Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutF-3a - Amended Newport Dunes Settlement Agreementc° - 239j Agenda Item No. F-3(a) MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY October 24, 1988 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Robert H. Burnham, City Attorney BY THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RE: Amended Newport Dunes Settlement Agreement OCT 2 4 1988 — APPR(W,J) Background: In 1980, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved the Redevelopment Plan for Newport Dunes. The City of Newport Beach filed a lawsuit challenging the adequacy of the EIR for the Plan and alleging jurisdictional authority to regulate the proposed development. This lawsuit was settled in 1983 with Council and Board approval of the Newport Dunes Settlement Agreement. On August 22, 1988, the City Council approved, in concept, modifications to certain components of the Settlement Agreement and authorized staff to discuss, with the County and its lessee, amendments to provisions of the original Agreement relative to the funding of circulation system improvements. These discussions have resulted in the proposed amended Settlement Agreement attached to this Memo as Exhibit "A." Discussion: We have prepared a chart that compares the original and amended Settlement Agreements. (See chart at end of Memo). The differences between the original and amended Agreement can be summarized as follows: 1. Family Inn: These provisions are the same, but the amended Agreement incorporates 12,500 square feet of restaurant space into the family inn; 2. Restaurant: Restaurant development is the same, but 12,500 square feet of allowable development is to be a incorporated in the family inn, not constructed as a freestanding facility; 3. RV Par k• The number of spaces are the same, but we have clarified provisions relative to the RV support facilities to include a small convenience store, laundry room, pool and recreation area. The incorporation of these facilities into the RV Park will reduce trips generated by the facility; 4. Office: Permitted office development has been reduced from 10,000 square feet to 5,000 square feet; 5. Headquarters: The size of the headquarters has been reduced from 12,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet; 6. Meeting Rooms: One meeting room has been eliminated; 7. Boat Slips: Remain the same; 8. Coffee Shop/Marine Repair Facilitv: Has been increased from 4,900 square feet to 6,200 square feet; 9. Dry Boat Storage: Remains the same; 10. Boat Launch /Parking: The boat launch facility has been reduced from 10 lanes to 7 lanes, but we have required 185 boat /trailer spaces compared with no parking requirement in original agreement; 11. Day Use Parking: Reduced from 800 spaces to 645 spaces, but boat /trailer parking will serve as overflow. Also, there will be 110 visitor parking spaces located within the RV Park to minimize the extent to which RV parking spills over into day use area. The amended Agreement does change the height limit of the family inn and other structures. The original Agreement establishes a 35 foot height limit, but the structure could exceed 40 feet because a pitched roof is measured on the basis of average roof height. The amended Agreement proposes an absolute maximum pitched roof height of 38.5 feet. The amended Agreement also allows mechanical equipment to exceed the basic 35 foot height limit provided it is fully screened from public view and does not exceed 38.5 feet. These revised height limit provisions are consistent with the original desire of the Council to insure the structure is limited to three stories and does not adversely affect views from Pacific Coast Highway. The most significant difference between the original and amended Agreements is found in the provisions relating to Fair Share and Traffic Phasing contributions. The original Agreement required the payment of $600,000 to fund intersection improvements required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). This sum was to be paid in four (4) equal installments beginning with the construction of the family inn and concluding with the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The amended Agreement requires the $600,000 TPO payment and $235,402 in Fair Share fees.l The TPO and Fair Share fees are to be paid in phases, with the initial payment commensurate with the execution of the Agreement, and substantial contributions required prior to the construction of the RV Park and renovation of the boat launch and boat storage facility. (Payment schedule found on pages 13 and 14 of the proposed amended Agreement.) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the amended Newport Dunes Settlement Agreement. 1 Ki Early in the discussions, Newport Dunes took the position it was not obligated to pay Fair Share fees since the original Agreement was signed prior to adoption of that Ordinance. However, the original Agreement also required Newport Dunes to comply with all building ordinances and Fair Share is in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Newport Dunes has agreed to pay Fair Share fees provided they were given a credit, as authorized by the Fair Share ordinance for Master Plan circulation system improvements made with the $600,000 TPO contribution. Staff determined the Fair Share fees to be $518,304, with an appropriate credit of $282,902 (this credit included a $30,000 cost savings resulting from a cooperative agreement between The Irvine Company and City for the widening of Jamboree near Back Bay Drive. RHB /jc Attachments (Dictated, but not read) Robert H. Burnham'/ City Attorney �-� i 5 0) , ay H P 1P N H N H 1P N UI N O O m 0 O O 1 U w a lI O v ;U O O O �a O N 0 N w 0 ° 0 0 m m r°e 0 C O m Al :00 'C H a G ti M w w m M `3 O O SU N 0 C) 'r. K O H. M rt A. rt r• ro r• rt r- H q r- b7 p m N r• 0 m a ti N z n O m m (n G ft rt m PI � N H m W a a N N H w Q 0 7v n fi H m M H U1 r• O 0 P. w(D rr rMt rt fi rt ro PL H p x) m x 'a rt PO a N rMr m n r- N m 0 H. °o N 00 z k m rr K ' W r• N (n O R W Sc \ r -\ K N n m C a a 0 G G O ri N ri r• r• O w ° 0) , ay H P 1P N H N H 1P N UI N O O m 0 O O 1 O N w lI O v ;U O O O �a O N 0 N (m 0 t H t "0 O�El w m O m O O m a a G O O H O N O O SU H x n z :5 O O o R7 O 00 Z H- 7r m r• N N 0"` O a 00 N � t'I rt, z N a ft rt � � N M N N H. N rt A rt M fi M m M H U1 r• O 0 P. w(D rr rMt rt fi rt rt PL H p x) ttl a 0 N rMr m n r- N m z H. z k m G N r• N (n O R W N K n m C a a 0 G G O ri al H j m 0 W J H UI Id U) O H 0 (n r- U) Ic, m a w O w 7 0 w G w In UIH N 0 N (m O "0 t "0 O�El w m O m O O rt CD m aO m rm ° ° P. ° O m O M tr N 0"` P� N � IQ ft rt H. N O (D rt rt rt M M m M H U1 r• O 0 P. ti rr rt n rt r- O PL H p x) ttl a N rt 5 m n r- N m z H. z k m O N (n O R W N n C a a 0 G G O ri N ri r• r• O w ° 'O � "C rat I rt