Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Marlene Hamontree <Marlene@hamontree.com> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 6:05 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: Museum House This project will benefit ALL of Orange County for generations by providing a world class museum. Please support this. Sincerely, Marlene Hamontree Sent from my iPad Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Marcia Cashion <mandjcashion@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 7:15 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: Museum House I hope you will carefully consider the Museum House. I think it would be a welcomed addition to our community and I hope you will approve of the project. Marcia Cashion 1927 Bayside Drie Corona dei Mar, CA 92625 Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Russ Van Cleve <Russ@vanclevedev.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 12:02 PM To: Dept - City Council Cc: Gino Canori (gcanori@related.com) Subject: Museum House Dear Mayor Dixon and members of City Council: We are 46 year residences of Newport Beach and are very excited about the Museum House project. For 30 years we had a private homebuilding and land development company and we are very familiar with impacts of development as well as the long term benefits to communities. We feel this project has minimal impacts and very good long term benefits to Newport Beach. Newport Beach should be very excited about having the best high rise residential developer in America select Newport Beach for this project. Many residents are looking for a close in opportunity to down size, or simply looking for a sophisticated life style. These opportunities are currently limited in Newport Beach and Museum House offers both. This project would also enhance the retail and shopping in Fashion Island and promote a better life style. We will be at City council meeting to support this project and we strongly encourage the City Council to approve Museum House. Best Regards, Russ and Kathy Van Cleve 39 Sarteano Dr. Newport Coast, CA Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Scott Anderson <sanderson@skacpa.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:20 AM To: Peotter, Scott; Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward Cc: Rochelle Anderson Subject: Condo Project on Museum Site My wife and I are Port Street residents. We urge you to vote AGAINST the condo project on the museum site in Fashion Island. We worked our precinct to vote for Team Newport in 2014 and 2016 to stop this overdevelopment of Newport Beach. The traffic congestion in the Fashion Island area alone should be reason to vote against this project. Thank you. Scott Anderson, CPA CFP- EA www. MakingSenseOnTheDoilan corn sanderson@skacpa.com Office: 949/200-7111 Cell• 949/422-3484 Member of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors Any tax advice included in this communication may not contain a full description of all relevant facts or a complete analysis of all relevant tax issues or authorities. This communication is solely for the intended recipient's benefit and may not be relied upon by any other person or entity. From: Cynthia Sinsel [mailto:csinsel@hotmail.com] Received After Agenda Printed Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 12:34 PM To: Nelson, Jennifer November 29, 2016 Subject: Thank you for your time on the telephone: 1) NO on Museum House High Rise; 2) Homeless in NBch Dear Jennifer, 9.644.3004 Thank you for your kindness and taking my recent call to communicate my concern over a couple of issues that affect the residents of Newport Beach. I have lived in NBch —25 years and am a mortgage payer. My message is for Mayor Dixon and Mayor Pro -tem Muldoon: 1) 1 am very against the High Rise proposed for the Museum of Art footprint. Please uphold Measure Y and let the will of NBch residents be heard. 2) NBch has seen a spike in homeless people over the last ^3 years. I have compassion for disordered people and their care; however, I also have a sense that these people are being "brought" in. Costa Mesa's homeless issue appears worse but we literally have homeless taking up residence on the street and in parks. We need to enact alternative options to provide more adequate care than homeless living in the corners of buildings. I have tried to call local numbers for assistance but have been told that the offices are in Long Beach. I've dialed the number only to be met by an a -voice and no assist occurs. Thank you for consideration and action. Best regards, Cynthia Sinsel 9.642.1540 Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:55 AM To: Dept - City Clerk Subject: FW: Please approve the Museum Tower For the record, November 29. -----Original Message ----- From: RCD [mailto:rcdavisson@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:57 PM To: Dept -City Council Subject: Please approve the Museum Tower Dear City Council members and City Manager Kiff, I write to add my and my wife's voices to those who strongly support the Museum House project. We attended the Planning Commission meeting and are in full agreement with their findings that this would be a high-class addition of much-needed housing to our City. Well -located, single story dwellings suitable for older residents are in very short supply in Newport. The proposed condos look to be a dream come true for the multitude of us empty nesters who want to leave behind our two-story family homes, but stay in Newport Beach. Further, it would enable a dramatic improvement in the future of the Orange County Museum of Art. It is interesting to note that the analysis of auto trips to the location shows such a small average number for the museum. The permanent collection and special exhibitions at OCMA should be seen by far more residents. While we may take pride in having it in our city, it is the Orange County, not Newport Beach, Museum of Art, and its current location is simply not succeeding in bringing fine arts to the whole county. Moving it to the South Coast Plaza cultural area, near the first-class theater and music venues there, is eminently sensible, and will accrue to the benefit of the entire county, including Newport Beach. The financial benefits to the city are also a compelling advantage of this project—a point that needs no belaboring. We urge you to approve this project. Sincerely yours, Marjorie and Roger Davisson 42 Via Burrone Newport Coast Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:57 AM To: Brown, Leilani Subject: FW: Against Museum House In the City Clerk's inbox. Kim -----Original Message ----- From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:55 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Against Museum House From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:55:08 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Against Museum House For the record, November 29. -----Original Message ----- From: Amy Senk (mailto:amy.senk@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 6:51 AM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Against Museum House To all, We are against the development of the Museum House project. For years, we have watched the City Council listen to concerns of neighbors around CdM High School — too much growth at the school creating traffic, parking, pollution and noise problems. How can the same council members then approve this project that will bring even more residential growth within the school's attendance boundaries? There already is too much traffic and development in our city. Please don't listen to chain emails from residents of Huntington Beach and Irvine who claim this is so "fantastic." Sincerely, Amy Senk Corona del Mar Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:58 AM To: Brown, Leilani Subject: FW: Museum Tower In the City Clerk's inbox. Kim From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:55 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Museum Tower From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:55:24 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Museum Tower For the record, November 29. From: Larry Leifer [mailto:lawrelei@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 11:29 AM To: Dept - City Council Cc: to: Batley, Craig; Garber _Chris; Gignoux, Suzanne; Johnson, Mike; Koller, Cynthia; Leifer, Larry; Miller, Jim; O'Flynn, Ann; Schroeder, George; Sharon Boles (sharonaboles@gmail.com) Subject: Museum Tower We ` adamantly opposed • the 25 -story Museum Tower project proposed to occupy the current• • of Orange . • of >" Our reasons for opposition to the proposed project are: -the loss of • museum which is a valued public resource• • would relocate to Costa 1 Mesa thereby diminishing the cultural attractions in our city. -the introduction of an excessively tall structur- •• - potential flight hazard to navigation for John Wayne Airport traffic. -the influence that approval for such an oversize skyscraper like structure which have in changing the nature of Newport Beach into a high rise, high density population city with the attendant crowded, traffic choked problems characteristic of Los Angeles and the Miami coastline. Once approved, developers would be encouragelt to propose more and similar projects detrimental to the quality of life in the city. -and most importantly ..... the Council would be violating 'the trust of the citizens if they were to use land that was donated for use as a public benefit into a commercial project excessive in density and height by private developers who have no concern for the public interest. Sincerely, Lawrence and Susan Leifer 3706 Channel Place, Newport Island, Newport each Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:51 PM To: Brown, Leilani Subject: FW: Museum House Residential Project - 11/29 City Council Meeting In the City Clerk's inbox. Kim From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:44 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Museum House Residential Project - 11/29 City Council Meeting From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:43:58 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Museum House Residential Project - 11/29 City Council Meeting For the record, November 29 From: Jason Choulochas[mailto:jchoulochas@bankozarks.com] Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:24 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Museum House Residential Project - 11/29 City Council Meeting Dear Mayor Dixon, Council Members and City Manager Kiff, I am sending this email to express my support for the Museum House residential project at 850 San Clemente. I believe this type of development is appropriate for the Fashion Island area and the height of the building is in keeping with others in the area. It will be a good additional to the Newport Beach "skyline". I have no concerns over traffic generated by a residential condominium building, especially in this location which has excellent access to Jamboree. J. Jason Choulochas 1300 Estelle Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 WARNING: This communication may contain privileged or confidential information and is intended solely for the addressee. This communication also may contain nonpublic personal information about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. § 6801 et seq.). You may not directly or indirectly reuse or disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services for which you are receiving the information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, or otherwise using any of this information. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy this message in its entirety and do not redistribute the contents in any electronic, verbal, or hard copy form. Note all email sent to or from this address will be received or otherwise recorded by the Bank of the Ozarks email system and is subject to archival, monitoring, or review by, and/or disclosure to, someone other than the recipient. Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 November 29, 2016, Council Agenda Item 1 Comments The following comments on an item on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by: Jim Mosher (jimmosher(a-)yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item 1. Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) - 850 San Clemente Drive This proposal has two glaring problems: 1. Whatever else the Council may choose to do with this application, it should recognize the people of Newport Beach have a right to vote on the appropriateness of the requested General Plan Amendment. Four years ago, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2012-63, allowing, among other things, for a voter -approved allocation of 79 hotel rooms in Newport Center to be transformed into an entitlement for 79 dwelling units. Whatever that resolution may have been called, it obviously changed, or "amended," the General Plan. The present proposal would bring to 179 the number of dwelling units added to what is claimed to be the General Plan for Newport Center since voters' last approval of it. That makes this GPA request a ,'major amendment" under the terms of Charter Section 423 and requires a vote. Forcing the public to mount either a lawsuit or a referendum on the GPA to obtain what should have gone automatically to the ballot is unconscionable and disrespectful. It is especially unconscionable that the Greenlight analysis on pages 6 through 7 of the staff report doesn't even mention the previous amendment adding dwellings, or suggest it might need to be included in the totals. Recognizing the unnecessary burden the Council is already placing on its constituents if it adopts Resolution 2016-127 (the GPA) without an automatic Greenlight vote, it should seriously consider revising Section 7 to remove the incorporation by reference of Resolution 2016-126 (the EIR certification) into Resolution 2016-127. By some assessments, that would require petitioners seeking to regain by referendum their right to the equivalent of a Greenlight vote on the GPA (Resolution 2016-127) to attach to their petitions all the documents cited in Resolution 2016-126 (namely the complete EIR with all its appendices and more). Unless amended, that seems a completely gratuitous requirement, adding insult to injury. 2. The requested height is totally inconsistent with the City's Zoning Code. City staff obtains its finding of consistency by misreading a grandfathering clause (carried over from earlier versions of the code) as exempting planned communities from height limits. As I have repeatedly pointed out, not only is there nothing in the legislative history to support such an exemption, but the present code citing the adoption of a planned community as one of several ways to go from the base height to the maximum height for a class of structure would be reduced to a logical absurdity if the adopted planned community were exempted from that very code. November 29, 2016, Council Item 1 Comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2 Beyond this, while the City staff correctly observes that the subject property is in the "high rise" height limit area, allowing construction to 300 feet, it downplays the fact that the limit explicitly says it applies only to non-residential projects (which this obviously is not). I do not know if that restriction was knowingly added in 2010, but it certainly is a problem. What follow are comments on a more -or -less random sampling of a few pages from the staff report: 1. Pages 35 and 72, Mitigation Measure 9-9: 1 have trouble visualizing how a 16 foot tall sound barrier could be very effective against noise emanating from construction up to 295 feet above the ground. Does the curtain rise as the construction moves up? Or does some other mitigation measure cover that? 2. Page 206: 1 believe the first "Whereas" incorrectly states that Ordinance 2016-23 changes "the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC) land use designation from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential." I believe that is true of only one of the subareas of PC -19, and the other subarea remains Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office. 3. Page 210-27: Why are only Exhibits A and B incorporated by reference? What happened to Exhibits C through D? 4. Page 210-38: What does clause 4 mean? I understand The Irvine Company has to consent to the donation of the 0.9 acre property, but does this mean the City will not accept it unless TIC additionally waives all restrictions on the property (including the restriction to a "first class art museum" on page 210-82)? 5. Page 221: Why is the fiscal analysis based on the generic assumption that "The City receives about 20 percent of the base property tax that property owners pay." This proposal involves a single parcel. Aren't the allotments from it precisely known? 6. Page 309-312: 1 am unable to find anything in the letter the applicant provides to confirm "support" of the project by the Newport Beach Firefighter's Association. The letter provided is clearly written on Police Association letterhead and signed by two persons associated solely with the NBPA. Who authorized them to speak on behalf of the NBFA, and why did no one from NBFA co-sign? I would have thought disasters in a high-rise residential tower would have been among a firefighters worst nightmares. Additional comments may follow... Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Nov. 29, 2016, Council Agenda Item 1 Comments — Part 2 The following comments on an item on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by: Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item 1. Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) - 850 San Clemente Drive The following comments, being submitted on November 29`", are intended to supplement those submitted by me yesterday. 1. Environmental analysis inadequate As noted in my late comment (FEIR, Letter 121) on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, it is widely understood that the Museum House proposal is just one element of a two-part project in which the proceeds from the sale of 850 San Clemente Drive will be used to finance the construction of a new and larger Orange County Museum of Art facility on a currently undeveloped parcel about six miles away in Costa Mesa. To me it is disturbing that the complete picture of what is being proposed was not even stated as a project objective in the DEIR, and although no response was required, I found the response provided inadequate. Although municipal boundaries may intervene, the idea that the present approval would precipitate addition construction and impacts is not speculation, but an entirely predictable consequence. I do not believe the public, or decision makers, are being adequately informed when the impacts of the two aspects of the project are considered in isolation. 2. Incompatible with General Plan From presentations I have heard, the developer would seem to like the public to believe that construction of this project is almost compelled by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.4 ("Development Scale") to "Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway." Not only does this ignore the fact that the proposal is to build a highrise in the northwesterly section (not the northeasterly one), but that the addition of residences anywhere in Newport Center is incompatible with the General Plan. While it is true that the 2006 General Plan identified Newport Center as an "opportunity from growth," the General Plan vision for growth in Newport Center over the next 20 years, as approved by voters in 2006, was to add 450 new dwelling units. All of those, and more, have already been approved or built. And in 2014, voters sounding defeated a proposal to modify the General Plan to add more development (both residential and office) in Newport Center. Adding dwelling units to what was envisioned in 2006 is incompatible both with the Plan and with the will of the voters. Regarding the purported 295 foot of the Museum House tower, and how it contributes to a tapering crescent of buildings, one has to read deep into the packet to learn that the 295 feet is measured not from the level of the existing OCMA building, but rather from a newly filled lot Nov. 29, 2016, Council Item 1 Comments, Part 2 - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 5 raised to the level of San Clemente Drive, making an already very tall building even more of an eyesore, by a few feet, than one might at first guess. 3. Defective Greenlight Analysis It was previously noted that the analysis in Table 1 on page 7 of the staff report ignores the addition of 79 dwelling units to the General Plan for Newport Center through "conversion" of hotel room allotments in 2012 (see also point 8d, below: the 79 units have been added by amendment to the Housing Element, removing any doubt they count toward Greenlight). It also ignores the addition of 27 rooms and 38,000 square feet of resort development by Resolution 2012-10. And it questionably claims all new development added to the General Plan for Newport Center when the new City Hall location was changed was approved by voters, and hence doesn't count toward Greenlight. This ignores the fact that the City Council ultimately approved a Civic Center larger than the one that was on the ballot, not to mention the Central Library expansion, which was, to the best of my knowledge, never part of any voter approval. The City's own entitlements for public facilities development are not exempt from Greenlight considerations, and to pretend they are is disingenuous. 4. Beauty is in the eye of beholder Proponents of this project have been heard to say that even the most vociferous of opponents agree the proposed building is "beautiful." I'm not sure who they asked. I find nothing beautiful about it, and nothing about it that "says Newport Beach." Indeed, as indicated above, I would regard it as an out -of -place eyesore. Whether beautiful, or not, and whether it is compatible now, or not, it is said that the building would become a Newport Beach icon. To that I would say that a 295 foot high-rise tower shaped like a hot dog standing on end would become instantly iconic. But that doesn't mean we should want it. I am also bothered by the emphasis on the building and its amenities being part of Newport Beach's ultra -luxury "brand." They may indeed be compatible with the "aspirational lifestyle" touted by Newport Beach & Company ("Visit Newport Beach"), but I think the idea that ultra - luxury is what Newport Beach is about demeans and denigrates the many good Newport Beach residents who do not see themselves as ultra -luxury people. Are we no longer welcome here? 5. Applicant makes knowingly misleading representations In my previous comment, I noted that in Attachment R to the staff report, the applicant has provided the City with a letter which the applicant says demonstrates the project has support from the Newport Beach Firefighters Association, yet when reading the letter one is unable to find anything confirming the project actually has that organization's support. I don't know if the applicant actually has letters demonstrating support from the NBFA, but I found even more flagrantly misleading the full page color ad on the back page of the Sunday, November 27, Daily Pilot. It leads readers to believe that not only the NBFA, but also the Nov. 29, 2016, Council Item 1 Comments, Part 2 - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 5 Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and, most prominently, Susan Skinner, on behalf of SPON and the Line in the Sand PAC, have stepped forward to endorse the project. My understanding is that the ALUC, rather than "endorsing" the project, had concerns about its compatibility with the nearby Police Headquarters helipad, and made any "approval" by them (which is not really an "endorsement," anyway) conditional on obtaining additional information about that. While there may be later developments on that front, I am quite confident that Susan Skinner, SPON and the Line in the Sand PAC are not supporters of the Museum House project, and have never "endorsed" it. On the contrary, to the best of my knowledge they strongly oppose its approval. To me, such blatantly misleading public representations cast grave doubt on any information and representations the applicant may provide to the Council. 6. Continuing loss of cultural facilities The possible donation back to the City of the former Newport Center Library Branch at 856 San Clemente (which may or may not happen depending on the attitude of The Irvine Company), is now being trumpeted as a "benefit" of the project: retaining a cultural facility. I would note that when the Arts and Cultural Element (Chapter 9) of our City's General Plan was written in 2006, the city boasted (on page 9-4) being "home to a variety of museums": OCMA, the Newport Harbor Nautical Museum, the Sherman Library for California History and the Newport Sports Collection Museum. In the ensuing 10 years we have already lost two of the four, and, to the best of my knowledge, none have been added. With this approval, we would be down from four to one. That is a disturbing trend. My suggestion, as made at the previous hearings on the Museum House, is that the City work not on helping OCMA to leave but rather on encouraging OCMA to revitalize and improve their facility at its existing location. In my view, their move to Segerstrom Center will not realize the benefits they expect. I believe that in part because I am not aware of any particular synergy between art museums and performing arts centers. Indeed, in most major cities, they are located in different places. A park -like setting, compatible with the quiet contemplation of art, might help; but I don't see how being next to a concert hall and playhouse would. OCMA is likely facing the same problems all art museums are in an internet age where art can be viewed as easily and more comfortably on-line. In my view, it would be to the benefit of Newport Beach if OCMA was encouraged to rethink itself here, rather than at some location outside our city. That may produce less tax revenue than a condo tower, but it would enrich our lives. 7. Poorly conceived pedestrian circulation? A major selling point of the project seems to be that its residents will be able to walk to nearby attractions. Not only does Newport Center as a whole not seem to have a particularly pedestrian friendly design (one has to navigate through a "sea" of parking lot to get the main "island" of retail), am unable to find anything in the project plans that improves on that. Nov. 29, 2016, Council Item 1 Comments, Part 2 - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 5 The layout on page 177 of the staff report suggests that pedestrians have a single entryway connecting to the City sidewalk to the right of the vehicle gate ("A"), but those wanting to walk to a destination to the left have to brave their way across the gauntlet of incoming and outgoing cars. Considering the vast "motor court" and the tiny, possibly un -buffered, walkway left to pedestrians along its side, this seems to me a project designed for cars, not walkers. 8. Additional specific comments on a random sampling of the agenda packet: a. Page 5: 1 recall commenting at the Planning Commission hearing on how the staff report for that meeting said the tower "footprint" measured "approximately 75 feet by 22 feet" (page 281 of present packet) and no one seemed to be questioning that. 22 feet seemed like an awfully skinny tower to me. It's seismically refreshing to see the "Floor Area" description on page 5 of the present staff report has enlarged the footprint to "approximately 75 feet by 220 feet." But even then, I would defy anyone to find an angle from which the building width is seen as 75 feet. This is difficult to verify because nearly all the Project Plans of Attachment D have been printed in such a way that the dimensions (and much of the writing) are tantalizingly just beyond the point of legibility, both in the printed and electronic versions. One of the very few I could find with a legible scale is the "Hardscape Plan — Roof Gardens" on page 174, which suggests that the trunk of the main tower is about 90 feet thick. But it's unclear there's any angle from which the various wings and appendages wouldn't add visual width to that 90 feet. In short, the 220 feet seems possible. The 75 feet does not. b. Page 8: The "public benefit fee" of $71,100 per unit is identical to the fee The Irvine Company was asked to pay for the mysterious process of converting General Plan hotel room allocations in Newport Coast to "non -TOT dwelling units." As there, I am unaware of any basis being given for where this number comes from. How was it arrived at? Is there any basis for it? Closely related to that, development agreements in the past were generally negotiated by a two- or three-person team of Council members appointed, for that person, at a public meeting of the Council as a whole. Has the Council, or any of its members, had any involvement in the development of the Development Agreement of the present Attachment G before tonight's meeting? If so, when did that involvement take place? And under what authority? c. Page 66: The impact of construction traffic on traffic is discussed on this page. Have we also considered the impact on the roadbeds of our streets of 4,600 trips by heavy vehicles carrying heavy loads? d. Page 73: This page discusses alternative locations for a 100 unit residential project. It erroneously dismisses Banning Ranch as a location where the full General Plan capacity has already been spoken for. The suggestion that a 1,375 unit development might be approved there is out of date. Nov. 29, 2016, Council Item 1 Comments, Part 2 - Jim Mosher Page 5 of 5 Likewise, the suggestion in the last paragraph that 49 dwelling units have been proposed for 150 Newport Center Drive is no longer current. It might also be noted the last paragraph quotes 608 housing units as being the "future development capacity" of Newport Center. That number includes the 79 hotel room conversions from 2012 (74 of which are part of the Villas at Fashion Island project, and the remaining 5 of which are referred to as "unbuilt'). This reinforces my point 3, above, that the General Plan has already been amended, without voter approval, to add 79 units, and hence that the current amendment to add 100 more dwellings on top of the 79 added in the Housing Element needs Greenlight approval. In any event, the last paragraph seems specious in concluding there are no alternative sites that could be considered in Newport Center because there is no housing capacity available. There is no housing capacity available at 850 San Clemente Drive, either! e. Page 77: 1 am unable to find any substantial reason being given to support the Council's finding to reject the "Reduced Density Alternative." According to the two paragraphs that follow the finding it is environmentally superior and fulfills are the project's objectives. Why is it being rejected? f. Page 80-81: 1 find the discussion of why this project is needed to alleviate a "jobs rich" jobs -housing balance in Newport Beach totally baffling. First, in what I believe to be largely a suburban bedroom community with an aging population, and many retirees, I would think there are already more dwelling units than can be supported by the jobs. Second, what of jobs are there so many of in the City? Gardeners? Hotel and restaurant staff? And could the people who have jobs but can't find housing in Newport Beach afford to buy a condo in the Museum Tower? In the case of the rather similar 150 Newport Center proposal we were told essentially none of the people who could afford to live there would have jobs or travel to work. Much as I have trouble seeing how the Museum House will improve the City's water allocation, I have trouble seeing how will provide housing to support the new jobs it creates (valets, cleaning people, etc.). Those people will not be able to afford to live in it, and hence it will not reduce the jobs to dwellings ratio except in some perverted mathematical sense. I would suspect more affordable housing is what is needed to help the balance, not more ultra -luxury housing. g. Page 89: Similar to a comment yesterday, Section 2 confusingly makes it appear the City Council is changing the entirety of PC -19 "from Civic/Cultural/Professional/Office to Multi -Unit Residential," or alternatively, if one goes by the first "Whereas" on page 84, that it is changing only 850 San Clemente Drive. Yet my understanding is that PC -19 contains both 850 and 856 San Clemente Drive and I believe changes are being made to the PC affecting both. It might be further noted that the present PC -19 is a tiny remnant of a much larger planned community that at one time included a mix of office and cultural facilities. In its present state, as a single -use 3 acre area it is really hard to see how it is any longer truly a "planned community" — or how adding the Museum House makes it one. Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 3:18:38 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Museum House For the record, November 29. -----Original Message ----- From: lauri mendenhall (mailto:artiazz@roadrunner.com] Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 3:18 PM To: Dept -City Council Subject: Museum House I am unable to attend tomorrow night's City Council meeting, so am writing to extend my sincere and passionate thoughts in support of the Museum House project -- and ultimately, the prosperous future of the Orange County Museum of Art (OCMA) which is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year. I first joined the museum in 1974 (then called the Newport Harbor Art Museum located then near the Newport Pier), only nine years after its founding in 1965 at the Balboa Pavilion by a small group of dedicated art patrons. ' As a resident of Newport Beach for nearly 40 years, a founding Board member for Arts Orange County, and one whose whose career as an arts publicist and journalist in Orange County began in the late '70s, I am hoping to add a bit of historical perspective as to why approving the Museum House project is paramount to the continued success of OCMA which has long outgrown its current facility. What is particularly significant here is that as the Museum has grown over the years, it has continued to expand its vision and scope beyond the city limits of Newport Beach; it is now a museum which represents a wider demographic throughout the region and belongs in the Metro area as part of the Segerstrom Center for the Arts. Accordingly, the majority of OCMA's members are NOT residents of Newport Beach. And yet, we have the current television ads by the "Citizens Against High Rise Urban Towers" (with the song "Cherish" playing in the background no less) claiming that the "Los Angelization of Newport Beach will bury OCMA under the Museum House, robbing Newport of its cherished institution"!! Give me a Break! I can guarantee you that the people behind this opposition have absolutely no relationship to the arts whatsoever, and most likely have never set foot in the Orange County Museum of Art. This is the same committee of naysayers that can't face the reality that Newport has moved beyond the breezy seashore of the'60s, and continue to protest any natural growth of an ever -maturing City of Newport Beach. I am reminded of all the hoopla and endless protests that occurred when the current Newport`Civic yCenter location was being proposed as the site for a new City Hall and expanded Library. There were the same negative groups of angry citizens stationed outside Gelsen's with petitions about how terrible it would be for the City Hall to leave the Peninsula, and how the land along Avocado south of San Miguel would be RUINED if it was allowed to be developed ... Endless letters to the Pilot about the horrors of such a consideration. And on and on. These are people who simply refuse to see the big picture of healthy progress and I truly believe that is what is happening again with the Museum House. Over the last few years, Museum executives and members have worked tirelessly to come up with a world class architectural design by renowned architect Robert A.M. Stern for the Museum House residences which includes a generous public benefit package of nearly $22 million, a permanent Newport Beach Arts Center for adult and youth programs using the acre of land near Museum House, and $18 million in taxes over the next 30 years. Plus now we have both the Newport Beach Police Officers and Firefighters Associations joining the Newport Beach Planning Commission's unanimous support. Not to mention the hundreds of museum members and prominent arts and philanthropic leaders throughout the county who have thrown their hat in the ring to support this wonderful project. It is my sincere hope that all of you will join this effort as well by voting tomorrow night in support of Museum House. Thank you so much for your time and consideration, Lauri Mendenhall Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Terry Becker <hiccuptoo@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 7:57 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Selich, Edward; Curry, Keith; Muldoon, Kevin; Peotter, Scott Subject: Museum House Residential Tower To our City Council - I as a citizen and tax payer in Newport Beach do not want further damage to our city by allowing the Museum House Residential Tower to go through approval by the city. The Fashion Island area is already starting to look like downtown Los Angeles while developers are making millions to the detriment of the citizens. The traffic will be horrible and it will take our beautiful city from a great place to live to a high density mess such as Century City. Teresa Becker Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Andrea Domoslai <adomoslai@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:47 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Resident Statement on the Museum House Tower To the Members of Newport Beach City Council I am a current resident of Newport Beach and an Orange County native. I love our city, which is why I am opposed to the Museum House high-rise development plan. The problem with it is that the idea of a monstrous tower in our beautiful Newport Center is the very antithesis of what makes our city great! We are not L.A., nor do we ever want to be. I speak for myself and on behalf of my family who have called Orange County home for 50+ years. If we wanted to live in a concrete jungle we would have moved to an urban city a long time ago. But we don't. We enjoy the breathtaking naturescape of the Back Bay and its surrounding area. We are 100% opposed to the building of this tower. Please respect the wishes of high paying tax and rent Newport Beach residents and do not approve this development. Thank you, Andrea Domoslai Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Linda Yellin <Lyellinb@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:18 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Linda Yellin Newport coast Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Kim McEntee <kimmcll5@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:18 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Kim McEntee Irvine Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: James muzzy <Jimmuzzy@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:21 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Lived in Newport from 1967-1993 and still own property near Fashion Island. James muzzy Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Sandra Perlmutter <Myperls@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:20 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Sandra Perlmutter Corona del Mar Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: teri kennady <kennady@cox.net> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:20 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. The City is going to grow, becoming more prominent, and becoming more well known... the architecture, projects, and services here should grow to reflect that new vision for the 21t Century teri kennady Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Katherine Porter <katherineporter@me.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:19 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Museum House will be a wonderful addition to Newport Center and, with a new venue, OCMA will finally be able showcase its complete art collection. Best regards Katherine Porter Newport Coast Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Beth Bidna <bbidna@me.com> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:19 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Beth Bidna Irvine Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Robert Yellin <Ryellin@cox.net> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:19 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Robert Yellin Newport coast Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Steven Rosansky 404 Lugonia Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 (714) 381-2460 November 29, 2016 Mayor Diane Dixon City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Mayor Dixon & Council Members. Tonight, you will be reviewing the Planning Commission's approval of the Museum House project. I believe that a high-quality, architecturally significant, and minimally impactful project with tremendous public benefits like Museum House will be an enormous positive for Newport Beach. Robert A.M. Stern is one of the world's most celebrated architects. It is a distinct honor for Newport Beach that his classic and world-class design will be housed in Fashion Island. Museum House will generate close to $22 million in confirmed public benefits and more than $18 million in additional taxes over the next 30 years. These needed dollars will significantly lighten the tax burden on all residents and businesses. This is not an impactful project and complies with our strict Greenlight standards. After rigorous independent studies, it has been determined that Museum House will generate minimal traffic impacts, is consistent with Newport Beach general plan policies on height and mass, and helps with existing water conservation efforts. It is for all these reasons that the I strongly endorses Museum House. I urge the City Council to join me and vote Yes on Museum House. Warmest regards, Steve Rosansky Past Council Member & Mayor 2003-2012 Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Chris Kwasizur <ckwasizur@operongroup.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:08 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Duffield, Duffy Subject: Museum tower For the record, I am opposed to the high rise tower in Newport Beach as it would be out of character with the surrounding area. It seems our little town has morphed into a noisy, congested city. I left LA behind, or so I thought, 20 yrs ago. Please do you best to slow this trend. Thank you Chris Kwasizur Newport Beach, CA 92660 949 833-5400 This email is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete the message. 1 Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Libby Huyck <libonlido@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 8:29 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Muldoon, Kevin; Duffield, Duffy; Peotter, Scott; Petros, Tony; Selich, Edward; Curry, Keith; Nova, Makana Subject: Museum House on Nov 29th I feel strongly that there is very little support for this 25 story Museum House project. (1000 signatures on petition, but even at NB Headquarters over the last 2 months, nobody I knew there, close to 300 people, were for it). So the logical step would be to put this to a vote of the people here. It's that simple. We are tired of seeing these massive condo complexes which destroy the character of our city. Enough is enough. Please keep this as a public record. Thank you. Libby Huyck Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Robert Craig <robert.craig6@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 10:10 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: The Museum House Please take into consideration the character and peaceful environment we currently enjoy in our City as you make a decision regarding the Museum House high rise development. - we already have water restrictions in Newport so where will the City source the extra water required ? - our main thoroughfare roads are already under stress so how will we mitigate the extra traffic ? Thanks Robert Craig 418 Snug Harbor Road Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: cindygates@cindy7.com Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 10:00 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: THE MUSEUM HOUSE STOP THE BUILDING OF THE MUSEUM HOUSE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC Cindy Gates Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Christine Gayner <christinegayner@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 11:12 AM To: Dixon, Diane Subject: 25 story museum house PLEASE DO NOT BUILD THE 25 STORY MUSEUM HOUSE .... TO MUCH TRAFFIC. WE DO NOT NEED MORE IN THIS CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!M Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Alfred Ferrari <fubine42@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 10:11 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Alfred Ferrari Laguna Niguel Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Karen Swanson <NewportBeachkarenl@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 10:55 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Would this be going in at FI or SCP area in CM? Karen Swanson NB Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Rebecca McLarand <rmclarand@me.com> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 11:17 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Rebecca McLarand Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Donald Evarts <dpevarts@me.com> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 11:20 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Donald Evarts Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Paula Tomei <emtom@cox.net> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:41 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Paula Tomei LAGUNA BEACH Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Bibi Yang <bibiyang2003@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:42 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Bibi Yang Huntington Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: John Santry <jsantry@icloud.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:47 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. John Santry Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Jane Fowler <Janof122@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:51 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. I have been a docent at OCMA since 1979 and I hope to have a world class museum when we are able to move to Costa Mesa. Jane Fowler Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: LARANE CINQUINI - RODNICK <cinquini@me.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:55 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. YES... YES...... YESSS LARANE CINQUINI - RODNICK Newport Beach 92660 Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Diane Stovall <dianebeachcomber@earthlink.net> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:59 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Hi. I have lived in Newport since 1975. And in Big Canyon my parents were residents for 37 years. I and my family have supported our Museum since that time. Thank you for your support of this very important project for our future Museum. Sincerely Diane Stovall Diane Stovall Newport beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Joan Riach Gayner <joanriach@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:24 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. As a longtime resident of Newport Beach,I applaud the designers of this project for its aesthetic and environmental qualities. It would be a great asset to our city! Joan Riach Gayner Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Steve Roush <roush007@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:33 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. This structure will just add to the class act of the City of Newport Beach Steve Roush Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Deborah Johnson <debtj@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:37 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Deborah Johnson Newport Beach CA Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Hedda Marosi <hmarosi@roadrunner.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 2:06 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Should not be so tall. Hedda Marosi Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Randa Phair <Randaphair@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 2:17 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Randa Phair Irvine Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Karen Evarts <krmevarts@me.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 3:03 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. OCMA needs to join the other arts venues of our county, over in Segerstrom Arts Center. Allowing Museum House to occupy OCMA's current site --which will facilitate the move-- is a win-win for all residents of Orange County. Karen Evarts Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Lynne Hamilton Lang <Lynne.hamiltonlang@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 3:31 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. I very much support the Museum House. Lynne Hamilton Lang Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Linda White <lindawhite@roadrunner.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:42 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Linda White Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: judith hendler <jhendler@socal.rr.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 6:55 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. judith hendler huntington beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Lourdes Bottger Nark <lourdesbottger01@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 8:26 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Lourdes Bottger Nark Irvine Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Gayle Widyolar <gaylewidyolar@cox.net> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 10:07 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Gayle Widyolar Corona Del Mar Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Katherine Porter <katherineporter@me.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 10:31 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Museum House will be a beautiful addition to Fashion Island and allow Orange County the world class museum it deserves. Katherine Porter Newport Coast Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Daryl Nelson <daryl_01@mac.com> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 3:01 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Daryl Nelson Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Steven Nelson <strevennelson0l@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 3:03 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Steven Nelson Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Rieff, Kim From: Michelle Jordan <jordanllc@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 9:22 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Petros, Tony; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Selich, Edward; Peotter, Scott; Curry, Keith Subject: I SUPPORT THE MUSEUM HOUSE PROJECT Dear City Councilmember, Museum House will be a fantastic addition to Fashion Island. I support the project. Please vote YES on Museum House. Michelle Jordan Newport Beach Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:19 AM To: City Clerk's Office Subject: FW: Resident Statement on the Museum House Tower From: Andrea Domoslai [mailto:adomoslai@kahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:47 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Resident Statement on the Museum House Tower To the Members of Newport Beach City Council: I am a current resident of Newport Beach and an Orange County native. I love our city, which is why I am opposed to the Museum House high-rise development plan. The problem with it is that the idea of a monstrous tower in our beautiful Newport Center is the very antithesis of what makes our city great! We are not L.A., nor do we ever want to be. I speak for myself and on behalf of my family who have called Orange County home for 50+ years. If we wanted to live in a concrete jungle we would have moved to an urban city a long time ago. But we don't. We enjoy the breathtaking naturescape of the Back Bay and its surrounding area. We are 100% opposed to the building of this tower. Please respect the wishes of high paying tax and rent Newport Beach residents and do not approve this development. Thank you, Andrea Domoslai For the record, November 29. From: Suzanne Gauntlett [mailto:surta@pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:51 AM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Museum House Project - Please Vote NO! Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 Dear Mayor Dixon, Mayor Pro -Tem Muldoon, Council Members Petros, Duffield, Selich, Peotter, Curry and City Manager Kiff, I am against the Museum House project and hope that you vote "NO" on it this evening. My reasons are as follows: 1. There are already enough residential opportunities, both rental and to purchase in and around Fashion Island. 2. I'm not in favor of amending the General Plan to allow the project to move forward. 3. Given each unit will have 3 or 4 bedrooms, it appears to me that he number of allotted parking spaces, 2 per. unit, does not seem adequate, will residents and their visitors end up parking on the street or at Fashion Island? 4. The 540 unit Irvine Company Apartment Villas at Fashion Island are not occupied yet and we really do not know the impact those residents in their 1, 2 and 3 bedroom rentals will have on the community. It always seems the reality is considerably different than what the traffic studies suggest. It's always worse!! 5. Traffic is already congested enough on Jamboree, MacArthur and PCH as you approach Fashion'Island from all directions 6. As it is now, I AVOID Fashion Island. It's a place I would frequent numerous times a week, now I only am there maybe once a week—so the city is losing my sales tax dollars... 7. 1 do not like the quid pro quo of the Museum House sweetening the deal by donating the adjacent acre of land to the city. And now find out, it is part of the agreement with the Irvine Company who gifted the land to the museum. And that the Irvine Company is also opposed. And will not sign off on the exchange. 8. 1 don't like the fact that our Fire and Police associations are backing the project; I gather they received donations to do so? Finally, I was a Studio Art Major at UCI when the Newport Harbor Art Museum moved to its Fashion Island location. I have so many fond memories of going to the museum as part of my studies and the relationship that the museum had with the UCI Fine Arts Program and its Artists . It's a shame that the museum's Board of Directors wants to abandon its roots in our city and sell out to outside developers who will build a monument to Commerce and Construction vs. ART and Culture for our home town! I am a 25 year plus resident and my husband and our families have roots in Newport Beach going back over 80 years. So, tonight I ask that you ALL listen to the residents of Newport Beach and VOTE NO on the Museum House proiectl Sincerely, Suzanne Theal Gauntlett S Pelican Vista Drive Newport Coast, CA 92657 P.S. At least they could have chosen an architect based in California! Received After Agenda Printed November 29, 2016 November 29, 2016 The Honorable Diane B. Dixon 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Members of the Newport Beach City Council 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Aaron C. Harp City Attorney 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: City Council Consideration of the Museum House Project Dear Mayor Dixon and Members of the Newport Beach City Council: After reviewing the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the proposed 100 -residential unit condominium project, the Museum House ("Project") and related materials, I continue to oppose the Project. The Project applicant has requested several approvals from the City of Newport Beach ("City"), including the approval of a vesting tentative tract map ("VTTM"). However, review of the Planning Commission packet reveals that the Project's VTTM is defective, cannot take effect if adopted by the City Council, and may be incomplete. Under Newport Beach Municipal Code section 19.20.030, "whenever a subdivider files a vesting tentative map for a subdivision whose intended development is inconsistent with the Zoning Code or Districting Maps in existence at that time, that inconsistency shall be noted on the vesting tentative map." Despite requiring a General Plan Amendment and a Planned Community District Plan Amendment, the Project's VTTM does not contain a notation of the development's inconsistency with these plans. Under the Newport Beach Municipal Code, prior to approval of a VTTM, the City is required to make a finding that "the proposed map ... [is] consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan." Newport Beach Municipal Code § 19.12.070. Yet the VTTM would allow the development of a 100 -unit condominium building in conflict with the allowable height and use of the Project site under the City's existing land use regulations. Therefore, the City cannot make its required findings of consistency with the General Plan and the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community District Plan. Accordingly, unless the VTTM is conditioned on a General Plan Amendment or Planned Community District Plan Amendment, the VTTM would be void upon adoption for its inconsistency with the existing General Plan and Planned Community District Plan Amendment. Thus, the City should postpone approval of the VTTM until the General Plan Amendment and Planned Community District Plan Amendment become effective, so that the City may make the required findings. Further, review of the Planning Commission package reveals only one sheet of the VTTM, which does not appear to subdivide any parcels. If this is the complete VTTM being approved, then it is not a valid VTTM because there is no subdivision of land. If this is not the complete VTTM, then the Planning Commission—and the public—did not have the complete VTTM available at the time of the Planning Commission's recommendation, and a new Planning Commission hearing on the full VTTM should be held. Si Susan Skinner 2042 Port Provence Place Newport Beach, CA 92660 (Also submitted on behalf of Newport 1St)