reducing the long-term rental subsidy costs associated with the two- and three -bedroom units and affording additional rental income for the project to ensure financial feasibility.
The Project includes a second development concession to waive a portion of the required in -lieu park fee for a half -acre park. The reduction in park in -lieu fees would allow the Applicant to contribute to the overall fund for parks in the Airport Area, while providing identifiable cost reduction that make the provision of affordable units feasible.
4. In addition to the density bonus units and qualified concessions, the Project is entitled under California Government Code Section 65915(e), Section 20.32.080 of the NBMC, and recent caselaw to receive waivers or reductions of development standards where application of the development standard would physically preclude construction of a density bonus project. In this case, the following development standards are entitled to a waiver:
a. Park dedication requirement. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.13 requires a public park equal to 8% of the gross land area of the development, or a minimum one-half acre, whichever is greater, be provided. In this case, the 2.49-acre Project site is too small to feasibly accommodate a half -acre park.
b. Residential density. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 6.15.7 and PC-11 requires residential density between 30-50 dwelling units per acre. Inclusive of only the conversion units, the proposed density of 55.8 dwelling units per acre would exceed the maximum density of 50 dwelling units per acre. Including the proposed GPA units, conversion units, and density bonus units, the Project would not comply at a density of 113 dwelling units per acre and a waiver is necessary to implement the project. c. Building height. The Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) limits building height to 55 feet from established grade. In this case, a higher building height is necessary to accommodate 282 residential units within seven stories. The Project is anticipated to have a height of 100 feet from established grade.
01-17-23
22-210
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 13 of 24
Traffic Study
In accordance with Section 15.40.030 (Standards for Approval -Findings -Exemptions) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A.
Fact in Support of Finding:
A traffic study, entitled 1600 Dove Street Residences Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Ganddini Group, Inc., dated August 14, 2023, was prepared for the Project in compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and Appendix A of the NBMC.
Finding:
B. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection 15.40.030(B) can be made:
Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval in accordance with Section 15.40.030(B)(1) of the NBMC. ii. Additionally, the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection in accordance with Section
15.40.030(B)(1)(a) of the NBMC.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the Traffic Study, and the conditions of approval, all of the findings for approval in Section 15.40.030(B)(1)(a) can be made in that:
a. The Project is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2029, within the 60-month criteria. Therefore, the Traffic Study addresses the entire project development. b. The Traffic Study provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hours at 14 existing intersections that are located in the City and the adjoining City of Irvine. c. The Project is projected to generate an additional (i.e. net increase of) 622 daily trips, including 12 peak a.m. trips and 22 peak p.m. trips. When these trips distributed to these studied intersections, the analysis concludes that there is no significant impact as the Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any impacted primary intersection, and all intersections are forecasted to continue to operate at acceptable Levels of Service.
01-17-23
22-211
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 14 of 24
Finding:
C. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval.
Fact in Support of Finding:
No improvements or mitigation are necessary because implementation of the Project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. The Applicant will be required to pay any applicable Traffic Fair Share fees for the net increase in vehicles trips, which will be used to fund future planned improvements to the City's circulation system. The Applicant will also be subject to the payment of San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Fees.
Development Agreement
In accordance with Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(a) (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, a development agreement is required as the Project requires an amendment to the General Plan that includes the development of more than 50 residential units. In this case the Project has a total of 188 base residential units. The proposed development agreement satisfies the requirements of Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements) of the NBMC as follows:
1. A development agreement is requested by the Applicant, as the Project would include a base density of 139 units and 49 units from the requested General Plan Amendment. The development agreement includes all the mandatory elements including a term of 10 years and public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, the NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
2. Public benefits include the payment of a public safety fee to satisfy any obligation the Project could have to provide new emergency response services or Fire Department equipment to serve the Airport Area whether a Community Facilities District is formed or not. The Applicant has also agreed to pay a park fee to support the provisions of new parks in the Airport Area and a separate public benefit fee to be used by the City Council as it deems appropriate.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the following to the City Council:
01-17-23
22-212
DocuSign Envelope ID: 958E5150-F6B7-46B2-95DA-16F4273E139C Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-008
Paae 15 of 24
1. Adopt Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR (SCH2O06011119), as depicted in Exhibit "B" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
2. Approve General Plan Amendment as depicted in Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
3. Approve Affordable Housing Implementation Plan as depicted in Exhibit "D" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference;
4. Approve Development Agreement, as depicted in Exhibit "E" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference; and
5. Approve Traffic Study, as depicted in Exhibit "F" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd DAY OF MAY, 2024.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Langford, Rosene
NOES: Salene
RECUSED: Harris
ABSENT: Lowrey
BY:
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
BY: Tiisfav, RA.v'v'iS
Tristan Harris, Secretary
Attachment(s): Exhibit A — Legal Description
Exhibit B — Addendum No. 9 to the 2006 General Plan Update EIR (SCH NO. 2006011119)
Exhibit C — General Plan Amendment
1:7i11.7iiDa_1:11%
Exhibit E - Development Agreement
Exhibit F — Traffic Study
Exhibit G — Conditions of Approval
01-17-23
22-213
Attachment H
ALUC and Caltrans Comment Letters
22-214
ORANGE COUNTY
!�4sLuc:
August 8, 2024
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
Corn munity Development Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission Determination Regarding Residences at 1600 Dove Street
Dear Ms. Westmoreland,
We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated July 10, 2024, and City Council Resolution No. 2024-45 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed 1600 Dove Street Residences. In accordance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule findings for the above - referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to overrule the ALUC.
Please be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to overrule the commission's action or recommendation."
Background
On June 20, 2024, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Residences at 1600 Dove Street to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport (JWA) on a 6-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 3.2.1. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.
22-215
1600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. The City's proposed project would increase the maximum height and density of residential uses within the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), and within Safety Zone 6. This would result in exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP.
ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included in Resolution No. 2024-45.
Response to Finding and Fact in Support A - Regarding Noise Standards:
Finding of Fact A correctly states that the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP and that the AELUP identifies residential uses as " normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour.
The ALUC appreciates that, "as part of the future Site Development Review, the Project will be conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of windows." However, Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP states "... aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport," and the ALUC believes that increasing the intensity and height of residential uses in the proposed location would subject future residents to excessive noise.
Response to Fact in Support B - Regarding Safety:
Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
The proposed project is located in Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone. According to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in Safety Zone 6. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report which show a high number of flights adjacent to the proposed project site. Considering the proposed density, increased height, and proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, this project is an inappropriate use for the site.
Response to Fact in Support C - Regarding "Intent of the AELUP":
By virtue of being clearly stated in AELUP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0 "Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC 22-216
t600 Dove Street Residences
August 8, 2024
members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed 1600 Dove Street Residences to be inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA.
We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to deciding whether to overrule ALUC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments.
Sincerely,
Gerald Bresnahan
Gerald Bresnahan
Chairman
cc: Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County
Jonathan Huff, Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics
Signature: GemU a fmhaii
Gerald Bresnahan (Aug 9, 2024 09:28 PDT)
22-217
CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR California Department of Transportation
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
P.O. BOX 942873, MS-40
SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001
(916) 654-4959
www.dot.ca.gov
August 7, 2024
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267
Dear Ms. Westmoreland:
Electronically Sent
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics (Division) thanks the City of Newport Beach (City) for providing the Notice of Intent, dated July 10, 2024, to overrule a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has reported that the Residences at 1600 Dove Street Project (Project) is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2024-45 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support" related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling the ALUC's determination, the Division is providing the following comments pursuant to California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21676. The Division supports the position of the ALUC in noting that the City has provided insufficient support for an overrule.
The ALUC has noted the following reasons this Project update is incompatible with the AELUP:
Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport."
Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." Section 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... "
The Division notes that the intent of the California Airport Lane Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) guidance aims to ensure the safety of both the aviation community and the community members surrounding an airport. Within this framework, the ALUC has determined that the City has inadequately addressed the safety concerns related to the proposed significant increase of housing density within airport safety zones. "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" 22-218
Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
August 7, 2024
The Division notes of the 282 proposed units on the 2.49 acre parcel, all are within the 60 CNEL noise contour. While this is nominally allowed by the AELUP, the Division strongly recommends that the Lead Agency or authority having jurisdiction require developers to adequately design structures to ensure interior noise levels below 45 dB and to hold final permitting until the developer can demonstrate adequate interior noise attenuation. Separate from interior noise reduction is exterior noise, which cannot be mitigated, and must be addressed through avigation easements to ensure that airport operations are not adversely impacted by noise complaints from new residents.
The Division concurs with the ALUC's determination that the Housing Element Implementation Program Amendments Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. This conclusion is based on insufficient findings by the City and the safety concerns for public health and welfare posed by allowing housing in incompatible safety zones and noise contours.
The Division also notes that this is the seventh proposed overrule since 2020 for a component of a larger redevelopment development program in Newport Beach. This ongoing pattern of overrules raises concerns about the cumulative impact on safety. Each overrule potentially compromises the safety of both aviation users at John Wayne Airport (JWA) and the new residents of Newport Beach, by allowing developments that may not fully account for the necessary safety and noise considerations.
In addition, PUC Section 21675.1(f) provides: If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision(d) with respect to a publicly owned airport that the city or county does not operate, the operator of the airport is not liable for damages to property or personal injury resulting from the city's or county's decision to proceed with the action, regulation, or permit.
Please note: These comments are to be included in the public record of any decision to overrule the ALUC. If you have questions or if we may be of further assistance, please contact me by email at [email protected] or call (916) 879-6528.
Sincerely,
Originally signed by
Jonathan Huff
Associate Transportation Planner
Caltrans Aeronautics
c: Julie Fitch, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ;
Matthew Friedman, Chief of Aviation Planning, Caltrans Aeronautics
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" 22-219
Attachment I
Fiscal Impact Memorandum dated April 17, 2024
22-220
MEMO
TO: Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach
FROM: Doug Svensson
DATE: April 17, 2024
SUBJECT: Fiscal Analysis for the 1600 Dove St. Project
INTRODUCTION
The fiscal analysis uses the Newport Beach Fiscal Impact Model to help calculate revenue and cost impacts of the proposed project. This model was initially developed in support of the General Plan Update, which was adopted in 2006.1 The model has been updated to reflect Fiscal Year 2023-2024 costs and revenues from the Adopted Newport Beach City Budget. The fiscal impact model calculates public service impacts for specific land uses that support the residential population, the employment base and the visitor population in Newport Beach. It also calculates the public revenues that each type of land use typically generates for the City, including property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes as well as a variety of user charges and fees.
The fiscal impact model is designed to calculate the average cost of public services required by new development, on the assumption that new development affects City services in approximately the same way that existing development does. The model nets out certain costs that are unlikely to change with expansion of City government, such as the number of City Department Directors and Division managers, as well as the City Council and City Clerk expenditures, but otherwise assumes that City administrative support and overhead tends to increase as City government activities grow to provide services to an expanding population and employment base. Over the long term, this is clearly the dynamic that local governments experience. In the short term, development projects may have 1 A technical description of the fiscal impact model may be found in: Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis and Model, Newport Beach General Plan Update, January 2004. 3527 Mt. Diablo Blvd. #248, Lafayette, CA 94549 ■ Tel 925.934.8712 www.adeusa.com
22-221
lower or higher cost impacts depending on the existing capacity of City services to accommodate more development, and the level of expenditure needed to expand services incrementally if existing capacity is not available.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project would convert an existing 4-story office building, with a total of 60,675 sq. ft., to a 7-story apartment building comprised of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, roof top common space and parking. At this stage of project planning, the project sponsor has not determined a mix of units types for the project. For purposes of this analysis, ADE reviewed project plans for several other large multi -family developments in Newport Beach and devised a potential unit mix that would include 25 studios, 141 one -bedroom units and 116 two -bedroom units. Based on available market data, unit sizes may range from 526 sq. ft. for the studios to 1,153 for the two -bedroom units.
Of the 282 total units, 254 will be market rate and 28 will be affordable units.
SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
In order to calculate the fiscal effects of the proposed changes, it is necessary to estimate certain socio-economic characteristics of the land uses, including population and employment, assessed value, household spending on taxable retail goods in Newport Beach, and direct sales taxes from the existing non-residential uses. Based on 2023 data from the State Department of Finance, the average household size in Newport Beach is 2.17 persons, which would imply the proposed project would have a resident population of 612 persons. The existing office uses are estimated to support 221 jobs based on standard employee density ratios for office space.
The assessed value for the proposed project has been derived from analysis of estimated rents for the proposed project and multifamily unit sales in Newport Beach over the past year July 2022 - July 2023. ADE researched current asking rents for several major apartment complexes in Newport Beach on the Zillow website (Table 1). The average rents for units that are available ranged from $5.54/sq. ft. for studios to $3.87/sq. ft. for two -bedroom units in the project sponsor has indicated that rents for the proposed project would be similar to the One Uptown Newport project, at the upper end of the range, which they also own and operate. These are market rate rents. The rents for affordable units are specified under HUD guidelines for Orange County and range from $1,042 for studios (1-person household) to $1,340 for two -bedroom units (combined 3- and 4-person households) (Table 2).
In terms of assessed value for the units for property tax purposes, ADE obtained sales records for 198 multi -family and condominium units that sold between July 2022 and July 2023 in Newport Beach. As shown in Table 3, while there is some variation in sales price for condos based on the age of the units, there is no correlation with age for units classified as multi -family units in this sample. Also, there is no correlation based on whether the units are owner occupied or rented. In most market settings, however, we would expect for -sale units to carry a higher value than rental units.
Applied Development Economics I Page 2
22-222
SELECTED APARTMENT
PRO]ECT/SIZE
ASKING RENTS, TABLE 1:
AUGUST 2023
STUDIO
1 BDRM 2 BDRM
One Uptown
Newport - 21
Units
Sq. Ft.
515
839
1,147
Monthly Rent
$3 039
4,079
5,313
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.90
$4.86
$4.63
Newport North
- 18 Units
Sq. Ft.
779
1,056
Monthly Rent
3,170
3,756
Rent/Sq. Ft
$4.07
$3.56
Colony at
Fashion Island
- 28 Units
Sq.Ft.
1,087
1,395
Monthly Rent
$4,480
5,095
Rent/Sq. Ft
$4.12
$3.65
Newport Bluffs
- 46 Units
Sq. Ft.
549
795
1,104
MonthlyRent
$3,050
3,429
4,141
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.56
$4.31
$3.75
Park Newport -
51 Units
Sq. Ft.
513
745
1,163
MonthlyRent
$2 650
3,120
3,951
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.17
$4.19
$3.40
Total Average
Rent/Sq. Ft
$5.54
$4.38
$3.87
Source: ADE, Inc., based on data obtained from Zillow.com
ESTIMATEDTABLE
AVERAGE
UNI
2:
=W4
PROPOSED
1 1 DOVE PROJECT
MARKET RATE
AFFORDABLE
RENT/
UNIT
SQ.
RENT/
RENT/
RENT/
TOTAL
TYPE
SIZE
NO.
FT.
UNIT
NO.
SQ. FT.
UNIT
UNITS
Studio
526
23 $6.10
$3,210
2 $1.98
$1,042
25 1 Bdrm
815
127
$4.98
$4,060
14 $1.46
$1,191
141
2 Bdrm
1,153
104
$4.20
$4 840
12 $1.16
$1 340
116
254
28 282
Source: ADE, Inc.
In order to correlate the anticipated rent levels for the proposed units with the sales data in Table 3, ADE researched recent cap rates in the multi -family real estate market.z Data published by CBRE, Inc. indicate that cap rates for multi -family developments in the Los Angeles market area in 2022 ranged from 4.0% to 4.5%.3 Based on the rent levels estimated for the proposed project in Table 2, the overall average building value of $1,111/sq. ft. shown in Table 3 would be equivalent to a cap rate of z In investment terms, rental projects create a stream of revenue for the building owner and the capitalization ("cap") rate calculates how much an investor would be willing to pay for that income stream. 3 CBRE Research, "Underwriting Assumptions Exceed Pre -Pandemic Levels or Prime Multifamily Assets". January 13, 2023.
Applied Development Economics I Page 3
22-223
about 4.1%, which falls within the reported range. Therefore, for the property tax analysis in this report, we have used an average assessed value for the proposed project market rate units of $1,180 per sq. ft., which equates to an average of $1.1 million per unit. For the affordable units, the value is prorated to $351 per sq. ft. based on the difference in rent levels. Based on these values, the apartment units would have an aggregate assessed value of $287.3 million.
AVERAGE SALES
SALES IN
UNIT
CLASSIFICATION
TABLE
PRICES PER
NEWPORT BEACH,
YEAR BUILT
3:
•FOR
2022-2023
NO. OF
DDRESSES
MULTI -FAMILY
AVERAGE SALES
PRICE PER SQ. FT.
Multi -Family
1924-1977
37 $1337
Condominium
1960-1997
140
$981
Condominium
2001-2012
12 $1,098
Condominium
2015-2021
9 $1,392
Total Average
198
$1,111
Value Assumed for 1600 Dove Market
Rate Units
$1,180
Value Assumed for 1600 Dove Affordable Units
$351
Source: ADE, Inc., based on data obtained from CoreLogic, Inc.
The analysis also estimates household income for the residents for the purpose of calculating annual sales taxes that may be generated for the City. The project sponsor has indicated that at the One Uptown Newport project, the average household income is $180,000, with a significant number of the residents earning above $200,000 and $300,000. For the affordable units, the allowable household incomes are set by HUD guidelines. The combined spending profile for the project is shown in Table 4. . AIDE has analyzed consumer expenditure surveys published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and at these income levels, households typically spend less than 30 percent of their income on taxable retail goods, and the percentages decline as income goes up. We have assumed for purposes of these calculations that households would spend two-thirds of their annual retail budget in Newport Beach, and the remaining one-third would be spent at retail centers in other cities or on out-of-town trips.
The City receives sales tax at the rate of one percent of taxable sales.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The analysis, summarized in Table 5 below, estimates the projected fiscal impact of the proposed project as well as the estimated current impact of the existing office use on the site. For the residential project and office buildings, the primary revenue source generated for the City is the property tax. The City receives about 16 percent of the base property tax that property owners pay, but in addition the City gets a share of property tax from the state in lieu of vehicle license fees, which adds about ten percent to the total property tax revenues for Newport Beach.
Applied Development Economics I Page 4
22-224
4W�-
UNIT
TYPE
INCOME
PERCENT
TAXABLE
SALES
UNITS
TOTAL
ANNUAL
SALES
TAX
Affordable Units
Studio
$47,450
27.5%
2 $175
1 Bdrm
$54,200
24.6%
14 $1,260
2 Bdrm
$64,375
23.5%
12 $1,176
Market Rate Units
Studio
$128,400
20.0%
23 $3,957
1 Bdrm
$162 400
18.8%
127
$25 959
2 Bdrm
$250,000
13.8%
104
$24,132
Total
282
$56,658
Source: ADE, Inc.
In addition to the property tax and sales tax, the residents of the proposed project would be expected to generate a variety of other more incidental revenues for the City General Fund, including fees for recreation programs, parking fees and fines, utility franchise fees and other permit revenue. The total General Fund revenue is projected to be about $697,500 per year. In terms of non -General Fund revenue, the added population will contribute to the City receiving additional Gas Tax revenues from the state for street maintenance. Also, Measure M is a countywide sales tax fund which is used for transportation projects. The added taxable sales purchases made by project residents will add to these funds. The total revenue generated from all sources by the proposed project is estimated at $_747, 300.
The proposed project is estimated to cost the City about $705,600 per year for services. The bulk of these costs are for police and fire protection, but they also include street maintenance and costs for recreation, library, and senior services as well as general government functions. The project site is in an intensely developed urban area of the City and existing service capacities are likely sufficient to provide services to the proposed uses on the site. However, with the more intensive residential uses, it may be expected that there would be some additional calls for service, particularly for public safety and perhaps traffic related incidents, compared to the existing use on the site.
It is important to recognize that the fiscal model cost factors are based on citywide averages across all socioeconomic groups in the City. The project sponsors have indicated that their experience at the One Uptown Newport project suggests that these types of units attract a younger demographic, with a median age of 35 years and an average age of 40 years. The median age in the City of Newport Beach is 42.8 years. In general, the City does not have data to indicate how different age groups impact City services, with the exception of emergency medical (EMS) response calls by the Fire Department, where the age of patients is tracked. As may be expected, the data indicate the older segments of the Applied Development Economics I Page 5
22-225
City population generate a higher rate of EMS calls. Based on the anticipated age breakdown for the proposed project provided by the project sponsor, AIDE estimates that the project may generate 28 percent fewer EMS calls than the City population as a whole. This has been factored into the Fire Department costs shown in Table 5 below.
5:
PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 1600 DOVE AND THE
OFFICETABLE
EXISTING
Annual Revenues/Costs
Budget Category Proposed Project Existing Office Use
REVENUES
GENERALFUND
Property Tax
$459,157
$19,856
Property Tax in lieu of Vehicle License Fees
$47,074
$2,036
Sales Tax
$56,658
$27,403
Transient Occupancy Tax
$0
$0
Franchise Fees
$5,740
$7,124
Business Licenses
$0
$12,780
Other Intergovernmental
$7,632
$2,757
Charges for Service
$61,019
$22,047
Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures
$12,667
$4,577
Licenses and Permits
$1,422
$514
Use of Property
$30,222
$10,920
Other Revenue
$11,892
$4,297
Interest Income
$3,991
$658
SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND
$697,474
$114,968
GAS TAX
$29,799
$0
MEASURE M
$20,068
$3,521
SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS
$49,867
$3,521
TOTAL REVENUE
$747,341
$118 489
EXPENDITURES
GENERALFUND
General Government
$48,224
$15,251
Police
$120,973
$63,803
Fire
$161,419
$69,930
Public Works
$167,565
$60,544
Community Development
$12,160
$4,394
Community Services
$184,559
$0
SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND
$694,901
$213,922
GAS TAX
$6,246
$5,383
MEASURE M
$4,462
$3,845
SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS
$10,708
$9,228
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$705,609
$223,150
NET (COST)/REVENUE
$41,732
($104,661)
Source: ADE, Inc.
The City was also able to provide data on police calls for service for the One Uptown Newport project.
The data indicate about one -quarter the rate of calls and 15% fewer arrests compared to the per capita rates for the City as a whole. To some extent, these rates may reflect differences in socioeconomic variables at the project compared to the Citywide population. Factoring these reductions into the calculation of police costs, ADE estimates the total police services costs for the 1400 Dove project would be about half of what the fiscal model would otherwise calculate. Other Applied Development Economics I Page 6
22-226
police costs included in the analysis relate to offsite traffic enforcement, animal control and support services.
Overall, the service cost figures by Department in Table 5 are generally below levels equivalent to hiring an additional fulltime staff person, and it is possible that the service impacts would be an incremental increase of service activity for existing personnel. Based on the fiscal model analysis the proposed project may generate positive net revenue of $41,700 per year.
The existing office use is estimated to generate a negative fiscal impact for the City, estimated at about $104,700 per year. This is consistent with the original General Plan Fiscal Analysis for office uses. Office uses have lower assessed values than residential and therefore create less property taxes.
The figures in Table 5 are based on the assessed value of the site in 2022. At $12.4 million, the assessed value is equivalent to about $195 per sq. ft. for the office space. This is low in comparison to other office properties in the market area. It is possible a new office building on this site would generate more property taxes than the existing use.
Office uses also generate much less sales tax than do retail uses, which generate a high positive fiscal benefit for the City. At times, office -based businesses have a point of sale operation that generates sales tax even though it is not a store front retail operation, but most often professional services, financial offices and other businesses that occupy office space do not provide taxable goods or services. Office workers do generate some sales taxes in restaurants and other retail stores. In terms of municipal services, however, the high employee densities in offices increase costs for traffic related services. The post -pandemic trends toward increased remote working may lessen this impact, but it also further reduces market values for office real estate.
CONCLUSION
The proposed rental residential use of the site would generate a positive fiscal impact for the City, compared to the negative fiscal impact of the existing office use of the site. This is due to the assumption that this project would attract a younger, higher income demographic that would have lower demands on City services than the typical Newport Beach resident. This is not consistent with the original fiscal analysis of residential uses in the 2006 General Plan, although in recent years some other very high value luxury residential projects have shown a positive fiscal benefit. If the proposed project resident profile turns out to be more like the average Newport Beach demographic, or if it changes in that direction over time, then the project would have a lower, or possibly negative impact on the City budget. However, even so, the General Plan increased development potential for commercial and lodging uses substantially, in addition to the new residential units it would permit. The net impact of the growth in land uses at buildout of the General Plan compared to existing land uses in 2006 when the plan was adopted, would result in a positive fiscal impact for the General Fund of $21.7 million per year .4 Thus, any negative fiscal impacts of future residential development can potentially be mitigated as long as commercial development keeps pace throughout the City. 4 Applied Development Economics, Fiscal Impact Analysis Land Use Element Amendment, April 4, 2014. p. 3.
Applied Development Economics I Page 7
22-227
Attachment J
Applicant's Project Description and Letters of Support
22-228
1600 Dove Street
Project Description
The Picerne Group Inc. ("Applicant"), applicant of the proposed project at 1600 Dove Street in the City of Newport Beach ("Property"), hereby submits the following project description to the City's Community Development Department.
The 1600 Dove Street Project ("Project") is a proposed 7-story apartment building comprised of 282 residential units, podium level amenity space, a leasing office, roof -top common space, and approximately 530 parking spaces within an on -grade parking garage with two and a half subterranean levels. Residential units within the Project will include a mix of studios, one - bedroom units, two -bedroom units and potentially three -bedroom units.
The Project is located on a 2.49 acre site at the corner of Dove Street and Dolphin Strike Way.
The current use is a 60,675 sq. ft., 4-story office building with a surface parking lot. The Property is currently zoned Planned Community ("PC")- I I and is situated in the Residential Overlay, and is designated as Mixed Use Horizontal 2 ("MU-112") under the City's General Plan. The Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to obtain additional density allocated to the Airport Area (Statistical Area L4).
The Project's base density consists of 188 units (139 units from the conversion of the office building to residential and 49 additional units allocated to the Airport Area (Statistical Area L4), which are sought via a General Plan Amendment). The Project qualifies for a 50% density bonus (94 units) in exchange for providing the necessary level of affordable housing. Of the 282 total units, 254 will be market rate units and 28 will be affordable units. The 49 additional base units referenced above will not constitute a "major amendment" for purposes of Section 423 of the City's Charter.
Under the State Density Bonus Law ("SDBL"),1 the Project is entitled to a 50% density bonus, three (3) concessions/incentives,2 and unlimited waivers from development standards that would physically preclude construction of the Project at the density sought.3 The entitlements currently requested for the Project include (i) a General Plan Amendment; (ii) a Traffic Study pursuant to Newport Municipal Code Chapter 15.40; (iii) a Development Agreement, and (iv) preparation and approval of an Addendum to the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Applicant will submit an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") for the City's review and approval at a future date when project design approvals are sought. Applicant reserves the right to utilize any SDBL concessions, incentives or waivers that the Project is entitled to, for either the currently requested entitlements or subsequent design approvals. 1 Gov. Code §§ 65915 et seq.
2 Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(C).
s Gov. Code § 65915(e).
#182881468_vl
22-229
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
&w^ RaTe ^ C kzre-ir,�
22-230
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-231
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, 1 am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, 1 am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
�QpPl BE40B
r �'E SiN "1 .1 e4
CLASSIC__:_
- �/�!/g9pS 8 SPOHSS��JO
Ronnie Lutfi
Owner
Q Classic Q
4251 MacArthur Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Twitter: ®theclassicq
Facebook: The Classic Q
Instagram: theclassicq
Tel: (949) 261-9458
Fax:(949) 261-1065
Email: ron®classicq.com
www.classicq.com
22-232
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
YOOO
/�QJ �LLAMAS I MAR �*
949.316.4318
gR10SBUTCHERSHOP EL':C�M
MpR10@M ERSHOPD
MARIOSBUTGH
22-233
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
CRISTIAN
BECERINE
OWNER
MAIN
(949) 316-4216
SERVICE
(949) 316-4444
IN [email protected]
Op' @bikehouseca
♦ r Bike House Newport Beach
0 1000 Bristol St N suite 26
Newport Beach, CA 92660
house
22-234
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
OWb
22-235
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-236
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
IC��a �Y CAS , - Pu
22-23 7
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need. 1 (D &f � 4 f, � halvl_(
of{- 9-00,;�y
22-238
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council 100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
I am writing to express my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street in Newport Beach. As an active member of the City's business community, I have seen the positive impact that thoughtful development has on the area. This project will bring new life to the community, expand the customer base for local retail businesses, and provide needed housing for the City.
The Picerne Group is a committed local development group with a strong interest in the success of the City. Their unique nature of long-term ownership and proven track record at One Uptown Newport have assured me they are the right people to develop this project. 1600 Dove will help alleviate a severe housing shortage while creating a dynamic village in the Airport Area. I encourage you to approve this development, which I believe is a positive step towards creating a community where people will live, work, and shop.
p
Sincerely,
Scott Baugh
4040 MACARTHUR BLVD. STE zoo
NEwFoar BEACH, CA 9266o
OFFICE - 949-274-828o
FAx - 949-823-3956
MOBILE - 7i4-470-5220
SBAUCH@S BAUGH. COM
22-239
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely, %
L;
//o/ Z QZy
22-240
�7�PVX SC&Ado /_�\4 S11S) P I
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-241
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need. 0, .5�,4
Sincerely,
22-242
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, 1 am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
IL
Sincerely,
LI - + z - `- `1
SuNoy FvcsL eIEQ��rs
22-243
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
2-
22-244
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
22-245
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
l
J
�C)cK10
(_�z.A
22-246
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,
/6 %
22-24 7
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need.
Sincerely,���c
22-248
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council, I am writing this letter to show my support for The Picerne Group's proposed luxury apartment development at 1600 Dove Street. This project is going to bring new life to the area and expand the customer base for local retail businesses.
As a local business owner, I am excited to welcome the residents of this new apartment project and know that it will benefit the community. The Picerne Group has a proven track record of developing successful, high -quality projects, and this is exactly the type of project that our neighborhood and businesses need. 22-249
Attachment K
Conceptual Plans
22-250
. 4t
1600 DOVE
ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT &
REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS
APRIL 18, 2023
-rAPICERNEGROUP
A R C H I T E C T S
ky
4F
22-251
1600 DOVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
TCA # 2022-060
VEHICULAR ENT
RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS
1 VEHI ULARENTRY
mk
LPHIN-STRIKER WAY
'
T9\ ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT & REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS o' 40' 80' 160' O APRIL 18, 2023
..°.IT.°T= PICERNEGROUP
LEGEND
6 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL
OVER PARKING
COURTYARD
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
22-252
a
1600 DOVE -rrA �� ENTITLEMENT EXHIBIT & REPRESENTATIVE ELEVATIONS NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA APRIL 18, 2023
TCA#2022-060 ..-T-T. PICERNEGROUP
22-253