Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - Uptown Newport Project - PA2011-134Q SEW FORS O O� C9C /FORH�P TO: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report Agenda Item No. 14 January 8, 2013 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Department Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director 949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt (a)newportbeachca.00v PREPARED BY: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner APPROVED:..ia O /� TITLE: Supplemental Memorandum: Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Uptown Newport Project at 4311 -4321 Jamboree Road (PA2011 -134) ABSTRACT: To provide the City Council with additional information pertaining to the process to overrule the Airport Land Use Commission's ( "ALUC ") determination of inconsistency for Uptown Newport mixed -use residential planned community. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No 2013 -3 (Attachment No. CC 1) notifying the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and the State Division of Aeronautics of the City's intention to overrule the ALUC determination that the proposed Uptown Newport mixed -use residential planned community is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for the John Wayne Airport and finding the adopting of this Resolution is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. 1 Uptown Newport — ALUC January 08, 2013 Page 2 On December 6, 2012, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Uptown Newport mixed -use residential planned community (the "Project'). The Planning Commission, after receiving public comments, continued the Project to the December 20, 2012, meeting. On December 11, 2012, the City Council continued this item to January 8, 2013, because the Planning Commission had not concluded their project deliberations and recommendations to the City Council. The December 11, 2012, Council Staff Report package can be found on the City's website at: htto: / /newoortbeachca.gov /i nd ex.asox ?oage =701. On December 20, 2012, the Planning Commission further reviewed and considered the project; however, the Commission did not take final action on the project. The Commission continued their consideration to February 7, 2013, and directed staff to report the outcome of the several straw votes they have taken thus far related to several of their recommendations to the City Council, including: 1. No need to recirculate the draft environmental impact report. 2. The draft environmental impact report is adequate and should be referred for certification by the City Council. 3. The draft statement of overriding considerations is appropriate and should be referred to the City Council for consideration. 4. The proposed amendment of the Koll Center PC is appropriate and should be referred to the City Council for consideration. 5. The project is consistent with the General Plan and Integrated Conceptual Development Plan as it relates to vehicle and pedestrian connectivity with surrounding properties. 6. The following components of the proposed Uptown Newport Planned Community documents are adequate and should be referred to the City Council for adoption: a. Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures (as modified) b. Phasing Plan (as modified) The Planning Commission will consider the proposed Design Guidelines, Tract Map conditions, Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, and Development Agreement on February 7, 2013. The architectural components of the Design Guidelines remain unresolved and revisions are being prepared by the applicant. 2 Uptown Newport — ALUC January 08, 2013 Page 3 The Planning Commission did not express any concerns with the City Council proceeding with this agenda item. The Planning Commission must complete its review and provide its recommendations to the City Council before any final action to overrule the ALUC determination. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this memo is to provide the City Council with additional information regarding the process to overrule ALUC's determination that the Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan ( "AELUP "). The process generally consists of notice to ALUC and the State Division of Aeronautics of the City's decision to overrule the finding of inconsistency, which notice must include the basis for the City's decision. The attached resolution sets forth the proposed findings to support the City's decision to overrule ALUC. The City may not approve the zoning regulations included as part of the Project until it provides the required notice, thus allowing ALUC and the State Division of Aeronautics to provide comments prior to the City's decision as to whether or not to overrule the ALUC determination. Staff offers the following reasons for the City Council to consider in conjunction with the override process: ALUC has Previously Determined that the Project's Mixed Use Land Designation under the Newport Beach General Plan is Consistent with the AELUP: The Project site has a General Plan designation of Mixed -Use Horizontal -2 (MU -H2), which 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. The MU -H2 designation applies to the majority of properties in the Airport Area. The Project is consistent with this General Plan Land Use designation as it would provide a mix of residential and neighborhood - serving uses and park and open space in the City's Airport Area. On July 20, 2006, ALUC determined that the MU -H2 designated area was consistent with the AELUP as a part of the City's General Plan Update in 2006. A copy of the July 20, 2006, ALUC minutes is attached as Attachment CC 2. ALUC has Previously Determined that the Newport Beach Zoning Code Building Height Review Requirements for the Proiect are Consistent with the AELUP: Pursuant to the Newport Beach Zoning Code, the Project site is located within the 300 - foot High Rise Height Area which is delineated in Newport Beach Zoning Code Section 20.30.060 and Map H -1. The proposed Project is in compliance with the Zoning Code's permitted building height as the residential buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height, with several residential towers up to 150 feet high. The Project is also in 3 Uptown Newport — ALUC January 08, 2013 Page 4 compliance with the AELUP review procedure as specified in Section 20.30.060.E of the Zoning Code which requires the Project to be reviewed by ALUC staff and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The Project received a determination of "No Hazard to Air Navigation" from the FAA on August 6, 2012. This review procedure was included in the City's Zoning Code pursuant to the ALUC's request as part of the Zoning Code update in 2010. It is important to note that ALUC found the 300 -foot High Rise Height Area included in the Newport Beach Zoning Code Update consistent with the AELUP on August 19, 2010. A copy of the August 19, 2010, ALUC minutes is included as Attachment CC 3. ALUC Review of the Uptown Newport Proiect The current zoning designation of the Project site is Industrial Site 1 of the Koll Center Planned Community (PC -15). Permitted uses in the Industrial Site 1 designation include light industrial and office and commercial related uses. The applicant is proposing to remove the Property from the PC -15 zoning designation by adopting a standalone Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) to accommodate the proposed mixed - use residential development. The proposed Uptown Newport PCDP would be the zoning document for the Project where land use and development standards would be specified. Because of the proposed zoning code amendment, the City is required to refer the Project to ALUC for consistency determination with the AELUP, in accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b). Consistency Determination AELUP: As stated in the October 18, 2012, ALUC staff report, ALUC staff recommended a consistency determination for the Project with recommended conditions. These conditions have all been included in the applicant's proposed zoning documents. A copy of the October 18, 2012, ALUC staff report is attached as Attachment CC 4. The minutes of the October 18, 2012, ALUC meeting reflect that ALUC rejected its staff recommendation and found the proposed Project to be inconsistent with the AELUP. A copy of the October 18, 2012, ALUC minutes is attached as Attachment CC 5. Overrule Process: As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may, after a public hearing, choose to overrule ALUC's determination by following a two -step process established in Public Utilities Code Section 21676. This two -step procedure requires the City Council to conduct two separate noticed public meetings. The initial step is to notify ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics of the City's intention to overrule ALUC's determination by adopting a resolution of intention at least 45 days in advance of the 21 Uptown Newport — ALUC January 08, 2013 Page 5 City Council's decision on whether or not it will overrule ALUC. Once notified, ALUC and the State may provide comments to the City Council. If comments are not provided within 30 days of receiving the City's resolution of intention the City Council may act without them. If received, comments are advisory to the City Council and will be included in the public record of any final decision on the consistency determination. This final decision will take place at a second meeting at which time the City Council will consider specific findings that the proposed overruling is consistent with the purposes stated in Public Utilities Code Section 21670. The following points are important to consider: • The Council's adoption of the attached notification resolution does not constitute the Project's approval nor does it predispose the City Council's future action on either the Project or the consistency determination; and • Should the City Council ultimately overrule the ALUC decision, that action will not affect the City's status as a consistent agency with the AELUP. Public Utilities Code Section 21678 states that if the City "overrules" a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability from damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the City's decision to overrule the ALUC determination. Should the City Council desire to proceed with the overruling of the ALUC's decision, a draft resolution with specific findings has been prepared for consideration. Public Utilities Code Section 21678 and the liablility of the airport operator are addressed below in response to correspondence received on this issue. CORRESPONDENCE: Staff received five (5) written letters prior to the public hearing scheduled for December 11, 2012 (Attachment CC6). Three letters (Meyer Properties, John S. Adams & Associates, Inc. and MIG Real Estate, LLC) stated that they supported ALUC's determination of inconsistency but provided no additional information to buttress this position. The remaining correspondence (Robert Hawkins and Jim Mosher), raises issues related to Public Utilities Code Section 21678 and the liability of the airport operator. Mr. Hawkins asserts in his correspondence that, as to the immunity of the airport operator, Public Utilities Code Section 21678 is a "liability shifting provision ". Similarly, Mr. Mosher asserts that the City would "assume considerable liability in the event of an accident." The case relied on in the correspondence does not support this conclusion. In fact, nothing in Public Utilities Code Section 21678 provides that City takes on additional liability by overruling ALUC. Rather, the provision appears to recognize the City's right to make land use decisions and the airport operator's immunity from that decision. Furthermore, to suggest that the City would assume J Uptown Newport — ALUC January 08, 2013 Page 6 liability by overruling ALUC ignores the fact that the City's municipal liability, if any, would be subject to any public entity immunity provided by statute. Submitted by: / yk,"z(- Kimberly Brand O. Director Attachments: CC1 CC2 CC3 CC4 CC5 CC6 Draft Resolution of Intent July 20, 2006, ALUC Minutes August 19, 2010, ALUC Minutes October 18, 2012, ALUC Staff Report October 18, 2012, ALUC Minutes Correspondence Received NO Attachment No. CC 1 Draft Resolution of Intent 7 2 RESOLUTION NO. # # ## A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH NOTIFYING THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AND THE STATE DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS OF THE CITY'S INTENTION TO FIND THAT THE UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE AERONAUTICS ACT AND TO OVERRULE THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION THAT THE UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN FOR THE JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT (PA2011 -134) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Uptown Newport LP ( "Uptown Newport" or "Applicant") with respect to a 25.05 -acre property generally located on the west side of Jamboree Road between Birch Street and the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard, legally described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, (the 'Property') requesting approval for the development of up to 1,244 residential dwelling units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial uses and two acres of parklands (the "Project "). The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: a. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2011 -003. An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan #15 (Koll Center Planned Community) to remove the subject property from the Koll Center Planned Community, pursuant to Chapter 20.66 (Amendments) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. b. Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2012 -001. A Planned Community Development Plan adoption to establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as the zoning document for the construction of up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail commercial, and 2.05 acres of park space to be built in two separate phases on a 25.05 -acre site, pursuant to Chapter 20.56 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. C. Tentative Tract Map No. NT2012 -002. A tentative tract map to establish lots for residential development purposes pursuant to Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. I Council Resolution No. #### Page 2 d. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -005. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O12 -001. A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, pursuant to Chapter 19.53 (Inclusionary Housing) and Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. f. Development Agreement No. DA2012 -003. A Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits, pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.a of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Policy LU6.15.12. g. Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH#2010051094). An environmental impact report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). 2. The Property's General Plan designation is Mixed -Use District Horizontal 2 (MU -H2), and the Property is located within the Airport Business Area, for which the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan ( "ICDP ") has been implemented. The ICDP allocates a maximum of 1,244 residential units and up to 11,500 square feet of retail to be developed on the Property. 3. The Property is currently located within the Koll Center Newport Planned Community (PC -15) and is designated as Industrial Site 1. The applicant is proposing to remove the subject property from the PC -15 zoning designation by adopting a separate Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) to accommodate the proposed mixed -use residential development. The proposed Uptown Newport PCDP would be the zoning document for the project where land use and development standards would be specified. 4. Due to the proposed amendments to the Property's zoning regulations, Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) requires the City of Newport Beach to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of the Project's consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. 10 Council Resolution No. #### Page 3 5. On October 18, 2012, ALUC voted four (4) to one (1) in favor of finding the Project inconsistent with the AELUP. One ALUC Commissioner recused himself and did not vote. 6. Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 and 21676, the City of Newport Beach may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC by a two - thirds vote of the City Council, if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670, which are stated to be to protect 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. 7. Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b), the City provided notice of a public hearing to be held on December 11, 2012, which was continued to January 8, 2013, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at the public hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYACT DETERMINATION. 1. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. 2. Specifically, the resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it is limited to the notification of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC determination; and it does not authorize the development of the Property or commit the City to approve the Project. In fact, the Project has been independently reviewed and evaluated pursuant to CEQA in the Environmental Impact Report for the Project (SCH No. 2010051094). 11 Council Resolution No. # # ## Page 4 SECTION 3. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The City Council directs staff to provide notice to the Airport Land Use Commission and California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics of the City of Newport Beach's intent to find the Project consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670 and overrule the Airport Land Use Commission's determination on October 18, 2012, that the Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. This notice shall include the proposed findings in support of the City's intended action attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 8th day of January, 2013, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS MAYOR ATTEST: Leilani Brown, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM, OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY: Aaron Harp, City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach 12 Council Resolution No. #### Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" PROPOSED FINDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH THAT THE UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN FOR THE JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT IN SUPPORT OF THE CRY'S DECISION TO OVERRULE THE AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DETERMINATION OF INCONSISTENCY Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) provides that the City of Newport Beach may overrule the determination by the Airport Land Use Commission that the Project is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for the John Wayne Airport, by a two- thirds vote of the City Council, if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purposes of in Public Utilities Code Section 21670. The purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670 are included is subsection (a)(2), which reads as follows: It is the purpose of this article to protect 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. Finding A The Project is consistent with the legislative purpose set forth in California Public Utilities Code Section 21670(a)(2) to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports. Facts in Support 1. To provide for the orderly development of John Wayne Airport (JWA) and the area surrounding the airport, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) adopted the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport, which was most recently amended on April 17, 2008. The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for orderly development of the airport and the area surrounding the airport through implementation of the standards for aircraft noise, safety compatibility zones, and building height restrictions in AELUP Section 2.1. 2. The ALUC staff report dated October 18, 2012, reflects that ALUC's staff reviewed the Project with respect to compliance with the AELUP, 13 Council Resolution No. #### Page 6 including review of appropriate noise standards, height restrictions, imaginary surfaces, safety zones, and environmental compliance, and recommended that ALUC find the Project consistent with the AELUP. 3. The Project is consistent with the noise, height and safety standards set forth in the AELUP, and therefore provides for the orderly development of the airport and the area surrounding the airport, based on the following: a. The residential and commercial land uses for the Project are consistent pith the noise standards of the AELUP. AELUP Section 2.1.1 sets forth the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) standards. A small portion of the Project on the eastern boundary fronting Jamboree Road is located within the 60 dB CNEL noise contour for JWA, with the remainder falling within the 55 dB CNEL contour. AELUP Section 3.2.4 defines the noise exposure to be "Moderate Noise Impact" in the 60 -65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which is Noise Impact Zone 2. Per the AELUP, noise impact in this area is sufficient to require sound attenuation. As outlined in the AELUP, the residential use interior sound attenuation requirement in this noise impact zone is required to be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dBA. The small portion of the Project area that falls within the 60 dBA CNEL triggering an interior level of 45 dBA would not include residential units. This area would be developed with a landscaped parkway and sidewalk. Future Project - related residential units that would fall within Noise Impact Zone 2 would be conditioned to achieve compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. In addition, the Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element requires that residential development in the Airport Business Area be located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour (Policies LU 6.15.3 and N 3.2), and requires residential developers to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise (Policy N 3.2). The Project would be developed in accordance with these General Plan policies. The AELUP also identifies land uses that are "normally consistent" and "conditionally consistent" in each noise impact zone delineated by the CNEL noise contour. AELUP Section 3 Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) identifies the 60 dB CNEL contour for residential and commercial uses as "normally consistent' requiring "no special noise reduction requirements." b. The residential and commercial land uses for the Project are consistent Wth the safety standards of the AELUP. 14 Council Resolution No. #### Page 7 AELUP Section 2.1.2 sets forth Safety Compatibility Zones to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air safety and reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working, or recreating near JWA. The Property is within Safety Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone of JWA. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence. Allowed uses in this safety zone include residential and most nonresidential uses, with the exception of 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. The residential and commercial land uses of the Project would be consistent with those outlined in Safety Zone 6 and its applicable land use restrictions. C. The residential and commercial land uses for the Project are consistent vuth the height standards of the AELUP. AELUP Section 2.1.3 sets forth building height restrictions. This Section provides that ALUC consider only one standard, Title 14 CFR Part 77. AELUP Section 2.1.3 provides that these regulations "are the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used." AELUP Section 2.1.3 indicates that ALUC recognizes 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. The AELUP also indicates that the Commission considers the FAA as the "Authority' for reporting results of such studies and project analyses. The FAA conducted an aeronautical study for the Project consistent with FAA Part 77 Regulations. The FAA issued a "No Hazard Determination" and found that the structures would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace. The FAA reviewed the following heights: 59 feet site elevation (SE); 150 feet above ground level (AGL); and 206 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). Three of the eleven points that represent the building heights were identified as obstacles under the obstruction standards of Title 14 CFR Part 77, Section 77.19(a) (which is 206 feet AMSL) by between 1 to 3 feet. 15 Council Resolution No. #### Page 8 The FAA stated that the adverse effect of these three building points are known, and that similarly situated structures of equal or greater height exist in the area between the Property and the John Wayne Airport runways. The FAA concluded that three building points do not result in any significant adverse effect on the aeronautical operations or on the utility of the navigable approach and departure Terminal Procedures for John Wayne Airport. The FAA further concluded that existing obstacles and terrain control the development of future instrument approach and departure procedures for John Wayne Airport. Subsequent to the FAA's aeronautical study and No Hazard Determination, and to ensure that the Project's building heights would be within the limits established by the Orange County Board of Supervisors for John Wayne Airport, the applicant amended the Project's proposed zoning regulations. The amendment limited heights for buildings and any appurtenances to no greater than the 206 feet AMSL established for John Wayne Airport, by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. Therefore, the heights of the Project's residential towers will not penetrate John Wayne Airport's Horizontal Surface. Additionally, the Project's proposed Planned Community Development Plan specifies that all development must be constructed in conformance with FAA Part 77 height restrictions, the Division of Aeronautics, and height restrictions in the AELUP. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the height standards contained in the AELUP. Finding B The Project is consistent with the legislative purpose set forth in California Public Utilities Code Section 21670(a)(2) to ensure 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. Facts in Support 1. To protect the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring orderly expansion of airports, the ALUC adopted the AELUP, which serves as a land use compatibility plan to "safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operations of the airport" (AELUP, Section 1.2, p. 2.). The AELUP standards guide development proposals to provide for the orderly development of the airport and the area surrounding the airport through 10 Council Resolution No. #### Page 9 implementation of the standards in AELUP Sections 2 (Planning Guidelines) and 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards "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." As set forth above in the Facts in Support of Finding A, the proposed project is consistent with the AELUP noise, safety standards, and building heights. Because, the land use measures proposed as part of the Project are consistent with the AELUP, the Project serves the purpose of Public Utilities Section 21670(a)(2) to minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards to the extent the area is not already devoted to incompatible uses. 2. To protect the public health, safety and welfare the ALUC adopted the AELUP to outline land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent these are not already devoted to incompatible use. The AELUP provides land use policies in AELUP Section 3 (Land Use Policies) that govern noise, safety, and building height. As set forth above, the Project is consistent with AELUP noise, safety standards, and building heights. 3. The land use measures proposed by the Project were included in the City of Newport Beach 2006 General Plan, which ALUC found to be consistent with the AELUP on July 20, 2006. The 2006 General Plan provided the following goal: "re -use of underperforming industrial and office properties and development of cohesive residential neighborhoods in proximity to jobs and services in the John Wayne Airport Area" (LU Policy 3.3). The General Plan also designated properties located in the Airport Business Area as Mixed -Use Horizontal -2 (MU -H2), which allows for the intermixing of uses that include regional commercial office, multi - family residential, vertical mixed -use buildings, industrial, hotel rooms, and ancillary commercial uses. A maximum of 2,200 residential units were allocated for the MU -H2 properties. The Project is consistent with this General Plan Land Use designation as it would provide a mix of residential and neighborhood - serving uses and park and open space to the City's Airport Business Area. 4. The Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element additionally specifies that residential development in the Airport Business Area be outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour and requires residential developers to notify purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise. The proposed project is outside the 65 dBA and prospective purchasers and tenants will be notified. The proposed project is consistent with these 17 Council Resolution No. #### Page 10 policies, which are the same policies that ALUC deemed consistent with the AELUP on July 20, 2006. 5. On August 19, 2010, ALUC found the City of Newport Beach 2010 Zoning Code Update consistent with the AELUP, which included Map H- 1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limit Areas (Exhibit 1). The Project is located in the Newport Beach Zoning Code 300 -foot High Rise Height Area. Furthermore the Project is subject to review by ALUC and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as specified in Section 20.30.060.E of the Newport Beach Zoning Code. The Project is in compliance with the Newport Beach Zoning Code's permitted building height as the residential buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height, with several residential towers up to 150 feet high. The Project received a determination of "No Hazard to Air Navigation" from the FAA on August 6, 2012. Finding C The City Council finds the ALUC's determination that the proposed project was inconsistent is not based on substantial evidence that was introduced, commented on, or identified in support of the inconsistency finding. Facts in Support 1. The ALUC meeting minutes for October 18, 2012, reflect that a motion to find the Project inconsistent with AELUP was based upon AELUP Section 2.1.3 (Planning Guidelines, Building Height Restrictions). The AELUP Section 2.1.3 does state that a FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation does not automatically equate to a project consistency determination by ALUC. Section 2.1.3 further states that the ALUC may find a project inconsistent based on an obstruction determination by the FAA. However this criterion is not applicable to this Project, since the FAA concluded that the three obstacles, as defined under the Title 14 obstruction standards, do not result in any significant adverse effect on the aeronautical operations or on the utility of the navigable approach and departure Terminal Procedures for John Wayne Airport. Additionally, subsequent to the FAA's No Hazard Determination, the applicant reduced the Project's building and appurtenances height limit to no greater than the 206 feet AMSL consistent with the horizontal surface established for John Wayne Airport, by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. 2. AELUP Section 2.1.3 allows the ALUC to utilize criteria for protecting aircraft traffic patterns which is different than FAA Part 77 should evidence of health, welfare, or air safety surface sufficient to justify such AN Council Resolution No. #### Page 11 an action. The ALUC's statement of evidence contained in the meeting minutes of October 18, 2012, is limited to "this area directly under the general aviation flight path is not a good place for residential and noted that if buildings this tall were built, there would eventually be a wall of building that a pilot would need to navigate through ". This statement is contrary to the ALUC's two previous determinations of AELUP consistency that allows residential uses in the Airport Business Area with a maximum building height of 300 feet above grade. 3. The City Council has considered the FAA No Hazard Determination, the proposed relevant Project conditions, the AELUP standards, and the ALUC Inconsistency determination and finds the Project is consistent with the stated purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670 because (1) the Project is consistent with the AELUP and therefore ensures the orderly expansion of airports; and (2) the Project's proposed land use measures are intended to minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards. 19 Exhibit 1 of Draft Resolution of Intent Map H -1 High Rise and Shoreline Height Limit Areas 20 Ci 0 N N 0 O r � �♦ � j I �h /I i�lll � � �Ilire '■�" II�Y ■tip — ,� ��a(= ���- t � II N�II `�, IirrEIIII m m„ Ci 0 N N 0 O 22 Attachment No. CC 2 July 20, 2006 ALUC Minutes 23 24 C/ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 MINUTES OF MEETING July 20, 2006 PLACE: John Wayne Airport Administration Building Airport Commission Hearing Room 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92626 TIME: Regular Meeting called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Bresnahan COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Herman Beverburg, Jerry Bresnahan, Melody Carruth, Doug Davert, Rod Propst, and Don Webb I I Commissioner Absent: Tom O'Malley _ - Alternate Commissioners Present: None STAFF PRESENT: Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer Lea Umnas, Admin. Manager — Planning Sue Tanner - Secretary PLEDGE: Vice - Chairman Propst led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COn the motion and second of Commissioners Webb and Carruth, the June 16, 2006 regular meeting minutes were approved as written by Commissioners H. Beverburg, Bresnahan, Carruth, Davert, and Webb. 25 ALUC Minutes Page 2 July 20, 2006 NEW BUSINESS: 1. Policy Discussion: City of Newport Beach — Our Lady Oueen of Angels (OLOA) Church Expansion Proiect Staff Planner Lea Umnas presented this item to the Commission and described the project. The project does not require a general plan amendment or zone change but does surpass the FAA 100:1 notification surface for JWA. This project was presented to the Commission due to the receipt of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the City's Inconsistent status. After a discussion among the Commissioners and the project proponent regarding submittal of the FAA 7460 -1 application for the project, the Commission agreed to staff's recommendation number 3b: Draft a letter to the City of Newport Beach indicating that under PUC Section 21676.5, the ALUC requests that the OLQA project be referred to the Airport Land Use Commission, once the Form 7460 Determination has been received from the FAA for a Finding of Consistency/Inconsistency. On the motion and second of Commissioners Carruth and Webb, the recommended action was approved unanimously. 02. City of Newport Beach — City of Newport Beach General Plan - Review for Consistency with Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport (JWA) and AELUP for Heliports: Executive Officer Rigoni presented this item and the comments made for each section of the review of the General Plan. A discussion was held regarding the wording of the recommended action. Because the updated General Plan must be approved by the City Council and the voters of Newport Beach (November ballot measure), the recommended action was clarified to declare the City of Newport Beach General Plan consistent with the AELUP for JWA and AELUP for Heliports, subject to General Plan approval by the City of Newport Beach. Should the General Plan not be approved by the City, the City would remain Inconsistent until such time as changes to the General Plan were adopted. Staff was directed to provide final comments to the City and report back to the Commission after City action on the General Plan. On the motion and second of Commissioners Webb and Davert, the recommended action was approved by a five to one vote, with Commissioner Beverburg voting no. 3. Ratification of Executive Officer: Executive Officer Rigoni presented this item which was brought about due to the change in the ALUC Bylaws. The Commissioners voted unanimously to ratify Kari Rigoni as the Executive Officer for the ALUC for Orange County. 20 ALUC Minutes Page 3 July 20, 2006 ONGOING BUSINESS: 4. Administrative Status Report: Ms. Rigoni called the Commission's attention to the various correspondence and other items included in this report. 6. Proceedings with Consistent Agencies: The Executive Officer commented that the city of Lake Forest is now a Consistent agency. Proceedings with Inconsistent Agencies: No further comments were made. 8. Items of Interest to the Commissioners: Chairman Bresnahan reported on the second meeting of the AELUP Revision Sub - Committee. 9. Items of Interest to the Public: No one from the public wished to address the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, NOW i Kari A. Rigoni Executive Officer 27 22 Attachment No. CC 3 August 19, 2010 ALUC Minutes 29 30 C AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING August 19, 2010 PLACE: John Wayne Airport Administration Building Airport Commission Hearing Room 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92626 TIME: Regular Meeting called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Bresnahan PRESENT: Gerald Bresnahan, Rod Propst, Herman Beverburg; Tom O'Malley, Jim Righeimer, and Don Webb Commissioners Absent: Jon Dumitru Alternate Commissioners Present: Stephen Beverburg STAFF PRESENT: Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer Lea Umnas, Staff Planner Sue Tanner, Recording Secretary Ryan Baron, Deputy County Counsel PLEDGE: Vice- Chairman Rod Propst led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of June 17, 2009 were approved with no corrections. Commissioner Don Webb made the motion, Commissioner Tom O'Malley made the second, and the motion passed unanimously. 31 ALUC Minutes Page 2 August 19, 2010 NEW BUSINESS, City of Newport Beach: Review and Consideration of the City's Zoning Code Amendment: Lea Umnas presented the Zoning Code Update for consideration by the Commission. The comprehensive amendment reflects the land use designations and policies established by the Land Use Element included in the General Plan, which was approved by the voters of the City of Newport Beach in November 2006 and found to be Consistent with the JWA AEL UP on July 20, 2006. A discussion ensued between the Commission and City staff regarding the height limitations near the airport, the additional noise language that was proposed prior to the meeting, and assurance that building heights within the Airport Planning Area would not penetrate the FAR Part 77 Imaginary Obstruction Surfaces. If a future proposal were made for a project that exceeded this Imaginary Surface, the ALUC would review this as a zoning code amendment. Commissioner Don Webb made the motion to approve the staff recommendation with the additional changes. Commissioner Jim Righeimer seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 2. Administrative Status Report: Executive Officer Rigoni called the Commission's attention to the various letters of correspondence included in this report. 3. Proceedings with Consistent Agencies: Executive Officer Kari Rigoni reported that staff will work with the city of La Palma staff to determine the status of that city. Chairman Bresnahan inquired about the review of cities' of Orange County General Plans for consistency with the applicable AELUPs. Staff will continue to research ALUC responsibilities 4. Proceedings with Inconsistent Agencies: Nothing new to report. 5. Items of Interest to the Commissioners: Nothing new to report. 6. Items of Interest to the Public: No one from the public addressed the Commission. S2 ALUC Minutes Page 3 August 19, 2010 ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kari A. Rigoni Executive Officer 33 S4 Attachment CC 4 October 18, 2012 ALUC Staff Report S5 so )RANG[ I COIINTY October 18, 2012 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue o Costa Mesa, California 92626 ^ 949.252370 fax: 949.252.6012 AGENDA ITEM 1 TO: Commissioners /Alternates FROM: Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer SUIIJECT: City of Newport Beach: Request for Consistency review of Uptown Newport Project Background The City of Newport Beach is requesting Consistency review of the Uptown Newport Project which consists of mixed uses with up to 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail space, and approximately two acres of park space. Residential product types would be for -sale and rent with a mix of townhomes, mid- and high -rise condominiums; and affordable housing. Proposed buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height; with residential towers up to 150 feet high. 184 units would be set aside for affordable housing.. The proposed project is located within the Airport Business Area of the City of Newport Beach. The site is bounded by Jamboree Road on the cast and is within an area bounded by Birch Street on the north, and Von Karman Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard on the west (see Attachment 1 to view local vicinity map). 'file site is currently developed with light industrial /manufacturing uses and associated surface parking lots. The project would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would involve demolition of the existing single -story office building at 4311 Jamboree Road to accommodate approximately 680 residential units, 11,500 square feet of commercial development, and a one -acre park. Tile TowerJazz Semiconductor manufacturing facility (4321 Jamboree Road) would continue operating during construction and initial occupancy of Phase 1. Development of Phase I is projected to stmt in 2012 and be completed in 2018. Phase 2 would include demolition of the TowerJazz facility and construction of the remaining 564 residential units and a one -acre park. The proposed project requires a Zone Change and the adoption of a Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) by the City of Newport Beach to accommodate the proposed mixed -use residential development. The current zoning designation of the project site is Industrial Site 1 of the Koll Center Planned Community (PC- 15). Permitted uses in the Industrial Site I designation include light industrial and office and commercial related uses. The project site will be removed from the PC -15 zoning designation by adopting a standalone PCDP for Uptown Newport. The PCDP will serve as the zoning document for the project where land use and development standards would be specified. The City of Newport Beach has tentatively scheduled public hearings on the proposed PC zoning amendment as follows: November 8, 2012 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission November 27, 2012 City of Newport Beach City Council S7 Agenda Item I October 18, 2012 Pnge 2 J{f!A AL•LUP Issues Aircraft Noise Impacts: A portion of the proposed project site is located within the 60 CNEL noise contour for JWA (see Attachment 2), Residential and commercial uses are considered normally consistent within the 60 CNEL noise contour. The city is requiring that the interior CNEL does not exceed 45 dB. In addition, the applicant and or future residential developers will be required to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise. Safety Issues; The proposed project is located within airport Safety Zone 6 for JAVA (see Attachments 3 and 4). Zone 6 Traffic Pattern Zone includes aircraft within a regular traffic pattern and pattern entry routes. As stetted in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, within Safety Zone 6 there is generally low likelihood of accident occun,ence at most airports. Risk concern primarily is with uses for which potential consequences are severe. Residential uses are normally allowed as well as most nonresidential uses. Large outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities should be avoided. Children's schools, large day care centers, hospital and nursing homes should be limited; as well as processing and storage of bulk quantities of highly hazardous materials. The proposed mixed uses for the Uptown project would be compatible within this zone, although noise and overflight should be considered and disclosed to residents. JbVA Height Restrictions: The proposed project area is within the Notification Area for JWA and the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces for JWA (See Attachment 5 and Attachment 6). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for JWA above the project area is 206 feet above mean sea level (ANISL). Uptown Newport allows for a maximum height of 150 feet fi•om finished grade for all structures. The ground elevation of the project site ranges from approximately 55 to 59 feet. The allowed maximum building height could penetrate the obstruction imaginary surface for JWA by up to 3 feet. 'rhe FAA aeronautical studies completed for the proposed project provide more detail regarding the penetrated points for the project. See Attachment 7 to view one of the eleven aeronautical studies completed for the Uptown Project. The project proponent filed FAA form 7460 -1 Notice of Proposed Construction and Alteration and received a determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation. However, the FAA did find that 3 of I I of the submitted points that represent the building heights are identified as obstacles under the obstruction standards of Title 14 CPR Part 77, Section 77.19 by between 1 to 3 feet; a height penetrating the Horizontal Surface for JWA. The three points identified are associated with proposed 'rower Zone I as identified on the Building Height Limit Plan (see Attachment 8). The city stales in their submittal package that these three points identified as exceeding the 206 -foot elevation will be reduced such that the maximum building elevations (and all building appurtenances) will all be below the horizontal imaginary surface (Elev. 206 NAVD 88) for JWA. In addition, the following building height restrictions language will be included in the PCDP for the project (underlined portion is suggested ALUC addition.): "All development must 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 the height restrictions set forth by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport and the Airport Land use Commission (ALUC). It should be noted that the current avigation easement for JWA as adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors restricts the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 206 feet (NAVD 88), including all rooftop appurtenances." S2 Agenda Item I October 18, 2012 Page 3 Additionally, it is recommended that Figure 3 -2 of the PCDP include a note clarifying that the Tower Zone I height limit is 150 feet, but cannot exceed 206 feetAivlSL. AELUP for, Helitrorls Issues The development of heliports was not discussed within the Uptown Newport PCDP and is not proposed as part of the project. Heliports are not a permitted use without the prior approval and issuance of a conditional use permit which establishes the maintenance and operation of such a use. The Newport Beach General Plan includes language that states proposals to develop new heliports nwst be submitted through the City to the ALUC for review and action pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 and includes the requirement that proposed heliport projects must comply fully with the State permit procedure provident by law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by FAA, by the ALUC for Orange County and by Caltrans /Division -of Aeronautics. Environmental Comulianee The City of Newport Beach is currently circulating the Uptown Newport Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEiR) for public review and comment. Comments on the DEIR will be received by the city from September 10, 2012 through October 24, 2012. ALUC will provide comments on theDEIR prior to the end of the comment period, Conclusion Attachment 9 to this report contains excerpts from the project submittal package received from the City of Newport Beach which includes the proposed Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan. ALUC staff has reviewed this project with respect to compliance with the JWA AELUP, including review of appropriate height restrictions, imaginary surfaces, safety zones and environmental compliance. Based upon staff's review, the proposed PCDP including the city's proposed additional language restricting building heights and rooftop appurtenances to below 206 feet AMSL, would be Consistent with the Commission's JWAAELUP. The city has incorporated various conditions and mitigations related to John Wayne Airport in the ALUC submittal package. However, not all of the proposed conditions are part of the PCDP. To ensure that these conditions are pmt of the regulations for Uptown Newport, we recommend that the city add the following conditions to the Uptown Newport PCDP Land Uses, Development Standards and Procedures document: "Development within Uptown Newport shall be required to comply with Ore following conditions related to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport: 111) No buildings, including rooftop appurtenances or architectural features lvhhin the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan shall penetrate the FAA Federal Aviation Regulations (rAR) Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. 1122) Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the PAA (Form 7460 -1) for any construction cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level. Neighborhood parks within Uptown Newport shall have posted a notification to users regarding proximity to John Wayne Airpot and related aircraft overflight and noise. ` 4) For Uptown Newport, the residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB. 39 Agenda Item I October 18, 2012 Page 4 5) Appropriate written nolificalions shall be provided to all initial and subsequent buyers, lessees, and renters within Uptown Newport notifying therm that the area is in the vicinity of John Wayne Airport and as a result residents and occupants of buildings may ealIerience inconvenience, annoyance at- discomfort arising f Form the noise resultingfi•onn aircraft operating at the airport. " Please note that although the city Planning Commission has held study sessions on this project (October 4 "' and 18'h), your Commission is reviewing this project prim to the City Planning Commission hcsuing instead of between the City's Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Therefore, staff recommends that the City submit any project changes relevant to JWA that occur prior to City Council project approval to AL UC staff for review and resubmit the project for ALUC consistency determination. Recommendation: I. That the Commission find the City of Newport Beach Uptown Newport Project to be Consistent with the AELUP for JWJ'A. If changes to the proposed project occur prior to Newport Beach City Council project approval, which would conflict with theJfl'AAELUP policies, the City is required to resubmit the project for ALUC review prior to Council action. 2. That the Commission find the City of Newport Beach Uptown Newport Project to be Consistent with the AELUP for Heliports. If changes to the proposed project occur prior to Newport Beach City Council project approval, which would conflict with the Heliport AELUP policies, the City is required to resubmit the project for ALUC review prior to Council action. Respeefffully submitted, Kari A. Rigoni Executive Officer Attachments: I , Boundary Map of North Newport Center PC 2, JWA Impact Zones (Noise Contours) 3. JWA Safety Zone Reference Map 4. Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone 5, PAR Part 77 AELUP Notification Area for JWA 6. PAR Part 77 JWA Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces 7. Aeronautical Study 2012 -AWP- 2240 -OE 8. Building Height Limit Plan (Figure 3 -2) 9. Excerpts from City of Newport Beach Submittal Package 40 3, Project Description Local Vicinity costa McSa rr / John Wayne Pogpor1 R Irvine �' i `•� �� Site e/ Newport Beach 5 � � ��� ��' ( � • UC Irvine — — Site Qoundaiy - - ... City Boundwy Upnonn iNeaporl Drrrfl CIR Sr.21e(Feelt � Omim The Planning Onto -I DC &G ^ Figure 3.2 Att,a1Chrnd - -T-Ut I 41 J 1 I_, t >✓�' r n,Ijt U,�.J' �;-i .tom. -11 „� '*— y iv yy"r 1;1 1 �1'l. -` I j { y t / 1- (rs` ,-3•ry ..� C f .,i"k rvtl ' aI -wt ' ,�, ,. b'°� l� y - • y,, IT t•°",, - , �'' ( Y �a, 1 y I / z FY '�"�.y1' ' I -. �;'� , vl l�+``L• + /` �'" r it • ' ,�=h ' Y ✓, r j— r I >t � V' 'P i j �+' f r m-I i t (\ ,��- it - - r' •' I' \ _ i �- i _ V I +I /• Saftilding Uptown ^ i lIR `I /�`~• •2•LS yg 1. i Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. John Wayne AOrp®rt Impact Zones Composite contour from John Wayne Airport Pro'ecl LEGEND Case. -1990 and 2005 (see section 2.2.1( —60_. CNEI_ CONTOUR CERTIFICATION ©© - - -• RUNWAY PROIEC71ON ZONE I Adopted by the ti- podland Use Commission VOrango County -•• -• CITY BOUNDARIES -- .AIRPORT SOUNDARIES ,L LGL/Cl.K�'.Dee �t+ae% .am8 Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer Dale 12007 \jwaipzone- 07- bgarea.dgn 10/5/2012 3:33:47 Ptvl LA � ZL Cc 1-11 rvn Q-- In t 2 42 _I I - I i COSTA Otll ESA �1 m `; i !1 X11 M I IRVINE Building? uptezu" RTeusom8 .,. r0 _ l NEIpWt�pP/O+�RItT i It I® GP9\r flt 1 John Wayne Airport Safety Zone Reference Map LEGEND ( I FAPEIY L'fl1!1A1111i11p' (UY.ES FCR RUN-NA it } I P MEOAib I ' •' I GEFERIL A'MIIO!1 FWNYAYPS p WATEO RI IHE CG IFC MA gnpar I 1 nY1." F F907111011 ZONE a•!0 USE RA ^N= RABGUCCKJPNUAA( 2042 EVIUC'l) INNER PPPFL'P6i /VEPPftIliFF. ZCNF WMY COLIPAREILNY ZONES FOH RUNWAY :N 6 A (A EHORT GF.:TIUL AUATI01 PUNIMAS GESCRIEEG R1 1GE C,WfGROA APPCRr J INNEH IUNPNG ZONE rA':O USE Pi M!1!{G HA:,CKCK,lA:.UARI' 2W2 E01R0•,1 {P V a GUIER aaP110ACH .r.EP.nmNS zc::E. CERTIFICATION a D ? SCELCc LONE Adopted oy the Aifpad Land Use Commisscn ton Orange CGUnry E iFUfF:C PAIIEO!1 Z0:2 /wL/ acti8 'Yr 'n lr�l KariA. Rigoni, Executive Officer Dale �2 )Mjwaslzonerh.dgn 10/10/2012 1:54:32 PM Attai chn—beDvut 3 4S -,. {� ti� T� jSTIN J (, SANTA � � _ s ANA 4. b 0 I - I i COSTA Otll ESA �1 m `; i !1 X11 M I IRVINE Building? uptezu" RTeusom8 .,. r0 _ l NEIpWt�pP/O+�RItT i It I® GP9\r flt 1 John Wayne Airport Safety Zone Reference Map LEGEND ( I FAPEIY L'fl1!1A1111i11p' (UY.ES FCR RUN-NA it } I P MEOAib I ' •' I GEFERIL A'MIIO!1 FWNYAYPS p WATEO RI IHE CG IFC MA gnpar I 1 nY1." F F907111011 ZONE a•!0 USE RA ^N= RABGUCCKJPNUAA( 2042 EVIUC'l) INNER PPPFL'P6i /VEPPftIliFF. ZCNF WMY COLIPAREILNY ZONES FOH RUNWAY :N 6 A (A EHORT GF.:TIUL AUATI01 PUNIMAS GESCRIEEG R1 1GE C,WfGROA APPCRr J INNEH IUNPNG ZONE rA':O USE Pi M!1!{G HA:,CKCK,lA:.UARI' 2W2 E01R0•,1 {P V a GUIER aaP110ACH .r.EP.nmNS zc::E. CERTIFICATION a D ? SCELCc LONE Adopted oy the Aifpad Land Use Commisscn ton Orange CGUnry E iFUfF:C PAIIEO!1 Z0:2 /wL/ acti8 'Yr 'n lr�l KariA. Rigoni, Executive Officer Dale �2 )Mjwaslzonerh.dgn 10/10/2012 1:54:32 PM Attai chn—beDvut 3 4S DEVELOPING AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY POLICES 4 Nature of Risk • Normal Maneuvers o Aircraft within a regular traffic pattern and pattern entry routes • Altitude o Ranging from 1,000 to 1,500 feel above runway • Common Accident Types. • Arrival: Pattern accidents in proximity of airport • Departure: Emergency landings • Risk Level • Low • Percentage of near - runway accidents In this zone: 18 %- 29% (percentage is high because of large area encompassed) Basic Compatibility Policies o Normally Allow o Residential uses (however, noise and overflight impacts should be considered where ambient noise levels are low) e Limit o Children's schools, large day care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes o Processing and storage of bulk quantities of highly hazardous materials. o Avoid o Outdoor stadiums and similar uses will very high intensities u Prohibit o None IN TRAFFIC PATTERN Refer to Chaplet a for dimensions. FIGURE 413 Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 4 -25 A���cOoevro�vn 4 =111 Maximum Residential Densities Maximum Nonresidential I Maximum Single Acre Intensities i Average number of dwelling unfls' Average number of people , 4x the Average number of people I per gross acre per gross acre per gross acre Rural No Limit - See Note A 150-200 600-800 _ JI _ _ Suburban No Limit - See Note A 200-300 800-1,200 Urban No Limit - See Note A I No Limit - See Note B No Limit - See Note B Dense Urban i No Limit - See Note A r No Limit - See Note B I No Limit - See Note B Note A: Noise and overflight should be considered. Note B: Large stadiums and similar uses should be avoided. FIGURE 413 Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 4 -25 A���cOoevro�vn 4 =111 AELUP Nofificaflo©n Area for JWA CI -oaf-+°! 1 j..l; y i1 IWt,I ��i -� n d_mol .�iry`�Ff'��. ��•. n"' x{yh'1 �...I,•r 1. -, f'. -��It! h�1 �' Ifs ryrll.���°jjj,7 ®}L,ft�! �a.t. �uL °� / l�• � '• „�, v �t "�{ y 4?S.•. .1(:ft U. d�}D,ft�pTI����I[T�jt c+l�'V" �Olm ��r1q�; -jt"l 7 r 4 r IQ UE I �S iL,l� '7. I j Stl l I`i T+ +4 Il y /f 7. � .: 0 i F I f - �//•,,�� L �• •� � / roe -, t c , Il..i I+ or 0.1 p if+ ®W .J.a MIES r r' 0 L. r it r l I�r•! `< YN If M1 K/ ��k, !�c %M1U �. O° PF I�.��fr'1 /t r� F Y 1.�,`- _�', 1.' OG `' `•_' IR INN o Eta 1 C r2.*•�+�.Z: ' `' Jti\` G /Ir {. �: LY' -Iy.J .ID^E��• Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. FAR PART 77 /notification Area for John Wayne Airport: 20,000' Radius at 100:1 Slope LEGEND CERTIFICATION 4 = dm 2e,00o'Rarllus Adopted by the Aiipcd land Use Commission for Orange County CITY BOUNDARIES �..///� s AIRPORT BOUNDARIES ,G ��- i /Ci.�u<• C NN1;,' avae Kart A. Rigoni, Executive Officer Date ..120071jwanolf- 07.dgn 10/5/2012 3:15:07 PM .�ttachrtna-- rut 5 45 i , - �. i IL..• '.�� t '� ,gS�S�9 T �V j �1 ��j IC1y r . + �..1 J!j .�.d� ' .(xtllh' o r 1 dI If` A . U� Alt Ij - 1 -ti sv /41 - ,r Sfir• p '!� ` -,l>r P EVYICSA I Bu ➢edeg Uptown 7 I -N Newport s f, 4}i I, X14 IRVINE } opsl Ir , 3 RT /r ACK Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. FAR PART 77 John Wayne Airport Obstruction Drnaginary Surfaces LEGEND ' CERTIFICATION 4i D —••— CI7`! ROUNDARIES Adapled by the Ai:pod Land Use Commission lar OmflUe County 6 �,� r. ; _,vr ��, , AIRPORT BOUNDPRIES KariA. Rigoni, Executive Officer Date ...120071jwahsurface- 07 -1.dgn 10/5/2012 3:2127 PM At�araB,rve�o'o� 6 40 Mail Processing Centel- Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Regional Office Obstruction Evaluation Group 2601 Meacham Boulevard Fort Worth, TX 76137 Issued Date: 08/06/2012 Brian Rupp Uptown Newport LP 2 Park Plaza Suite 700 Irvine, CA 92614 Aeronautical Study No. 2012 -A WP- 2240 -OE ** DETE"I.INATION OF NO HAZAR]) TO AIR NAVIGATION ** The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning: Structure: Building Uptown Newport Location: Newport Beach, CA Latitude: 33- 39- 45.22N NAD 83 Longitude: 117-51-29.43W Heights: 59 feet site elevation (SE) 150 feet above ground level (AGL) 209 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on [lie operation of air navigation facilities. Therefore, pursuant to the authority delegated to nne, it is hereby determined that the structure would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condiiion(s) is(are) met: As a condition to this Determination, the structure is marked/lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70/7460 -1 K Change 2, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, red lights- Chapters 4,5(Red),&12. It is required that FAA Fomi 7460 -2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be completed and returned to this office any time the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460 -2, Part I) _X" Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460 -2, Part 11) See attachment for additional condition(s) or information. The structure considered under this study lies in proximity to an airport and occupants may be subjected to noise from aircraft operating to and from the airport. Any height exceeding 150 feet above ground level (209 feet above mean sea level), will result in a substantial adverse effect and would warrant a Determination of Hazard to Air Navigation. Page I of 8 AoottaLco--nmE�!nf 47 7 This detennination expires on 02/06/2014 unless: (a) the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460 -2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, is received by this office. (b) extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office. (c) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within 6 months of the date of this determination. in such case, the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application. NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BE E -FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE, AFTER RE- EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is subject to review if an interested party files a petition that is received by the FAA on or before September 05, 2012. In the event a petition for review is filed, it must contain a full statement of the basis upon which it is made and be suibmilted in triplicate to the Manager, Airspace Regulations & ATC Procedures Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Airspace Regulations & ATC Procedures Group, 800 Independence. Ave, SW, Room 423, Washington, DC 20591. This determination becomes final on September 15, 2012 unless a petition is timely filed. In which case, this determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the grant of any review. For any questions regarding your petition, please contact Airspace Regulations & ATC Procedures Group via telephone -- 202 - 267 -8783 - or facsimile 202 -267 -9328. This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights, frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will void this detennination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487 -6867 so a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number. This aeronautical study considered and analyzed the impact on existing and proposed arrival, departure, and en route procedures for aircraft operating under both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules; the impact on all existing and planned public -use airports, military airports and aeronautical facilities; and the cumulative impact resulting from the studied structure when combined with the impact of other existing or proposed Page 2 of 8 42 structures. The study disclosed that the described structure would have no substantial adverse effect on air navigation. An account of the study findings, aeronautical objections received by the FAA during the study (if any), and the basis for the FAA's decision in this matter can be found on the following page(s). If we can be of further assistance, please contact Karen McDonald, at (3 10) 725 -6557. On any future correspondence concerning this natter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2012 -AWP- 2240 -0B. Signature Control No: 160425117- 170565458 (DNH ) Sheri Edgelt -Baron Manager, Obstruction Evaluation Group Attachment(s) Additional Information Case Description Maps) Page 3 of 8 9 Additional information for ASN 201.2 -AWP- 2240 -OE The sponsor has submitted eleven separate points of proposed redevelopment site in Newport Beach, California. The redevelopment is located at 4311 -4321 Jamboree Road and consists of building points between 75 to 150 feet above ground level (agl) which are projected to contain 1,244 residential units and 11,500 square feet of retail uses. The closest civilian public -use landing area to this redevelopment area is the John Wayne Airport - Orange County (SNA) approximately one nautical mile to the northwest. Of the eleven separate points submitted that represent the building heights of this "Uptown Newport" proposal, eight were not identified as obstacles under the obstruction standards of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77. Three of the submitted points that represent the building heights are identified as obstacles tinder the obstruction standards of Title 14 CPR Part 77; Section 77.19(x) by between 1 to 3 feet, a height penetrating the SNA Horizontal Surface. The SNA Field Elevation is 56 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The site elevations of the eleven separate points of the proposed redevelopment buildings range between 55 to 59 feet above mean sea level (amst). Details of the three separate points of the proposed redevelopment that are identified as obstacles were circularized as Public Notice in order to gather aeronautical information. A comment was received as a result of the Public Notice from the John Wayne Airport, Office of the Airport Director, Planning Manager/Facilities. The comment acknowledged the obstacle identification of the three building points. The comment contained the following information, in part; "At the site of the proposed structures, the County of Orange owns the airspace above 206 feet (amsl)(NAVD88). Therefore, John Wayne Airport recommends that the structure height(s) be reduced to below this elevation, including all rooftop equipment and /or architectural details. If any encroactuuent into this airspace is proposed, it would be allowed only if approved by the County of Orange, Please note that the County has not historically approved residential projects which would penetrate this Horizontal Surface. Projects surpassing this elevation must also filly comply with procedures provided by Federal and State law, with the referral requirements of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County, and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA and ALUC. It is the County's policy to maintain and ensure the safe operation of John Wayne Airport." The FAA response; The Agency concurs. Every final airspace detennination of no hazard to air navigation issued contains the following statement; "This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body." FAA airspace evaluation has found that the adverse effect of these building points are known. Similarly situated structures of equal or greater height exist in the area between this proposed redevelopment area and the SNA runways. There is no significant adverse effect on the aeronautical operations or on the utility of the navigable airspace overlying the site. Existing obstacles and terrain control the development of future instrument approach and departure Tenninal Procedures for SNA. This does not affect the public's right to petition for review detenninations regarding structures which exceed the subject obstruction standard. Page 4 of 8 150 AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE EFFECT UPON THE OPERATION OF AN AIR NAVIGATION AID: - None. AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES (IFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED THE FOLLOWING: - The structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR arrivaVdeparture routes, operations, or procedures. -The structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR en route routes, operations; or procedures. - The struetue would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR minimum flight altitudes. AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE VISUAL FLIGHT RULES (VFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED THE FOLLOWING: - The structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed VFR arrival or departure routes, operations or procedures. - The structure would not conflict with airspace required to conduct normal VFR traffic pattern operations at any known public use or military airports. - The structure would not penetrate those altitudes normally considered available to airmen for VFR en route flight. - This building point shall be appropriately red obstruction lighted to make it more conspicuous to airmen flying in VFR weather conditions at night. The cumulative impact of the stnicture, when combined with other existing structures is not considered significant. Study did not disclose any adverse effect on existing or proposed public -use or military airports or navigational facilities. Nor would the structure affect the capacity of any known existing or planned civilian public -use or military airport. Therefore, it is determined that the structure would not have a substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or ort any air navigation facility and would not be a hazard to air navigation. This determination, issued in accordance with Part 77, concerns the effect of the structure on the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of any compliance responsibilities relating to laws, ordinances, or regulations of any Federal, state, or local governmental bodies. Determinations, which are issued in accordance with Part 77, do not supersede or override any state, county, or local laws, avigation easements, or ordinances, or local zoning maximum heights. Page 5 of 8 152 Case Description for ASN 2012 -AWP- 2240 -OE Redevelopment of the site in 1,244 residential units and 11,500 SP of retail. Notice of proposed construction is being submitted as part of land use approval process. No construction is being proposed at this time. Page 6 of 8 52 Verified 14iap for ASN 2012 -AWP- 2240 -OE Page 7 of 8 53 Sectional Map for ASN 2012 -AWP- 2240 -OE Page 8 of 8 54 Fr Pr n S r 'Tower Zone' 55'HeightLimit Figure 3 -2 Building Height Limit Plan Note: All plans are for illustrative purposes only : Linit it Limit 0' IN 2W +0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A October 1, 2012 OCT e I U e v Kari Rigoni AIRpp 0 12012 Planning Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County RI[ANOUSECpIf�l13S/pq John Wayne Airport 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 RE: UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT — 4311 -4321 JAMBOREE ROAD, NEWPORT BEACH Dear Ms. Rigoni: Pursuant to the Section 4.7 of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport, the City of Newport Beach requests that the Airport Land Use Commission review the proposed Uptown Newport mixed -use residential project for consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan at its October 18, 2012, meeting. The Shopoff Management, Inc., the applicant and property owner of Uptown Newport project, proposes a zoning code amendment to allow the development of mixed -use residential project consisting of 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of neighborhood - serving retail space, and approximately two acres of park space on the 25.05 -acre site formerly known as the "Conexant" property. Residential product types would be a mix of townhomes, mid- and high -rise condominiums for sale and rental. The project would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would involve demolition of the existing single -story office building at 4311 Jamboree Road to accommodate approximately 680 residential units, 11,500 square feet of neighborhood- serving commercial development, and a one -acre park. The TowerJazz Semiconductor manufacturing facility (4321 Jamboree Road) would continue operating during construction and initial occupancy of Phase 1. Development of Phase 1 is projected to start in 2013 and be completed in 2018. Phase 2 would include demolition of the TowerJazz facility and construction of the remaining 564 residential units and a one -acre park. The project site has a General Plan designation of Mixed -Use Horizontal -2 (MU- 1-12), which 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. The MU -H2 :3300 Newport Boulevard Post Office Box 1768 • Newport Beach, Collfrimin 92658 -8915 Telephone: (949) 644 -3200 • Fwc (949) 644 -3229 • wnnv.newportbeachea. A tZLC: N n-0 cant � W Kari A. Rigoni October 1, 2012 Page 2 of 3 designation applies to the majority of properties in the Airport Area. ALUC has determined that this MU -H2 designated area was consistent with the ALUEP as a part of the City's General Plan Update in 2006. Uptown Newport project is consistent with this General Plan Land Use designation as it would provide a mix of residential and neighborhood- serving uses and park and open space to the City's Airport Area. The current zoning designation of the project site is Industrial Site 1 of the Koll Center Planned Community (PC -15). Permitted uses in the Industrial Site 1 designation include light industrial and office and commercial related uses. The applicant is proposing to remove the subject property from the PC -15 zoning designation by adopting a standalone Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) to accommodate the proposed mixed -use residential development. The proposed Uptown Newport PCDP (Attachment #A) would be the zoning document for the project where land use and development standards would be specified. The subject property is located in the City's High Rise Height Area of 300 feet maximum as identified in Map H -1 (High Rise and Shoreline Height Limit Areas) (Attachment #B). Proposed residential buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height; with several residential towers up to 150 feet high. The proposed residential tower height is consistent with the City's permitted building height and compatible with the existing building heights of surrounding structures that are located within 1,000 -foot radius of the project site (see Attachment #C). The proposed project is located with the Height Restriction Zone of the John Wayne Airport (JWA), and the FAA determinations have been filed for the proposed residential towers. These determinations and latitudes and longitudes (taken from the corners of the project) are included as Attachment #D. As proposed, the residential towers and their appurtenances would be restricted to not exceed the Aviation Easement above JWA at 206 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) using North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) (see Section 3.1 of the attached draft PCDP). Additionally, applicable standard FAA's marking and lighting conditions for the residential towers will be included in the PCDP for safety purposes. The southern and eastern and easternmost parts of the project site are located between the 55 dB and 60 dB CNEL contours for John Wayne Airport (Noise Impact Zone 2). Residential use interior sound attenuation in this noise impact zone is required to achieve a CNEL value not exceeding an 'interior level of 45 dBA, as outlined in the AELUP and typical building construction, and standard windows and doors would provide sufficient exterior -to- interior noise reduction. Additionally, the applicant and/or future residential developers are required to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise. This condition will be included in the PCDP. Compliance with these regulations shall 57 Kari A. Rigoni October 1, 2012 Page 3 of 3 be implemented during the project site development review approval and building plan check processes. Also attached for your review are the project's Phasing Plan , Design Guidelines, Master Site Plan, and Tentative Tract Map (Attachments #E through H). A draft environmental impact report (DEIR) has been prepared for the proposed project. A CD copy of this document has been sent to you earlier for your review and comment. Relevant discussion on the proposed building height, proximity to airport noise contour lines, and appropriate mitigation measures can be found in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Noise Sections of the DEIR. The City of Newport Beach Planning Commission will be conducting two study sessions on the project and the DEIR on October 4 and October 18, 2012. Public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council will follow the study sessions. The proposed project is tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting on November 8, 2012; and the City Council meeting is tentatively scheduled for November 27, 2012. To maintain this schedule, we are respectfully requesting that the project be scheduled for the October 1, 2012, ALUC meeting prior to the City's expected Planning Commission hearing. This will allow the Planning Commission the ability to consider any concern ALUC may have and it will allow incorporation of any conditions the ALUC may deem appropriate. Should you have any questions concerning the preceding information, I can be reached by calling (949)644 -3208 or via e-mail at rungOnewportbeachca.gov. M. Ung Planner Attachments: A. Planned Community Development Plan B. Map H -1 (High Rise and Shoreline Height Limit Areas) C. Building heights of surrounding structures map D. FAA certifications E. Phasing Plan F. Design Guidelines G. Master Site Plan H. Tentative Tract Map WIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT October 5, 2012 Kari Rigoni Planning Manager /Facilities Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County John Wayne Airport 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 RE: UPTOWN NEWPORT PROJECT — ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Dear Ms. Rigoni: Per your request, please find the following information: A description of the three points that were identified as obstacles per the aeronautical studies conducted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the changes to the proposed project as a result of the obstruction finding'. A total of 11 points that form the building envelope for the proposed residential buildings within Uptown Newport were defined for the FAA studies. The points were defined by latitude and longitude, and the maximum building elevations were determined by taking the proposed grades and adding the proposed maximum building heights at each point. The maximum building heights are 75 feet for mid -rise buildings and 150 feet for high - rise buildings. Three points within Uptown Newport were identified as obstructing the JWA airspace during the FAA Aeronautical Studies. The following points within the project were identified as exceeding the 206 -foot elevation from the preliminary Notice of Proposed Construction: 3300 Newport Boulevard Post Office Boa 1768 • Newport Beach, Califomia 92658 -8915 Telephone: (949) 644 -3200 - Fax: (949) 6443229 - wvm. ncwporthcachca ,gov / corn Ill unitydevelopment �9 Kari A. Rigoni October 5, 2012 Page 2 of 3 Elevations per NAVD 88 These three points identified as exceeding the 206 -foot elevation will be reduced such that the maximum building elevations (and all building appurtenances) will all be below the height restrictions (Elev. 206 NAVD 88) adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). Furthermore, the following building height restrictions will be included in the Planned Community Development Plan which is the zoning document for the project. All development must be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set forth by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and the height restrictions set forth by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport and the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). It should be noted that the current aviation easement for JWA as adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors restricts the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 206 feet (NAVD 88)." An 11x17 version of Attachment C. See attachment Short description of existing and proposed uses on the site and adjacent properties. The site is currently developed with two industrial buildings. The one -story Half Dome building located at the southwestern part of the project site (4311 Jamboree Road), is approximately 126,675 square feet in size. The Tower Jazz facility located at 4321 Jamboree Road is a three -story building approximately 311,452 square feet in size. The balance of the site is developed with landscaped areas and surface parking lots. Vehicular access to the project site is via two driveways from Jamboree Road and one driveway from Birch Street. The proposed project would develop up to 1,244 residential units and 11,500 square feet of retail on a 25.05 acre site. Residential product types would be for sale and rent, with a mix of townhomes, and mid- and high -rise condominiums. Of the 1,224 housing units, 185 units would be set aside for affordable housing. Proposed buildings would Proposed Max Bldg Max Bldg. FAA ASNNo. Ground Elev. Height Elev. 2012 -AWP -2239 58 150 208 2012 -AWP -2240 59 150 209 2012 -AWP -2246 59 150 209 Elevations per NAVD 88 These three points identified as exceeding the 206 -foot elevation will be reduced such that the maximum building elevations (and all building appurtenances) will all be below the height restrictions (Elev. 206 NAVD 88) adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). Furthermore, the following building height restrictions will be included in the Planned Community Development Plan which is the zoning document for the project. All development must be constructed in conformance with the height restrictions set forth by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and the height restrictions set forth by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport and the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). It should be noted that the current aviation easement for JWA as adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors restricts the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 206 feet (NAVD 88)." An 11x17 version of Attachment C. See attachment Short description of existing and proposed uses on the site and adjacent properties. The site is currently developed with two industrial buildings. The one -story Half Dome building located at the southwestern part of the project site (4311 Jamboree Road), is approximately 126,675 square feet in size. The Tower Jazz facility located at 4321 Jamboree Road is a three -story building approximately 311,452 square feet in size. The balance of the site is developed with landscaped areas and surface parking lots. Vehicular access to the project site is via two driveways from Jamboree Road and one driveway from Birch Street. The proposed project would develop up to 1,244 residential units and 11,500 square feet of retail on a 25.05 acre site. Residential product types would be for sale and rent, with a mix of townhomes, and mid- and high -rise condominiums. Of the 1,224 housing units, 185 units would be set aside for affordable housing. Proposed buildings would Kari A. Rigoni October 5, 2012 Page 3 of 3 range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height; with several residential towers up to 150 feet high. The project would be developed in two separate phases. The site is surrounded to the north, west, and south by commercial /office uses within the Koll Center Newport office park. To the north are clusters of office buildings ranging from one to fifteen stories in height, and three restaurants. To the west are office buildings ranging from one to four stories high, landscaped areas, and two man -made lakes. To the south are two 20 -story office buildings, surface parking, and a Fast -food restaurant. Jamboree Road forms the eastern boundary of the project site, and beyond Jamboree Road is undeveloped open space within the North Campus of the University of California, Irvine. The San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve is 875 feet southeast of Jamboree Road. Please let me know if you need additional information. I can be reached by calling (949) 644 -3208 or via e-mail at rung @newportbeachca.gov. Again, thank you so much for the assistance you and Lea have provided. Attachments 01 sFa o� < eF', Attachment N ®o A Planned Community Development Plan O3 UPTOWN NEWPORT Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Applicant: Uptown Newport LP c/o Shopoff Management Inc. 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700, Irvine, CA 92614 949.417.1396 www.shopofi'.com Applicant Contact: Brian Rupp 949.231.5068 (Direct) brupp @shopoff.com Prepared By: MVE & Partners, Inc. Architecture + Planning + Interiors 1900 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, California 92614 -7318 949.809.3388 www.mve-architects.com Valley Crest Landscape Architecture 3242 Halladay, Suite 203, Santa Ana, CA 92705 714.546.7975 www.valleycrest.com 1. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan ......1 1.1 introduction., .................. . . ........................ . ........... . ........... 1 1.2 Airport Area Context ...... _. ............... ........ _ ........................ 2 1.3 Immediate Context ................................ _ ... ....................... 3 1APurpose ...................................................... ..............................4 15 Relationship to Municipal Code ...... ..............................4 1.6 Relationship to Airport Area Conceptual Landsc aping ..................... ........................ ....................... DevelopmentPlan .......... .. ... __ ............. _ ...... ...................... 4 1.7 Relationship to the Integrated Conceptual _ ....... 17 Development Plan ... ....... .......................................... .... ...... 4 2. Land Use Development Regulations ..........................6 2.1 Land Use .................... ....................... _ ......... _ ......................... 6 2.2 Development Program _ ...... ............................... __....._...7 2.3 Transfer of Development Rights ..... .......................... .... 7 3. Site Development Standards .... ............................... 11 3.1 Permitted Height of Structures ....... .............................11 3.2 Building Setback Requirements ............................ __32 3.3 Parking Requiremonts ......... _ ...................... _. ................. 17 3.4 Landsc aping ..................... ........................ ....................... _ ... 17 3.5 Lighting . .................................. ......................... ......... _ ....... 17 3.6 Residential Park, On -Site Recreation & Open Space .............. ........... _ .......................................... 17 3.7 Perimeter Walls and Fences...__ .................. .......__...... 18 3.8 Infrastructure ............. .............. ........................................ _18 01 � Land Uses, Develooment Standards 9, Procedures TABLE OF CONTENTS 4. Planned Community Development Plan Implementation ........ ............................... 4.1 Site Development Review ................. _.. 5. 19 .19 21 1. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan 1.1_INTRODUCTION Uptown Newport Planner) Community Development Plan, . hereinafter referred to as "Uptown Newport PC' is located within the Citys Airport Area. Local access to the 25 -acre project site Is provided by Jamboree Road to the southeast, Birch Street to the northwest. Von Karman Avenue to northeast, and MacArthur Boulevard to the southwest. The site is immediately bounded by Jamboree Road to the southeast, a fast food restaurant to the northeast. and by existing office development within the Kolf Center to the northwest and southwest. Uptown Newport is in close proximity to numerous regional transportation corridors and amenities. Uptown Newport is located near regional open space including Upper Newport Bay, Mason Regional' Park in Irvine and the San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh, It is also located near the University of California - Irvine (UC4 with immediate adjacency to the UCI North Campus opposite the Sub)ect Property on Jamboree Road. Uptown Newport has convenient access to the 405, 73 and 55 Freeways via MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road as shown on Figure 1 -1, The Uptown Newport site was originally developed as part of the KDII Center, and has been used for manufacturing telecommunications equipment and computer chips since the 1970'5 The Ctys General Plan calls for infill development and redevelopment of the Airport Business Area. The General Plan allows for up to 2,200 residential unit} to be developed in the Airport Business Area. In September of ?0 10. the City approved the Integrated Conceptual Development Plan (ICDP), which provides framework for residential development on both the Koll and Conexant properties within the Airport Business Area. The ICDP allocated 1,244 residential units and up to 11,500 Uprown Newport Planned Cninmunny Development Plan 9 l 12 -Aa Lur IIIN �' G'grn4 kr. - Fq'• - L IiIrt an • L� WiAxAtlbm OW R' }onto_ v � p ,• rrnva• SV nPUr „r A..0 r .tip > c aeha k 73 3 m it O ' Aaams Avg . {a F.4 Costa Mesa x � C L+ Viuer,a Unlvvnny Dr JMVVra,ym y,;, Q� .O +l If1¢GMMyorrtN \a + e ean,Plla DI Lhwci �3 0 I m rvw }, T ^_rite+ i� uao..,avl ��l Y f� ,^ it Land Uses. Development Standard. & Procedures rmlmAlenC Cor >f Ar Srnuon /r Irvine Qa Unlvvnny Dr JMVVra,ym y,;, Q� .O +l If1¢GMMyorrtN \a + e ean,Plla DI Lhwci �3 0 T ^_rite+ A11 .n .0 ✓� lxinorr "TOWN NEWPORT COMMUNRT DEVELOPMENT PLANAREA .`4Q' Unlvvnny Dr JMVVra,ym y,;, Q� .O +l If1¢GMMyorrtN 7O P ean,Plla DI Lhwci �3 0 each s Esc ano-:o t •\o Figure 1 -1: Regional Location Map Bongo Canon 01 SCAI-B t'- 6,0D0' D 3.000' G.UDD' snx. G� I Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedums 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN Figure 1 -2:The Airport Area and the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Area Uptown Newport Planned lommumty Development Plan 4, IS. 17. square feet of retail to be developed on the Uptown Newport property and up to 260 residential units to be developed on the Kell property. The Uptown Newport PC provides the regulatory framework for redevelopment of the 25 -acre property into a high- density mixed use residential project. Up to 1.244 residential units. 11,500 square feet of retail, and 2 acres of park space are planned as part of the project. :,2_l IRQORT AREA CONTEXT Uptown Newport is located within the Conceptual Development Plan Area of the City's Airport Area, as defined by the City's General Plan. The Airport Area encompasses approximately 360 acres of land abut ling and southeast of the John Wayne Airport UWA), and is bound by Jamboree Road, Campus Drive. and Bristol Street. The ICDP area includes a portion of the 75 -acre Kell property, and the 25 -acre Uptown Newport Property. These two properties are part of the larger Kell renter, referred to above. The Kell Center was developed as a master planned campus office park, governed by the Planned Community Development Standards for Kell Center Newport (PC-15 - Koll Centel adopted by the City of Newport Beach on August 14. 1972 (Ordinance No. 1449)-The Koll Center Planned Community emends northeast from the intersection Figure t.3: Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (Source- C rty of Newport Beach General Plan) DO I and Unit peveloument Standards A Pmcedue 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN Figure 1 -4: Aerial photo of the future Uptown (Newport project site. Uptown Newpon Pin n nC'l" gn I nunity D(vetopmenr Plan <) 16 1? of MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road to Campus Drive. Refer to Figure 1-2 for the location of the project site within the City of Newport Beach and in the context of the Airport Area. 1.3 IMMEDIATE CONTEXT As Illustrated in Figure 1 -4, the subject property consists of two adjoined rectangular portions. The larger rectangular portion, which accounts for approximately 18 acres of the property. fronts Jamboree Road. This portion of the subject property Is developed with two buildings aligned along the northwester n perimeter of the Site in a northeast to southwest direction to the rear of the site. The northernmost building located at 4321 Jamboree is approximately 25 feet in height with a three-story addition that is. approximately 56 feet high. The budding Is approximately 311,452 square feet in size, and includes both industrial and supporting office uses, The southernmost building located at 4311.Jamboree is 25 feet in height and approximately 116.675 square feet in size. and includes office uses. lab spare, a data center, and cafe uses. Parking for both buildings is provided in surface parking lots located adjacent to the identified buildings. The smaller rectangular portion of the site. approximately 7 acres in size, is set back to the northwest from Jamboree Road by approximately 200 feet, and is currently used for parking at 4,321 Jamboree Road. Local access to the subject property is currently provided by two driveways along Jamboree Road, one of •which . is signalized. and one driveway along Birch Street. 'don Karnlan Avenue to the northwest and MacArthur Boulevard to the west do not provide direct vehicular access to the Subject Property due to existing development within Koll Center. An access drive easement is located at the western -mosr corner of the site and provides access through the Kell Center to Von :4arman Avenue from the Uptown Newport property. The site is immediately bounded by Jamboree Road to the southeast, fast food restaurants to the northeast, and by existing office . development within the Koll Center to the northwest and southwest. Refer to Figure 1 -4 for an illustration of the project site's orientation to nearby streets and surrounding land uses. 9 3. Site Development Standards 3.1PERMITTED HE IGHT OF STRUCTURES The maximum height for most buildings shall be 75 feet. Exceptions Include towers (above 7S feet) where the maximum building height may reach t50 feet, and a portion of the site where the maximum height shall be 55 feet (see Figure 3 -21. Tower portions of buildings shall be set back an additional 15' beyond the required setback from property line. Towers may be wholly or partially surrounded with low- and mid - rise structures. The distance between the tower portions of buildings above 75 feet in height shall be a minimum of 75 feet. All building heights are measured at Finished Grade as shown on grading plan or final subdivision map. All development must be constructed In conformance with the height restrictions set forth by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations IMF) Part 77, and Calrrans Division of Aeronautics. and the height restrictions set forth by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (ALLUPI for John V✓ayne Airport and the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUCI. It should be noted that the current aviation easement for JWA as adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors restricts the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 206 feet (NAND 86). The maximum Floor Plate of any tower portion of a building shall not exceed 25,000 square feet, and there shall be no more than 2 towers located in any of the designated "tower zones" Architectural Features are permitted and may exceed the maximum building height up to 20 feet provided that the maximum height of the architectural features do not exceed 206 feet (NAVD 88). Such features must be an extension or compliment of the architectural style of the building in terms of materials, design and color Upiti•,it Nuwpart Planned i'oimnunnyDevelopment Plan 9 1617. TOWER, !'M MAX. :S r.Ax.1 1 I ; LOW' AND MID RISE BASE Hwitl.nq Selbrk � Figure 3 -1 Building /Structure Height Limits Figure 3 -2 Building Height Limit Plan Note: All plans are for Illustrative purposes only I and Uses. Develoament Standard-, R ProcMures Legend- SS Hn.Ihl:Im11 O 15 Hmgm bm.t OISO HngF.t 4mrt i e °e M R .fl MAX " - - -- - - - -- ROOFTOP APPURTENANCE OR hFCFIIi EC'.URAL FEAr URE 15UBJECTTD FAA REu`ULATIONSI TOWER, !'M MAX. :S r.Ax.1 1 I ; LOW' AND MID RISE BASE Hwitl.nq Selbrk � Figure 3 -1 Building /Structure Height Limits Figure 3 -2 Building Height Limit Plan Note: All plans are for Illustrative purposes only I and Uses. Develoament Standard-, R ProcMures Legend- SS Hn.Ihl:Im11 O 15 Hmgm bm.t OISO HngF.t 4mrt i e °e M :FD Attachment No. CC 5 October 18, 2012 ALUC Minutes 71- 72 (00 Airway Avenue 252 -5170 Fax(949)252 -6012 tki-I N UTES O r R.ECULAR ANWE TING October 18, 2012 PLACE: John Wayne Airport Administration Building Airport Commission Hearing Room 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92626 TINLE: Regular Meeting called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Bresnahan CONHNIfISSIONERS PRESENT: Gerald Bresnahan, Rod Propst, Leslie Daigle, Tom O'Malley, and Jim Righeimer Commissioners Absent: Herman Bcvcrburg, Jon Dumitru Alternate Commissioners Present:: Stephen Beverburg STAFF PRESENT: Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Office]' Lea Chown, Staff Planner Sue Tanner, Recording Secretary T. Mat Miller, County Counsel PLEDGE: Vice- Chairman Rod Propst led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The motion to approve the July 19, 2012 minutes was made by Commissioner Leslie Daigle, seconded by Commissioner Tom O'Malley, and was approved unanimously. Vice - Chairman Rod Propst abstained. 73 ALUC Minutes Page 2 October 18, 2012 NEMI BUSINESS: 1. City of Newport Beach Request for Consistencv Review of Uptown Newpm•t Project: Staff Planner Lea Chown presented the agenda item to the Commissioners. The City of Newport Beach is requesting Consistency review of the Uptown Newport Project which consists of mixed uses with 1,244 residential units, 11,500 square feet of retail space, and approximately two acres of park space. Residential product types would be for sale -and rent with a mix of town homes, mid- and high -rise condominiums, and affordable housing. Proposed buildings would range from 30 feet to 75 feet in height; with residential towers up to 150 feet high. The proposed project requires a Zone Change and the adoption of a Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) by the City ofNewport Beach to accommodate the proposed mixed -use residential development. The proposed project site is located within the 60 CNEL noise contour for JWA. Residential and commercial uses are considered normally consistent within the 60 CNEL noise coutour. The city is requiring that the interior CNEL does not exceed 45 dB. In addition, the applicant and or future residential developers will be required to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft overflight and noise. The proposed project is located within airport Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) for JWA, which includes aircraft within a regular traffic pattern and pattern entry routes. As stated in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, within Safety Zone 6 there is generally low likelihood of accident occurrence at most airports. Risk concern primarily is with uses such as large outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities. The proposed mixed uses for the Uptown Newport Project would be compatible within this zone, although noise and overflight should be considered and disclosed to residents. Regarding height restrictions, the ALUC Chairman requested a Flight hack map to show the flights over the project area which was distributed at the meeting. The proposed project area is within the Notification Area for JWA and the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Obstruction huaginary Surfaces for JWA. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for JWA above the project area is 206 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). Uptown Newport allows fora maximum height of 150 feet from finished grade for all structMes. The ground elevation of the project site ranges fiom approximately 55 to 59 feet. The allowed maximum building height could penetrate the obstruction imaginary surface for JWA by up to 3 feet. An FAA aeronautical study was completed for the proposed project and a determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation was issued. However, the FAA did find that 3 of I I of the submitted points that represent the building heights are identified as obstacles under the obstruction standards of Title 14 CFR Part 77; Section 77.19 by between I to 3 feet, a height penetrating the Horizontal Surface for JWA. The three points identified are associated with proposed Tower Zone I. The city stales in their submittal package that these three points identified as exceeding the 206 -foot elevation will be reduced such that the maximum building elevations (and all building appurtenances) will all be below the horizontal imaginary obstruction surface for JWA. in addition, the following building height restrictions language was proposed for inclusion in the PCDP for the project: 74 ALUC Minutes Page 3 October 13, 2012 "All development must 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 the height restrictions set forth by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport and the Airport Land use Commission (ALUC). Tt should be noted that the current avigation easement for JWA as adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors restricts the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 206 feel (NAVD 33), including all rooftop appurtenances." It was also recommended that Figure 3 -2 of ,the PCDP include a note clarifying that the Tower Zone I height limit is 150 feet, but cannot exceed 206 feet AMSL. Based upon staffs review, the proposed PCDP including the city's proposed additional lauguage restricting building heights and rooftop appurtenances to below 206 feet AMSL, would be Consistent with the Commission's.JYfA AELUP. Additional conditions were recommended for inclusion in the Uptown Newport PCDP Land Uses; Development Standards and Procedures document as follows: "Development within Uptown Newport shall be required to comply with the_1611mving conditions related to the Ahpovl Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) forJohin MTcayne Aiport: J) No buildings, including rooftop appurteminces or architectin-al feotures within the Uptown Newport Planned Community Development Plan shad! penetrate the FAA Feclercal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 imtaginaq obstruction smfnce for John MVayne Airport. 2) Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (Form 7460 -1) for any consn action cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level. 3) Neighborhood parks ivithin Uptown Newport shall have posted a nodfcation to users regarding proximi1)r to.John Micaryne Airport and related aircraft overllight curd noise. 4) For Uptown Newport, the residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CARL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB. 5) Appropriate written notllicationsshall be provided to all initial and subsequent buyers, lessees, and renters within Uptown Newport notifying then that the area is in the vicinih, of John MMprue Airport rand cis a result residents and occupants of buildings may experience inconvenience, annoyance or discomfort a risingfi•orm the noise resulting from aircraft operating art the airport." Discussion among the Commissioners, City staff and the applicant ensued and Chairman Bresnahan explained why he asked for a flight track map. The map shows flights at elevation 0 -500 ft. in red and 500 -1000 ft. in blue. He pointed out that a substantial amount of red shows over the project area and indicated that this is an extremely sensitive area. Commissioner Propst noted that there would be 1,244 units in a tall building of 150 ft. and it would be under a busy traffic pattern, which is the worst place for residential uses. Commissioner Propst made a motion to find the project Tneonsistent with the J1`VA AELUP, based upon Section 2.1.3 of the AELUP. Commissioner O'Malley seconded the motion. 7-5 ALUC Minutes Page 4 October 18, 2012 Additional input from the project proponent indicated that the City of Newport Beach General Plan was found consistent by ALUC and it included residential uses in this area. The Commission indicated that this area directly under the general aviation Flight path is not a good place for residential and noted that if buildings this tall were built, there would eventually be a "wall oi'buildings" that a pilot would need to navigate through. There was additional discussion regarding continuing the project, resubmitting the project and the ALUC overrule process. It was noted by the Commission that an overrule of the Commission would result in liability being shifted to the City of Newport Beach. The vote was called for and the Commission voted four (4) to one (I ) in favor of Inconsistency. Commissioner Righeimer recusetl himself and did not vote. 2. Administrative Status Report: Executive Officer Rigoni called the Commission's attention to the various letters of correspondence and 7WA statistics. 3. Proceedings with Consistent Agencies: Nothing new to report. 4. Proceedings with inconsistent Agencies: Nothing new to report. Commissioner Stephen Beverburg asked when the Inconsistent Agencies would become Consistent. Executive Officer Kari Rigoni advised that staff is currently working on updating the AELUPs and would work with the cities involved during that time. 5. items of Interest to the Commissioners: Nothing new to report. 6. Items of Interest to the Public: No one from the public addressed the Commission. ADJOURNIMENT: There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kari A. Rigoni Executive Officer 70 Attachment No. CC 6 Correspondence Received 77 72 EM REAL ESTATE Merage Investment Group December 10, 2012 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 Via Facsimile (949) 644 -3229 Re: Uptown Newport (the "Project ") Dear Ms. Ung: MIG Real Estate ( "MIG "), as the sole member of 4350 Von Karman, LLC, is the owner of the property with an address at 4350 Von Karman Avenue, Newport Beach, California (the "Property "), which Property is part of Koll Center Newport ( "KCN "). This letter is to express strong opposition to the referenced Project, specifically the Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") prepared in conjunction with such Project, and to voice our agreement with the Airport Land Use Commission's determination of inconsistency between the Project and the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. The concerns that we raised in our previous letter dated October 24th, 2012 still stand: namely, that the EIR focuses its concern on the approximate new 1,200 plus residential tenants and does not address the true impact on the surrounding commercial and retail use in the impacted area. At length, the EIR fails to appropriately address the following: (a) The impact of the additional 8,000+ trips approximated to be added from the project. (b) The use of outdated traffic study data in the study. (c) Traffic burden on surrounding parking to meet retail /restaurant minimum parking counts (d) Traffic during construction (a period that could easily be a period of five (5) years) along Jamboree Road as an arterial corridor. (e) Effect on surrounding workplaces, employees and companies located in the John Wayne Airport area. (f) Project dependency on the KOLL development that is very unlikely to occur. (g) Inconsistency with the CC &R's for KCN that owners relied upon to govern the common areas at KCN. (h) Effect of shade /shadow on surrounding one -story office buildings from 150 foot planned structures that is significant. (i) The impact of additional pedestrian traffic in a commercial office setting (within KCN). 0) Alternative options for the Project's ingress and egress (which will create a major problem for adjacent owners). (k) KCN was neither designed nor meant to support this type of project. MIG believes these enumerated concerns, and others, have not been adequately reviewed. Affiliate of MIG Capital 4350 Von Karman 4we.4th Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Main: 949.474.5800 www.migcap.rW EM REAL ESTATE Merage Investment Group Thank you for your consideration. Very Truly Yours, MIG Real Estate, LLC 4� IZevin Stiles Director of Asset Management Affiliate of MIG Capital 4350 Yon Karman Ave, 4th Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Main: 949.474.5800 www.migca` C: -1 JOHN S. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5100 BIRCH STREET, NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 [949] 8 33-197 2 FAX [949] 851 -2055 December 11, 2012 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Re: Airport Land Use Commission Uptown Newport Project Newport Beach, California Dear Ms. Ung: I am submitting these comments as President of Courthouse Plaza Association. This association includes 5100, 5120, 5140 and 5160 Birch Street. On behalf of the owners of these buildings we wish to express our opposition and objection to the City Council voting to override the determination of the Airport Land Use Commission regarding the proposed Uptown Newport project. The Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the proposed Uptown Newport project is inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan. The applicant should be required to alter their project so that it is consistent with the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan. We request that the City Council vote against the resolution overriding the determination of the Airport Land Use Commission. Sincerely, JOHN S. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, INC. John S. Adams on 11/08/2012 3:47PM FAX 8488501181 HAWKINS LAW OFFICES LAW OFFICES OF ROI3EItTi C. ; -'WKIM r - r December 10, 2012 Via Facsimile Nancy Gardner, Mayor Members of the City Council City of Newport peach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, California 92663 9 @j0002/0003 "RECEIAD AFTER A ENDA PRI ?:TED:° l ly& l J �JV[ar McCn� 12- 11.20)2 Re: December .11, 2012 Agenda Item No. 3: Correction regarding Public Utilities Code section 21678 Liability Shifting Provisions Dear Mayor Gardner and Members of the City Council: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the captioned agenda item. As you know, this firm represents individuals and groups including those interested in John Wayne Airport and land use issues. The Staff Report for this item contains an error regarding City liability if and when the City overrides the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's determination that the Uptown Newport Project is inconsistent with the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). Public Utilities Code section 21678 provides: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that's 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." Emphasis supplied. In,California Aviation Council v. City of Ceres (1992) 9 Cal. App. 4th 1384,1393, the Court regarded Section 21678 as a liability shifting provision: City and City Council argue that the liability shifting of section 21678 when the agency overrides an ALUC finding of inconsistency (see also § 21679, subd, (e)) is dispositive on the question of whether a legislative act is carried out by the override. This argument fails to shed any light on the question. Emphasis supplied. That is, Section 21678 shifts the liability for damages shifts from the airport operator, i.e. the County of Orange, to the City of Newport Beach. No developer or development agreement can possibly provide the security for such liability. 14 Corporate Plaza, Suite 120 Newport Beach, California 92660 (949) 650.5550 F= (949) 650.1181 22 11/08/2012 3:46PM FAX 9496501181 HAWKINS LAW OFFICES la0003/0003 Nancy Gardner, Mayor • 2 • Deccmbcr 10, 2011 Staff s recommendation to override the ALUC decision is wrong and based upon lack of understanding of the Public Utilities Code. I urge you to reject this recommendation and accept ALUC's finding of inconsistency. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. RC14/kw cc: Leilani Brown, City Clerk Sincerely, 14 Corporate Plaza, Suite 120 Newpott Beach, California 92660 (949) 650.5550 Fax: (949) 6.50.1181 es Comments on December 11, 2012 City Council Agenda Items Comments by: Jim Mosher ( jimmosheravahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, NB 92660 (949- 548 -6229) REGULAR MEETING — 6:30 p.m. General Comment Considering that the Council is not planning to meet again until January, the small number of items on the agenda, including the absence of draft minutes from prior regular and special meetings, makes one wonder if the Council is doing its job of diligently overseeing the business being done on behalf of the people they represent. Item 1. Donation of Playground Equipment for a Tot Lot by the Balboa Peninsula Point Association (BPPA) I have a number of problems with this item, which appears to consist of an Encroachment Agreement (pages 8 -16 of the staff report) and a separate Maintenance /Repair Reimbursement Agreement (pages 17 -27 of the staff report) which includes a Certificate of Acceptance (page 25), the signing of which by the City Manager will, per Condition 6 on page 10 of the staff report, terminate the first Agreement. It is unclear why this proposal has not been reviewed by the City's Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission (PB &R). In addition to waiving Council Policies L -6 and B -17, as indicated in the staff report, this item seems to require waiving City Charter Section 709 (something I don't think the Council has the power to do). That Section names PB &R as the Council's advisory body `5n all matters pertaining to parks, beaches, recreation, parkways and street trees." This matter would certainly seem to fall in that range making it hard to see how the Council can proceed on advice from persons other than the required advisory body. Some specific items of concern referenced to the staff report page numbers on which they appear: • On page 2, under "Funding Requirements" it would seem helpful to see a dollar estimate of the amounts involved. The guess lower on the page that it will cost only $35 per month to make, among other things, 6 clean -up visits a week (at a cost of less than $1.50 per visit) seems unrealistically low. • On page 4, it is not clear the "Noticing" is compliant with established Council policy. If PB &R were to consider a proposal to install new recreational equipment within 100 feet of residences, or with a potential to increase noise and traffic, homeowners within 150 feet would have to noticed. In the present case, Council seems to be expected to rely on the assurance in the BPPA letter on page 29 that homeowners are aware of the proposal based on "outreach" in their community newsletter. That leaves me less than confident that all homeowners within 150 feet are aware that the item is on this Council agenda and they have an opportunity to speak to it. M December 11, 2012 Regular Meeting agenda comments by Jim Mosher Page 2 of 4 • The "Exhibits" cited on pages 2 and 3 are actually labeled as "Attachments" to the staff report, not to be confused with the "Exhibits" connected with the two attached Agreements. • It is unclear from the staff report if there is adequate parking available for this new "public" amenity to be enjoyed by families from outside the immediate area. • On page 7, the computer simulation does not show the proposed new 6 -foot wide concrete walkway leading to the gate in the vinyl fence or the 2x3 foot gravemarker- like granite donor tablet in the lawn. • On page 8, according to the federal income tax records on file with the California Attorney General, BPPA is a 501(c)7 organization, not a 501(c)4. • On page 9, in Item 1 there is a typo: "specifications on file in with the City' • On page 10, there is a typo at the start of Item d: "What sheu/el Should City..." • Also on page 10, as previously noted, Condition 6 seems to imply that the entire Encroachment Agreement will be voided when the City Manager signs the Certificate of Acceptance (page 25). In a sense this is reasonable, since BPPA will no longer own most of the improvements in the public right of way, but: • It would seem to inadvertently void a number of what would seem still relevant provisions, including the indemnifications in Condition 5. • Even after the City Manager signs the Certificate of Acceptance, BPPA seems intended to retain ownership and sole responsibility for their "donor plaque" — which will remain in the public lawn in the public right of way and for which they would seem to need some kind of encroachment permit. • The boilerplate Condition 9 on staff report page 11 seems incorrect: the Encroachment Agreement is definitely not the "full and complete understanding' between the parties. The simultaneous signing of the separate Maintenance /Repair Reimbursement Agreement (pages 17 -27) and the eventual completion of the Certificate of Acceptance (page 25) seem essential parts of the overall understanding. • On page 17, the statement in Recital D that "City desires to accept ownership of the Permitted Improvements' [as described in the attached Exhibit "B "] seems partially contradicted by Clause 7 on page 18 (which, as previously noted, says BPAA retains ownership of the donor plaque). • More importantly, whether the Reimbursement Agreement was intended to include retention of the liabilities and other responsibilities that BPPA assumed under the Encroachment Agreement remains unclear. • The minor question of the status of the donor plaque recurs on page 22, where it is called out as part of the Permitted Improvements even though per the body of the Resolution it doesn't seem to be an improvement the City wants to accept. Personally, I would think a standard little brass plaque on the vinyl fence would be adequate. • On page 25, 1 find puzzling the reference to Council Resolution 92 -82, by which the Council purportedly delegated its responsibility to enter into contracts related to real property to the Mayor and City Manager. I do not believe such an action was consistent with the City Charter at that time, which clearly did not regard contracting as a responsibility that could be delegated except under the specific circumstances called out in the Charter. • On page 26, 1 am mystified by the reference to "the existing City contract." I can find no reference in the staff report, or elsewhere in the resolutions, to a contract between the City and BPPA related to the maintenance of the existing parkway. M December 11, 2012 Regular Meeting agenda comments by Jim Mosher Page 3 of 4 On page 27, it seems odd BPPA would be assuming liability for all damage caused anywhere in the right of way by the existing trees. Are they not "City trees" rather than BPPA trees? Council Policy L -6 (pages 31 -35), last revised in 2001, is probably in need of review. To the best of my recollection, the Council forgot, this year, its own Policy D -3, which calls for review of its policies "During the first quarter of each calendar year." Item 3. Uptown Newport Project - Notice of Intent to Override the Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency • This item is a preliminary to the Council voting to override a decision by the John Wayne Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). • Although it is unclear from the staff report, a review of the ALUC's on -line minutes suggests the reason for their finding of inconsistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan was the proposed project's location directly under the general aviation flight path, and their unwillingness to assume liability for approving a high -rise residential development which they felt inappropriate (and unsafe) for the location. • As a non - lawyer I would have to assume that by overriding the well- informed but contrary findings of the ALUC, the City would assume considerable liability in the event of an accident. It is difficult for me to see why that would be in the interest of Newport Beach taxpayers, and I would urge the Council to vote to not override the ALUC determination (or simply let the ALUC decision stand). • Although I appreciate the chicken -or -egg problem, I'm not sure I entirely understand the logic of the rumored action to continue this item until the Newport Beach Planning Commission has made its final recommendations regarding this project. If the Council should decide not to override the ALUC determination, then the project currently being evaluated by the Planning Commission would need to be revised and the Planning Commission is wasting time reviewing something that will not be built. That is, the residential tower heights would have to be lowered enough for the ALUC to be comfortable with them. Item 4. Certification of General Municipal Election Results • Under this item, the on -line agenda has two links to "Staff Report" which, although they appear to point to different web addresses, retrieve the same document, namely a draft of Resolution No. 2012 -122, which includes a 21 -page attachment from the Orange County Registrar of Voters. • 1 believe there is a typo in Section 1 on the first page of the draft resolution: "That the whole number of ballots cast in the precincts except vote -by -mail ballots and previsienal early voting ballots was 21,541." Based on the "Orange County Statement of Votes" provided by the Registrar which give separate "Early Voting Totals," "Vote -by -Mail Totals" and "Grand Totals," it wound appear that provisional ballots (which I believe are cast on the day of the election and counted late, not early) are included in the 21,541. MR December 11, 2012 Regular Meeting agenda comments by Jim Mosher Page 4 of 4 Items 6/7. Election of Mayor/ Mayor Pro Tern • 1 would like to remind the Council that per City Charter Section 404 ( "The Mayor. Mayor Pro Tempore. "), as last considered and approved by voters on November 6, the choice of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tern is normally expected to be reconsidered only at meetings (such as this) at which the election of new Council members is certified. That means these officers would normally be expected to serve until the next election, that is, for a term of two years — as seems to have been the case from the City's incorporation in 1906 (at which time the Mayor was technically "President" of the "Board of Trustees ") through 1997. • As I mentioned at the last Regular Meeting, I am unable to find anything in the Charter or prior custom to explain the recent custom of changing Council officers in non - election years. M 111', 11111 11111;111111, vill 11" ICFINVIK� 21,141 4320 VON KARMAN AVENUE ^ NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (949) 862 -0500 • FAx (949) 862 -0515 December 11, 2012 City Council City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Uptown Newport Project Intent to Overide Dear Council Members: The purpose of this letter is to provide support for the Airport Land Use Commission and for the determination that the proposed Uptown Newport Project is inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan. It is surprising to learn that the City is intending to override its own experts. Our company would like to know what experts the City consulted in concluding that the Airport Land Use Commission was in error in its determination. Moreover, by this letter we are requesting a copy of the documents that you reviewed to make your decision to override the Airport Land Use Commission. Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Meyer Properties INE�� James B. Hasty Senior Vice President cc: G.L. Dillion, Esq. gg