HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2021-296_20220607_Return of Appeal to James Mosher
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
Director’s Determination
To:Planning Division, Community Development Department
From:Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director
Date:April 30, 2021
Re:Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01 Interpreting Accessory
Residential as an Allowed Use within Resort Hotels (PA2021-096)
Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) define “hotel” as an
establishment that provides guest rooms or suites for a fee to transient guests for
sleeping purposes. Access to units is primarily from interior lobbies, courts, or halls.
Related accessory uses may include conference rooms and meeting rooms,
restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities. Guest rooms may or may not contain
kitchen facilities for food preparation. Hotels with kitchen facilities are commonly
known as extended stay hotels. A hotel operates subject to taxation under California
Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7280.
Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) list residential uses as part of the definition of “hotel”. Both Title
20 and Title 21 definitions of “hotel” are out of date and do not reflect current industry
practice. Specifically, the definition of “hotel” has not been updated to designate
residential uses as an accessory use, which has become common practice for
destination resort hotels (mixed-use hotels). While the definition of a hotel does not
prohibit residential uses, a Director’s Determination is necessary to fill the gap
between contemporary practice and the exact wording of Title 20 and Title 21.
Sections 20.12.020 and 21.12.020 (Rules of Interpretation) of the NBMC authorize
the Community Development Director to interpret the meaning of provisions of the
Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan.
Background
Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing)
At the March 9, 2021 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.
2021-18 adding City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of
Housing). Council Policy K-4 recognizes that the City has several major constraints
35
2
on existing lands that severely limit or totally restrict the City’s ability to
accommodate growth to the extent identified in the Sixth Cycle Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (“RHNA”). As a result, new and flexible land use and zoning
regulations and strategies should be developed in order to reasonably and
practically accommodate this ambitious State housing mandate while protecting
the character and maintaining a quality of life that makes Newport Beach a special
place to live, work, and visit.
Council Policy K-4 directs City staff to develop, modify as necessary, and
aggressively implement various strategies and action plans that are designed to
accelerate housing production consistent with the policy, including encouraging
and incentivizing the development of mixed-use hotels. Council Policy K-4’s goals
include interpreting ambiguities in the City of Newport Beach General Plan, Coastal
Land Use Plan, and Titles 20 (Planning and Zoning) and 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan)of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) to
allow hotels, located outside of the Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction, to
convert up to thirty percent (30%) of their approved hotel rooms into residential
units on a one-for-one basis. Such an interpretation would allow for residential
units to be deemed an accessory use to the principal use of a hotel and find that
such residential uses are consistent with the hotel’s underlying General Plan,
Coastal Land Use Plan and municipal code land use and zoning designations.
Applicable Resort Hotels
Mixed-use hotels are an established trend in the hospitality industry that
incorporate hotel-branded residential units as an accessory use located within a
resort hotel complex where residents enjoy access to the full range of services,
facilities, and amenities provided by the hotel operator or brand. These hotel-
residential uses cannot exist without the hotel’s services, facilities, and amenities.
There are currently twenty-two (22) hotels in the City, of which ten (10) hotels qualify
as a resort hotel, a self-contained destination that provides for all travel
accommodation needs in one location, including but not limited to restaurants, bars,
shopping, and recreational facilities (Attachment A). Of the ten (10) resort hotels in
the City, one (1) hotel is located in the coastal zone, but completely outside the
Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction area, and three (3) hotels are located
outside the coastal zone.
Table 1. Applicable Resort Hotel Properties in the City
Map
ID
Hotel Name Location General Plan Local Coastal
Program
Zoning
1 Renaissance
Newport Beach
4500 MacArthur Blvd. Mixed-Use
Horizontal
(MU-H2)
N/A- Outside Coastal
Zone
Koll Center Planned
Community (PC15)
2 Fashion Island
Hotel
690 Newport Center Dr. MU-H3 N/A- Outside Coastal
Zone
North Newport
Center Planned
Community (PC56)
3 Hyatt Regency
John Wayne
Airport
4545 MacArthur Blvd. MU-H2 N/A- Outside Coastal
Zone
Newport Place
Planned Community
(PC11)
4 Newport Beach
Marriot
900 Newport Center Dr. Visitor Serving
Commercial
(CV)
Commercial Visitor-
Serving (CV-B) / Visitor
Serving Commercial
(CV)
Commercial Visitor-
Serving (CV)
36
3
Planning and Zoning (Title 20) Interpretation
Pursuant to Section 20.12.020E (Rules of Interpretation –Unlisted Uses of Land)
of the NBMC, the Director may determine that a proposed land use that is not listed
in Part 2 of this title (Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses, and Zoning District
Standards) may be allowed if the following findings can be made:
Finding:
A. The characteristics of, and activities associated with, the proposed use are
equivalent to those of one or more of the uses listed in the zoning district as
allowable, and will not involve a greater level of activity, population density,
intensity, traffic generation, parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than
the uses listed in the zoning district;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel will be regulated
to ensure the underlying characteristics and activities remain equivalent to
the listed hotel use within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving)
Coastal Zoning District or PC (Planned Community) Zoning District.
2. Approved hotel rooms will be allowed to convert to residential uses on a
one-for-one basis to ensure the accessory residential use does not involve
a greater level of activity, population density, traffic generation, parking,
dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than the other uses listed within the
applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District or PC
(Planned Community) Zoning District.
3. The conversion of hotel rooms to residential uses will be limited to no more
than 30 percent of the total number of approved hotel rooms. This restriction
will further ensure that residential uses remain an accessory use to the hotel
and do not change the primary use of the property from hotel to residential.
4. The traffic generation associated with a residential use is comparable to the
traffic generation for a resort hotel use. According to the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition), a Multi-
Family Housing Mid-Rise (3-10 levels) development (ITE Code 221) would
generate 0.36 and 0.44 average AM and PM weekday peak hour trips per
dwelling unit. A Resort Hotel (ITE Code 330) would generate 0.32 and 0.41
average AM and PM weekday peak hour trips per room. The published ITE
trip rates are generally for stand-alone development (e.g. stand-alone hotel
or multi-family housing buildings); however, the reality is accessory
residential dwelling units would likely have lower rates due to the additional
on-site amenities provided. Therefore, following conversion of a hotel room
to a residential unit, the anticipated traffic generation will be similar or lower.
37
4
5. Pursuant to Council Policy K-3 and in compliance with Senate Bill 743, the
conversion of a resort hotel room to a residential unit is considered to be
less than significant impact on transportation/traffic and no further vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) analysis is required since all trips associated with such
conversion have already been accounted for as approved hotel rooms. As
a result, conversions are expected to fall below the adopted land use
screening threshold of 300 or less daily trips. For ITE Code 330, there is no
listed daily trip rate; however, the City Traffic Phasing Ordinance states that
if there is not an applicable rate, the City Traffic Engineer may, in the
exercise of his/her professional judgement, authorize the use of trip
generation rates in San Diego Association of Government’s (SANDAG)
Traffic Generators or on the basis of actual site counts. The SANDAG daily
trip rate for Resort Hotel is eight daily trips per room. The SANDAG daily
trip rate for Multi-Family Condominium is also eight daily trips per unit.
Therefore, the conversion of a resort hotel room to a residential unit would
result in same or lower daily trips, and below the screening threshold of 300
daily trips requiring VMT analysis.
6. Based on the similar vehicular trips associated with accessory residential
uses, levels of odor, dust, noise, or similar impacts at a hotel property with
accessory residential uses is expected to be similar or less.
7. Mixed-use hotels are a form of accommodation that affords buyers with
access to the full range of services, facilities, and amenities provided by the
hotel.
8. The definition of hotel allows related accessory uses such as conference
rooms and meeting rooms, restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities that
can generate additional parking demand substantially higher than residential
parking rates. The conversion of hotel rooms to residential units would
constitute an amendment to the conditional use permit. In reviewing such
amendments, approval of the conditional use permit would require ensuring
adequate parking is provided to accommodate the residential units through
surplus parking, shared parking, or the adoption of a parking management
plan.
Finding:
B. The proposed use will meet the purpose/intent of the zoning district that is
applied to the location of the use;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District is intended to
provide for areas appropriate for accommodations, goods, and services
intended to primarily serve visitors to the City. Hotels are allowed in the CV
(Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District subject to obtaining a
conditional use permit pursuant to Section 20.20.020 of the NBMC. A hotel
38
5
with an accessory residential use that is limited to no more than 30 percent
of the approved hotel rooms will primarily serve visitors to the City.
2. The resort hotels located within PC11, PC15, and PC56 are located within the
MU-H (Mixed-Use Horizontal) land use category of the General Plan. The
MU-H designations are intended to provide for the development of areas for
a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include general or
neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi-family residential,
visitor-serving and marine-related uses, and/or buildings that vertically
integrate residential with commercial uses. The hotel-branded units are
consistent with the MU-H designations as residential units are clearly
allowed, and a hotel with an accessory residential use that is limited to no
more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms will primarily serve
visitors to the City.
3. Mixed-use hotels are common practice within the hotel industry and provide
visitor serving amenities and services consistent with the CV (Commercial
Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District and PC (Planned Community)
Zoning District.
4. Fact in Support of Finding A.7 is hereby incorporated.
Finding:
C. The proposed use will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District General Plan
land use designation is intended to provide for areas appropriate for
accommodations, goods, and services intended to serve primary visitors to
the City. By limiting residential uses to an accessory use at a hotel property,
the primary purpose of the hotel meets the goals, objectives and policies of
the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan.
2. The MU-H (Mixed-Use Horizontal) designations are intended to provide for
the development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which
may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices,
multi-family residential, visitor-serving and marine-related uses, and/or
buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses. Mixed-
use hotels are consistent with the MU-H designations as residential units
are clearly allowed, and a hotel with an accessory residential use that is
limited to no more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms will primarily
serve visitors to the City.
3. The trend in the hotel industry is to locate limited residential uses at a hotel
property to create resort amenities that can be shared by residents, visitors,
and tourists alike.
39
6
4. This interpretation implements Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of
Residential Choices) by providing new opportunities for the development of
residential units in response to community and regional needs for housing.
5. This interpretation implements Land Use Element Policy LU 3.2 (Growth
and Change) which encourages enhancement of existing neighborhoods,
districts, and corridors, allowing for re-use and infill with uses that are
complementary in type, form, scale, and character. Changes in use and/or
density/intensity should only be considered in those areas that are
economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate the City’s
share of regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
commuting distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that
distinguish Newport Beach as a special place to live for its residents. The
hotel industry has been one of the hardest hit industries due to the COVID-
19 pandemic and for some hotels, a full recovery of the industry is not
anticipated for many years. Mixed-use hotels provide an opportunity to
revitalize older and/or underperforming hotels to maintain their competitive
standing by creating multiple revenue streams that can support
improvements to the property enhancing the visitor experience. Economies
of scale created by shared facilities, amenities, and services add additional
benefit to mixed-use hotel developments. This cross pollination of business
benefits both the hotel and the resident. It may also increase occupancy
rates at the resort by creating increased synergy between uses and social
gathering opportunities, boosting transient occupancy taxes while providing
in-fill housing opportunities to partially assist the City in meeting its RHNA
obligation in highly desirable and built-out areas.
Finding:
D. The proposed use is not listed as allowable in another zoning district;
Fact in Support of finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are not listed as allowable in
another zoning district, Stand-alone residential uses, which are allowable in
another zoning district, would not be permitted under this interpretation.
Finding:
E. The proposed use is not a prohibited or illegal use.
Fact in Support of finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are neither a prohibited or an illegal
use.
40
7
Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (Title 21) Interpretation
Pursuant to NBMC Section 21.12.020(E) (Rules of Interpretation –Unlisted Uses
of Land) of the NBMC, the Director may determine that a proposed land use that
is not listed in Part 2 of this title (Coastal Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses,
and Coastal Zoning District Standards) may be allowed if the following findings can
be made:
Finding:
A. The characteristics of, and activities associated with, the proposed use are
equivalent to those of one or more of the uses listed in the coastal zoning district
as allowable, and will not involve a greater level of activity, population density,
intensity, traffic generation, parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than
the uses listed in the coastal zoning district;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel will be regulated
to ensure the underlying characteristics and activities remain equivalent to
the listed hotel use within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving)
Coastal Zoning District.
2. Approved hotel rooms will be allowed to convert to residential uses on a
one-for-one basis to ensure the accessory residential use does not involve
a greater level of activity, population density, traffic generation, parking,
dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than the other uses listed within the
applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District.
3. The conversion of hotel room to residential units would constitute a major
change in hotel operations requiring a coastal development permit. The
coastal development permit review will require adequate parking be provided
to accommodate the residential units through surplus parking, shared parking,
or the adoption of a parking management plan, and to ensure the protection
of lower-coast visitor accommodations.
4. Facts in Support of Finding A.3 through A.8 are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Finding:
B. The proposed use will meet the purpose/intent of the coastal zoning district that
is applied to the location of the use;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Zoning District is intended to provide
for areas appropriate for accommodations, goods, and services intended to
41
8
primarily serve visitors to the City. A hotel with an accessory residential use
that is limited to no more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms will
primarily serve visitors to the City.
2. Mixed-use hotels are common practice within the hotel industry and provide
visitor serving amenities and services consistent with the CV (Commercial
Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District.
Finding:
C. The proposed use will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of
the Coastal Land Use Plan;
Facts in Support of finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District Coastal Land
Use Plan designation is intended to provide for areas appropriate for
accommodations, goods, and services intended to serve primary visitors to
the City. By limiting residential uses to an accessory use at a hotel property,
the primary purpose of the hotel meets the goals, objectives and policies of
the Coastal Land Use Plan that prioritize visitor-serving commercial
recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal
recreation over other uses.
2. The trend in the hotel industry is to locate limited residential uses at a hotel
property to create resort amenities that can be shared by residents, visitors,
and tourists alike.
3. This interpretation would restrict its applicability to hotel properties located
outside of the appeal areas identified in the California Public Resources
code Section 30603(a) as generally depicted on the Post-LCP Certification
Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map. This applicability restriction ensures
that coastal access and coastal dependent uses are not impacted.
4. Any development would be required to adhere to all LCP goals and policies
including those related to public access and resource protection, and the
protection of lower-cost visitor accommodations.
Finding:
D. The proposed use is not listed as allowable in another coastal zoning district;
and
Fact in Support of finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are not listed as allowable in
another coastal zoning district. Separate or stand-alone residential uses
operating as primary land uses, which are allowable in another coastal
zoning district, would not be permitted under this interpretation.
42
9
Finding:
E. The proposed use is not a prohibited or illegal use.
Fact in Support of finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are neither a prohibited or an illegal
use.
Directors Determination
The Community Development Director of the City of Newport Beach hereby
determines that residential uses are permitted as an accessory use to hotels subject
to the following:
a. This interpretation shall only apply to resort hotels, a self-contained
destination that provides for all travel accommodation needs in one location,
including but not limited to restaurants, bars, shopping, and recreational
facilities. Residents shall enjoy access to the full range of services,
facilities, and amenities provided by the hotel operator or brand.
b. The hotel property relying upon this interpretation shall be located outside the
appeal area identified in California Public Resources Code Section 30603(a)
as generally depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal
Jurisdiction Map.
c. Approved hotel rooms may be converted to residential units but only on a
one-for-one basis.
d. The residential use shall at all times be accessory to the hotel use, and the
residential units shall comprise no more than 30 percent of the approved
hotel rooms.
e. The residential units may be located within a repurposed hotel or in a new
residential structure.
f. A property owner that desires to have an accessory residential use at their
hotel shall process a conditional use permit and coastal development permit
(if applicable). In reviewing said permits, the review authority shall ensure
adequate parking is provided to accommodate the residential units through
surplus parking, shared parking, or the adoption of a parking management
plan.
g. Potential impacts to public access, affordable housing, and the loss of
transient occupancy tax must be mitigated by entering into a Development
Agreement with the City or by some other means deemed appropriate.
43
10
Please note that a call for review or appeal may be filed within 14 days following
the date of this determination.
Attachments:
A –Hotel Map and List
44
11
ATTACHMENT A
Hotel Map and List
45
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
46
COAST HWY W
NEWPORTCOASTDR
NEWP
O
R
T
B
L
V
D
JAMBOREERD
BALBOABLVDE
COA
S
T
H
W
Y
E
SUPE
R
I
O
R
A
V
E
FORDRD
BALBOABLVDW
MACARTHURBLVD
BA
L
B
O
A
B
L
V
D
NEW
P
O
R
T
B
L
V
D
BA
L
B
O
A
B
L
V
D
NEWPORTBLVD
UNIVERSITY DR
JAMB
O
R
E
E
R
D
SANJOAQUINHILLSRD
BISONAVE
BALBOABLVDE
BO NITACANYONDR
EASTBLUFFDR
!3
!2
!1
!4
!12!19
!15
!18
!6
!16
!21
!17
!20
!22
!7
!11
!5
!8
!14
!13
!9
!10
PA2021_096_Hotel_Exhibit_March_2021.mxd
06,9003,450
FeetI
City of Newport Beach
GIS Division
April 23, 2021
Qualifying Resort Hotels
Determination No. DD2021-001 (PA2021-096)
Legend
LCP Appeal Area
Coastal Zone Boundary
City Boundary
Eligible hotels; resort qualities and located outside Coastal Commission Appeal Area
Non-eligible hotels; non-resort or located in Coastal Commission Appeal Area
47
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
48
Tag Name of Establishment Address GP Zoning Coastal land
Use and Zoning
Appeal Area Resort Qualities Eligible for
Interpretation
Non-Appeal Area
Resort Qualities
1 Renaissance Newport Beach 4500 MacArthur Blvd MU-H2 PC-15 (Office Site A) -- -- Yes Yes
2 Fashion Island Hotel 690 Newport Center Drive MU-H3 PC-56 -- -- Yes Yes
3 Hyatt Regency John Wayne Airport 4545 MacArthur Blvd MU-H2 PC11 (Hotel Site 1) -- -- Yes Yes
4 Newport Beach Marriot 900 Newport Center Dr CV CV CV-B/CV No Yes Yes
5 Lido House 3300 Newport Boulevard CV-LV CV-LV CV-LV Bisected Yes No
6 Newport Dunes 1131 Back Bay Drive PR PC48 PR/PC48 Yes No No
7 Balboa Bay Resort 1221 West Coast Highway CV PC45 (Resort) CV-B/PC45 Yes Yes No
8 Newport Beach Marriot Bayview 500 Bayview Circle CV PC32 CV-A/PC-32 Bisected Yes No
9 The Resort at Pelican Hill 22701 Pelican Hill Rd CV PC52 (PA13C-
Tourist Commercial)
PC52 Bisected Yes No
10 Hyatt Regency Newport Beach 1107 Jamboree Rd CV CV CV-B/CV Bisected
Yes No
11 Balboa Inn 105 Main St. CV CV CV-B/CV Yes Yes No
12 Bay Shores Peninsula Hotel 1800 West Balboa Blvd. CV CV CV-A/CV Yes No No
13 Little Inn By The Bay 2627 Newport Blvd. CV CV CV-A/CV Bisected No No
14 Newport Channel Inn 6100 West Coast Highway CV CV CV-A/CV No No No
15 Hotel Solarena 6208 West Coast Highway CV CV CV-A/CV No No No
16 Holiday Inn Express 2300 West Coast Highway CV CV CV-A/CV Bisected.
No No
17 Pine Knot 6302 West Coast Highway CV CV CV-A/CV No No No
18 Marriot’s Newport Coast Villas 23000 Newport Coast Dr CV PC52 (PA13C-
Tourist Commercial)
PC52 Bisected No No
19 Doryman’s Inn 2102 West Ocean Front CV CV CV-B/CV Yes No No
20 Crystal Cove Beach Cottages 35 Crystal Cove OS PC52 (PA17) PC52 (PA17) Yes No No
21 Extended Stay America OC John Wayne Airport 4881 Birch Street CG PC15 (Retail and
Service Site 1)
__ __ No No
22 The Newport Beach Hotel A Four Sisters Inn 2306 W Oceanfront CV CV CV-B/CV Yes No No
49
Attachment 3
1
Harp, Aaron
From:Harp, Aaron
Sent:May 26, 2022 4:54 PM
To:Jim Mosher
Subject:Appeal Application - Newport Center Hotel ,LLC - 900 Newport Center Dr.
HiJim,
SeimonesentmeoveracopyoftheappealyoufiledonWednesdayregardingthe900
NewportCenterDriveProject.Ijustwantedtoconfirmthatyourappealisobjectingtothe
validityofDirector’sDetermination2021Ͳ001,whichallowsfortheconversionofhotelrooms
intoresidentialunitsintheCVZone,andthatyouarecontendingthattheDirector’s
DeterminationviolatestheLCP,ZoningCodeandGeneralPlan.Isthiscorrect?Asyouknow,
theMunicipalCoderequirestheappellanttosetforththebasisfortheappealandIwantto
confirmIunderstandtheissuesthatarebeingappealed.
Letmeknowwhenyouhaveachance.Thanksandhaveagoodweekend.
AaronC.Harp
CityAttorney
CityofNewportBeach
100CivicCenterDrive
NewportBeach,CA,92660
Phone:(949)644Ͳ3131
Fax:(949)644Ͳ3139
Email:aharp@newportbeachca.gov
CONFIDENTIALITYNOTICE:TheinformationinthiseͲmailmessageisintendedforthe
confidentialuseoftheaddresseesonly.TheinformationissubjecttotheattorneyͲclient
privilegeand/ormaybeattorneyworkͲproduct.RecipientsshouldnotfilecopiesofthiseͲmail
withpubliclyaccessiblerecords.Ifyouarenotanaddresseeoranauthorizedagent
responsiblefordeliveringthiseͲmailtoadesignatedaddressee,youhavereceivedthiseͲmail
inerror,andanyfurtherreview,disseminationdistribution,copyingorforwardingofthiseͲ
mailisstrictlyprohibited.Moreover,suchinadvertentdisclosureshallnotcompromiseor
waivetheattorneyͲclientprivilegeastothiscommunication.IfyoureceivedthiseͲmailin
error,pleasenotifyusimmediatelyat(949)644Ͳ3131.Thankyou.
Attachment 4
1
Harp, Aaron
From:Harp, Aaron
Sent:May 28, 2022 5:51 AM
To:Harp, Aaron
Subject:Fwd: Appeal Application - Newport Center Hotel ,LLC - 900 Newport Center Dr.
Attachments:2022May12_PC_Agenda_Item_5_Comments_JimMosher.pdf
SentfrommyiPhone
Beginforwardedmessage:
From:JimMosher<jimmosher@yahoo.com>
Date:May27,2022at1:04:29PMPDT
To:"Harp,Aaron"<aharp@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject:Re:AppealApplicationͲNewportCenterHotel,LLCͲ900NewportCenterDr.
[EXTERNALEMAIL]DONOTCLICKlinksorattachmentsunlessyourecognizethesenderandknowthecontent
issafe.
Aaron,
I sincerely hope you, too, have a happy holiday weekend.
And I apologize for the brevity of my statement of basis on my May 25 appeal form.
After I have a chance to review the existing record more carefully-- and, hopefully, get a
chance to spend some weekend time in my garden -- I will try to prepare and send
you next week a more thoughtful and comprehensive explanation of the issues
about the Ritz Carlton Residences approval that I believe deserve airing before
the City Council.
But as a preliminary matter, I assumed the Planning Division was already well aware of
my multiple concerns about this approval as expressed in the attached written
comments submitted to the Planning Commission in advance of their May 12 hearing,
as well as my additional oral comments at the hearing.
Yes, I contend, as you say, "theDirector’sDeterminationviolatestheLCP,Zoning
CodeandGeneralPlan,"butIbelievemoreoverthatttheCitylacksauthorityto
proceedwithaprojectapprovalonitsbasis.
Andthatismyprimaryconcernatthemoment.
ButIalsobelievetheCouncilmaywishtoreconsiderthePC'sactioninlightofthe
May24,2022,letterfromCoastalCommissionstafftothemwhichofferstoassist
2
theCityinpursuingaproperentitlement,aswaspreviouslydoneforthevery
similarSantaBarbaraCondominiums(now"Meridian")projectatthesame
address.
AllowingentitlementthroughtthepresentextraͲlegalprocess,andignoring
existingpreͲcertificationpermits(ofavarietywhichtheCityappearstohave
acknowledgedcontinuetohaveforceinthecaseoftheSuperiorAvenueBridge
and,Ibelieve,others)will,accordingtotheirletter,likelyexposetheapplicantto
aCCCenforcementactionblockingconstruction,whichwouldseemanoutcome
allpartieswouldwishtoavoid.
ͲͲJimMosher
On Thursday, May 26, 2022, 04:53:47 PM PDT, Harp, Aaron <aharp@newportbeachca.gov> wrote:
HiJim,
SeimonesentmeoveracopyoftheappealyoufiledonWednesdayregardingthe
900NewportCenterDriveProject.Ijustwantedtoconfirmthatyourappealis
objectingtothevalidityofDirector’sDetermination2021Ͳ001,whichallowsfor
theconversionofhotelroomsintoresidentialunitsintheCVZone,andthatyou
arecontendingthattheDirector’sDeterminationviolatestheLCP,ZoningCode
andGeneralPlan.Isthiscorrect?Asyouknow,theMunicipalCoderequiresthe
appellanttosetforththebasisfortheappealandIwanttoconfirmIunderstand
theissuesthatarebeingappealed.
Letmeknowwhenyouhaveachance.Thanksandhaveagoodweekend.
AaronC.Harp
CityAttorney
CityofNewportBeach
100CivicCenterDrive
NewportBeach,CA,92660
Phone:(949)644Ͳ3131
Fax:(949)644Ͳ3139
Email:aharp@newportbeachca.gov
CONFIDENTIALITYNOTICE:TheinformationinthiseͲmailmessageisintendedfor
theconfidentialuseoftheaddresseesonly.Theinformationissubjecttothe
attorneyͲclientprivilegeand/ormaybeattorneyworkͲproduct.Recipientsshould
notfilecopiesofthiseͲmailwithpubliclyaccessiblerecords.Ifyouarenotan
addresseeoranauthorizedagentresponsiblefordeliveringthiseͲmailtoa
designatedaddressee,youhavereceivedthiseͲmailinerror,andanyfurther
review,disseminationdistribution,copyingorforwardingofthiseͲmailisstrictly
prohibited.Moreover,suchinadvertentdisclosureshallnotcompromiseorwaive
3
theattorneyͲclientprivilegeastothiscommunication.IfyoureceivedthiseͲmail
inerror,pleasenotifyusimmediatelyat(949)644Ͳ3131.Thankyou.
Attachment 5
May 12, 2022, Planning Commission Item 5 Comments
These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229).
Item No. 5. RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296)
x It seems very unusual for a proposal of this scope and complexity to come forward for
approval at a single hearing, with no prior public discussion at as much as a study
session.
x It seems at least as unusual for the Planning Commission to be the final of approver of
staff-negotiated monetary exactions from an applicant, such as those in Condition of
Approval 7 (handwritten page 57). Normally, those are part of a development
agreement, and the City Council has the final word on them.
o Did the City Council designate someone to review the amounts and purposes?
o Has the full Council approved them?
o Will those for specific purposes be put in restricted funds?
o Will they be subject to California’s Mitigation Fee Act, such that they must be
refunded if not used for the stated purpose in a certain time?
o Will this new housing be subject to park in lieu fees, as well?
If so, where is that mentioned in the approval?
If not, why not?
x The purported Director’s Determination notwithstanding, I do not believe this proposal is
consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning and Local Coastal Program, or, by
implication, exempt from Greenlight (Charter Section 423) analysis and vote.
o The City’s voters clearly never contemplated nor approved such a land use at
this site, nor has the Coastal Commission ever certified it as consistent with the
Coastal Act.
o Indeed, to the contrary, as recently as 2009, the Coastal Commission considered
the City’s request to include “condo-hotels” as an allowed use at this and other
CV-designated sites in the City’s Coastal Zone, and quite explicitly rejected it
(see their Item Th18d-2-2009).
o I do not believe the Community Development Director or the City Council is free
to substitute their judgement.
o What is the “statute of limitations” that the staff report claims to have “run”
(handwritten page 12)?
x There is a clear and proper path for approving this project, which involves first changing
the land use designation in the General Plan (with voter approval, if required) and
simultaneously seeking Coastal Commission certification of corresponding changes to
our Coastal Land Use Plan. After which the zoning can be implemented and then the
application considered.
May 12, 2022, PC agenda Item 5 comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2
o The City followed those procedures when faced with a very similar proposal for a
smaller residential project (now called “Meridian”) on this same hotel’s property
(see, for example, the CCC’s Item W15e-9-2007).
o Why is the City ignoring those procedures now?
x As to comments on some random details of what I believe to be a wholly improper staff
recommendation:
o Am I to believe “The development footprint of the proposed building and the
subterranean parking garage are approximately 25,023 square feet and 44,860
square feet, respectively” (handwritten page 7)?
Is the 22-story building above ground really smaller than the 4 levels of
parking below?
Are the proposed 159 luxury condos really less than 200 square feet
each?
o Should I believe anything else about this?
o Should I believe handwritten page 141 (found with a PDF text search), which
says “The proposed 22-story tower would contain 421,973 gross square feet of
space, excluding 5 levels of underground parking. The up to 159 residences
would be located on floors 2 through 22, and contain a total of 341,766 square
feet of saleable residential space.”
Isn’t that a heck of a lot more development than voters would have
expected when they approved hotel rooms in the 2006 General Plan at an
estimated 1,000 sf of development per room?
Isn’t this a lot more than the 40,000 sf of new commercial development
that, if added to the General Plan, would trigger a Greenlight vote?
Of the 100 new residences that would do so?
How much floor area do the remaining hotel rooms occupy?
If these residences are thought of as “accessories” to the hotel rooms, will
the “accessories” now be larger than the rooms?
And by what stretch of the imagination is a private residence inaccessible
to the hotel guest an “accessory” to their room?
It appears to me they are an accessory to someone’s business model, not
to the hotel.
o Why is there no rendering (or even schematic) of what the proposed building
would look like in the printed agenda packet?
o Why does handwritten page 55 suggest there is no path for appeal of the CDP
(to be granted under Title 21) or the tract map (to be granted under Title 19), but
only one for Title 20 issues?
Attachment 6
RESOLUTION NO. PC2021-016
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL
AND UPHOLDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR’S DETERMINATION NO. DD2021-001, AND
ASSOCIATED FINDINGS, INTREPRETING ACCESSORY
RESIDENTIAL AS AN ALLOWED USE WITHIN RESORT HOTELS
(PA2021-096)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. At the February 9, 2021 City Council Study Session related to the Housing Element
Update, the City Council provided staff direction to develop a new Council policy and
amend the City of Newport Beach’s (“City”) land use and zoning codes related to housing
opportunities.
2. At the March 9, 2021 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-
18 adding City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing).
3. Council Policy K-4 recognizes that the City has several major constraints on existing
lands that severely limit or totally restrict the City’s ability to accommodate growth to the
extent identified in the Sixth Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”). As a
result, new and flexible land use and zoning regulations and strategies should be
developed in order to reasonably and practically accommodate this ambitious State
housing mandate while protecting the character and maintaining a quality of life that
makes Newport Beach a special place to live, work, and visit.
4. Council Policy K-4 directs City staff to develop, modify as necessary, and aggressively
implement various strategies and action plans that are designed to accelerate housing
production consistent with the policy, including encouraging and incentivizing the
development of mixed-use hotels.
5. The goals of Council Policy K-4 include interpreting ambiguities in the City’s General
Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) to allow
hotels, located outside of the Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction, to convert up to
30 percent of their approved hotel rooms into residential units on a one-for-one basis.
Such an interpretation would allow for residential units to be deemed an accessory use
to the principal use of a hotel and find that such residential uses are consistent with the
hotel’s underlying General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and NBMC land use and zoning
designations.
6. Mixed-use hotels are an established trend in the hospitality industry that incorporate
hotel-branded residential units as an accessory use located within a resort hotel
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 2 of 12
complex where residents enjoy access to the full range of services, facilities, and
amenities provided by the hotel operator or brand. These hotel-residential uses cannot
exist without the hotel’s services, facilities, and amenities.
7. There are currently twenty-two (22) hotels in the City, of which ten (10) hotels qualify as a
resort hotel, a self-contained destination that provides for all travel accommodation needs
in one location, including but not limited to restaurants, bars, shopping, and recreational
facilities.
8. Of the ten (10) resort hotels in the City, one (1) hotel is located in the coastal zone, but
completely outside the Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction area, and three (3) hotels
are located outside the coastal zone. Therefore, the following four (4) hotels meet the
criteria of a resort hotel located outside the Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction:
a. The Renaissance Newport Beach located at 4500 MacArthur Boulevard
(“Renaissance”) is designated MU-H2 (Mixed-Use Horizontal) by the General Plan
Land Use Element and is located within the Koll Center Planned Community (PC15)
Zoning District. Hotels are an allowed use, subject to a conditional use permit. The
Renaissance is not located within the coastal zone.
b. The Hyatt Regency John Wayne Airport located at 4545 MacArthur Boulevard
(“Hyatt”) is designated MU-H2 (Mixed-Use Horizontal) by the General Plan Land
Use Element and is located within Hotel Site 1 of the Newport Place Planned
Community (PC11) Zoning District. Hotels are an allowed use, subject to a
conditional use permit. The Hyatt is not located within the coastal zone.
c. The Fashion Island Hotel located at 690 Newport Center Drive (“Fashion Island
Hotel”) is designated MU-H3 (Mixed-Use Horizontal) by the General Plan Land Use
Element and is located within Block 600 Subarea of the North Newport Center
Planned Community (PC56) Zoning District. Hotels are an allowed use, subject to
a conditional use permit. The Fashion Island Hotel is not located within the coastal
zone.
d. The Newport Beach Marriott located at 900 Newport Center (“Marriott”) is
designated CV (Visitor Serving Commercial) by the General Plan Land Use
Element and is located within the Commercial Visitor-Serving Zoning District. Hotels
are an allowed use, subject to a conditional use permit. The Marriott is located within
the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is CV-B (Visitor Serving
Commercial) and is located within the CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal
Zoning District. Hotels are allowed subject to a conditional use permit and coastal
development permit.
9. Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC (“Title 20” or “Zoning Code”) is intended to
carry out the policies of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Section 20.10.030
(Authority—Relationship to General Plan) of the NBMC, states that the Zoning Code is
the primary tool used by the City to carry out the goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan. It is intended that all provisions of the Zoning Code be consistent with the
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 3 of 12
General Plan and that any development, land use, or subdivision approved in compliance
with these regulations will also be consistent with the General Plan.
10. The PC11, PC15, and PC56 Planned Community Development Plans state that the
requirements of the Zoning Code shall apply, unless otherwise stated.
11. Section 20.12.020 (Rules of Interpretation) of the NBMC authorizes the Community
Development Director to interpret the meaning of provisions of the Zoning Code.
12. Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC is intended to carry
out the policies of the City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan and Coastal Act of
1976. Section 21.10.030 (Authority—Relationship to Coastal Land Use Plan) of the
NBMC states that the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan is the primary tool used
by the City to carry out the goals, objectives, and policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. It
is intended that all provisions of the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan be
consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan and that any development, land use, or
subdivision approved in compliance with these regulations will also be consistent with the
Coastal Land Use Plan, and that if any proposed development is located between the first
public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone,
any approved development must be in conformity with the public access and recreation
policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. This determination does not impact any properties
located within the first public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water.
13. Section 21.12.020 (Rules of Interpretation) of the NBMC authorizes the Community
Development Director to interpret the meaning of provisions of the Implementation Plan.
14. Both Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan) define “hotel” as an establishment that provides guest rooms or suites for a fee to
transient guests for sleeping purposes. Access to units is primarily from interior lobbies,
courts, or halls. Related accessory uses may include conference rooms and meeting
rooms, restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities. Guest rooms may or may not contain
kitchen facilities for food preparation. Hotels with kitchen facilities are commonly known as
extended stay hotels. A hotel operates subject to taxation under California Revenue and
Taxation Code Section 7280.
15. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan) list residential uses as part of the definition of “hotel.” Both Title 20 and Title 21
definitions of “hotel” are out of date and do not reflect current industry practice. Specifically,
the definition of “hotel” has not been updated to designate residential uses as an accessory
use, which has become common practice for destination resort hotels (mixed-use hotels).
While the definition of a hotel does not prohibit residential uses, a Director’s Determination
is necessary to fill the gap between contemporary practice and the exact wording of Title
20 and Title 21.
16. On April 30, 2021, consistent with City Council’s direction provided in Council Policy K-4,
the Community Development Director issued Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001
interpreting accessory residential as an allowed use within resort hotels.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 4 of 12
17. On May 14, 2021, Stop Polluting Our Newport (“SPON”) filed an appeal of the Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 alleging that the determination improperly converts
General Plan-approved hotel allocations into General Plan-approved dwelling unit
allocations without Greenlight (Charter Section 423) tracking, in alleged contravention
of Council Policy A-18. The appeal also states that the determination adds the potential
for some 250 new dwelling units to the General Plan Statistical Area L1, which would
require voter approval if processed as a General Plan Amendment.
18. A de novo public hearing was held on July 8, 2021, in the Council Chambers located at
100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the
hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et
seq. (“Ralph M. Brown Act”) and Chapters 20.62 and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and
considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
This Director’s Determination is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act in
accordance with Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code (“CEQA”) and Sections
15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15378 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6,
Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”). The Director’s Determination is also exempt pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only when
there is the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Specifically, the
determination is for the purpose of interpreting the Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan. This action will not change the existing land use designations, will not
increase intensity of use, and will not authorize new development that would directly result in
physical change to the environment.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
Planning and Zoning (Title 20) Interpretation
In accordance with Section 20.12.020(E) (Rules of Interpretation – Unlisted Uses of Land) of
the NBMC, the Director, and the Planning Commission on appeal, may determine that a
proposed land use that is not listed in Part 2 of this title (Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses,
and Zoning District Standards) may be allowed if the following findings can be made:
Finding:
A. The characteristics of, and activities associated with, the proposed use are equivalent to
those of one or more of the uses listed in the zoning district as allowable, and will not involve
a greater level of activity, population density, intensity, traffic generation, parking, dust,
odor, noise, or similar impacts than the uses listed in the zoning district;
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 5 of 12
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel will be regulated to ensure
the underlying characteristics and activities remain equivalent to the listed hotel use
within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District or PC
(Planned Community) Zoning District.
2. Approved hotel rooms will be allowed to convert to residential uses on a one-for-one
basis to ensure the accessory residential use does not involve a greater level of activity,
population density, traffic generation, parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than
the other uses listed within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal
Zoning District or PC (Planned Community) Zoning District.
3. The conversion of hotel rooms to residential uses will be limited to no more than 30
percent of the total number of approved hotel rooms. This restriction will further ensure
that residential uses remain an accessory use to the hotel and do not change the primary
use of the property from hotel to residential.
4. The traffic generation associated with a residential use is similar or less than the traffic
generation for a resort hotel use. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition), a Multi-Family Housing Mid-Rise (three [3] to ten
[10] levels) development (ITE Code 221) would generate 0.36 and 0.44 average AM and
PM weekday peak hour trips per dwelling unit. A Resort Hotel (ITE Code 330) would
generate 0.32 and 0.41 average AM and PM weekday peak hour trips per room. The
published ITE trip rates are generally for stand-alone development (e.g. stand-alone
hotel or multi-family housing buildings); however, the reality is accessory residential
dwelling units will have lower rates due to the additional on-site amenities provided.
Therefore, following conversion of a hotel room to a residential unit, the anticipated traffic
generation will be similar or lower.
5. Pursuant to Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California
Environmental Quality Act) and in compliance with Senate Bill 743, the conversion of a
resort hotel room to a residential unit is considered to be less than significant impact on
transportation/traffic and no further vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) analysis is required
since all trips associated with such conversion have already been accounted for as
approved hotel rooms. As a result, conversions are expected to fall below the adopted
land use screening threshold of 300 or less daily trips. For ITE Code 330, there is no
listed daily trip rate; however, the City Traffic Phasing Ordinance states that if there is
not an applicable rate, the City Traffic Engineer may, in the exercise of his/her
professional judgement, authorize the use of trip generation rates in San Diego
Association of Government’s (SANDAG) Traffic Generators or on the basis of actual site
counts. The SANDAG daily trip rate for Resort Hotel is eight (8) daily trips per room. The
SANDAG daily trip rate for Multi-Family Condominium is also eight (8) daily trips per
unit. Therefore, the conversion of a resort hotel room to a residential unit would result in
same or lower daily trips, and below the screening threshold of 300 daily trips requiring
VMT analysis.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 6 of 12
6. Based on the similar vehicular trips associated with accessory residential uses, levels
of odor, dust, noise, or similar impacts at a hotel property with accessory residential
uses is expected to be similar or less.
7. Mixed-use hotels are a form of accommodation that affords buyers with access to the
full range of services, facilities, and amenities provided by the hotel.
8. The definition of hotel allows related accessory uses such as conference rooms and
meeting rooms, restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities that can generate additional
parking demand substantially higher than residential parking rates. The conversion of hotel
rooms to residential units would constitute an amendment to the conditional use permit. In
reviewing such amendments, approval of the conditional use permit would require
ensuring adequate parking is provided to accommodate the residential units through
surplus parking, shared parking, or the adoption of a parking management plan.
Finding:
B. The proposed use will meet the purpose/intent of the zoning district that is applied to the
location of the use;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District is intended to provide for
areas appropriate for accommodations, goods, and services intended to primarily serve
visitors to the City. Hotels are allowed in the CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal
Zoning District subject to obtaining a conditional use permit pursuant to Section
20.20.020 of the NBMC. A hotel with an accessory residential use that is limited to no
more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms will primarily serve visitors to the City.
2. The resort hotels located within PC11, PC15, and PC56 are located within the MU-H
(Mixed-Use Horizontal) land use category of the General Plan. The MU-H designations
are intended to provide for the development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of
uses, which may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices,
multi-family residential, visitor-serving and marine-related uses, and/or buildings that
vertically integrate residential with commercial uses. The hotel-branded units are
consistent with the MU-H designations as residential units are clearly allowed, and a
hotel with an accessory residential use that is limited to no more than 30 percent of the
approved hotel rooms will primarily serve visitors to the City.
3. Mixed-use hotels are common practice within the hotel industry and provide visitor
serving amenities and services consistent with the CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving)
Coastal Zoning District and PC (Planned Community) Zoning District.
4. Fact in Support of Finding A.7 is hereby incorporated.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 7 of 12
Finding:
C. The proposed use will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General
Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District General Plan land use
designation is intended to provide for areas appropriate for accommodations, goods,
and services intended to serve primary visitors to the City. By limiting residential uses
to an accessory use at a hotel property, the primary purpose of the hotel meets the
goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan.
2. The MU-H (Mixed-Use Horizontal) designations are intended to provide for the
development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include
general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi-family residential,
visitor-serving and marine-related uses, and/or buildings that vertically integrate
residential with commercial uses. Mixed-use hotels are consistent with the MU-H
designations as residential units are clearly allowed, and a hotel with an accessory
residential use that is limited to no more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms
will primarily serve visitors to the City.
3. The trend in the hotel industry is to locate limited residential uses at a hotel property to
create resort amenities that can be shared by residents, visitors, and tourists alike.
4. This interpretation implements Land Use Element Policy LU 2.3 (Range of Residential
Choices) by providing new opportunities for the development of residential units in
response to community and regional needs for housing.
5. This interpretation implements Land Use Element Policy LU 3.2 (Growth and Change)
which encourages enhancement of existing neighborhoods, districts, and corridors,
allowing for re-use and infill with uses that are complementary in type, form, scale, and
character. Changes in use and/or density/intensity should only be considered in those
areas that are economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate the City’s
share of regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce commuting
distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach
as a special place to live for its residents. The hotel industry has been one of the hardest
hit industries due to the COVID-19 pandemic and for some hotels, a full recovery of the
industry is not anticipated for many years. Mixed-use hotels provide an opportunity to
revitalize older and/or underperforming hotels to maintain their competitive standing by
creating multiple revenue streams that can support improvements to the property
enhancing the visitor experience. Economies of scale created by shared facilities,
amenities, and services add additional benefit to mixed-use hotel developments. This
cross pollination of business benefits both the hotel and the resident. It may also
increase occupancy rates at the resort by creating increased synergy between uses and
social gathering opportunities, boosting transient occupancy taxes while providing in-fill
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 8 of 12
housing opportunities to partially assist the City in meeting its RHNA obligation in highly
desirable and built-out areas.
Finding:
D. The proposed use is not listed as allowable in another zoning district;
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are not listed as allowable in any other zoning
district. Stand-alone residential uses, which are allowable in another zoning district,
would not be permitted under this interpretation.
Finding:
E. The proposed use is not a prohibited or illegal use.
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are neither a prohibited or an illegal use.
Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (Title 21) Interpretation
In accordance with Section 21.12.020(E) (Rules of Interpretation – Unlisted Uses of Land) of
the NBMC, the Director, and Planning Commission on appeal, may determine that a proposed
land use that is not listed in Part 2 of this title (Coastal Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses,
and Coastal Zoning District Standards) may be allowed if the following findings can be made:
Finding:
F. The characteristics of, and activities associated with, the proposed use are equivalent to
those of one or more of the uses listed in the coastal zoning district as allowable, and will
not involve a greater level of activity, population density, intensity, traffic generation,
parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than the uses listed in the coastal zoning
district;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel will be regulated to ensure
the underlying characteristics and activities remain equivalent to the listed hotel use
within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District.
2. Approved hotel rooms will be allowed to convert to residential uses on a one-for-one
basis to ensure the accessory residential use does not involve a greater level of activity,
population density, traffic generation, parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar impacts than
the other uses listed within the applicable CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal
Zoning District.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 9 of 12
3. The conversion of hotel rooms to residential units would constitute a major change in hotel
operations requiring a coastal development permit. The coastal development permit review
will require adequate parking be provided to accommodate the residential units through
surplus parking, shared parking, or the adoption of a parking management plan, and to
ensure the protection of lower-cost visitor accommodations.
4. Facts in Support of Finding A.3 through A.8 are hereby incorporated by reference.
Finding:
G. The proposed use will meet the purpose/intent of the coastal zoning district that is applied
to the location of the use;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Zoning District is intended to provide for areas
appropriate for accommodations, goods, and services intended to primarily serve
visitors to the City. A hotel with an accessory residential use that is limited to no more
than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms will primarily serve visitors to the City.
2. Mixed-use hotels are common practice within the hotel industry and provide visitor
serving amenities and services consistent with the CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving)
Coastal Zoning District.
Finding:
H. The proposed use will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Coastal
Land Use Plan;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The CV (Commercial Visitor-Serving) Coastal Zoning District Coastal Land Use Plan
designation is intended to provide for areas appropriate for accommodations, goods,
and services intended to serve primary visitors to the City. By limiting residential uses
to an accessory use at a hotel property, the primary purpose of the hotel meets the
goals, objectives and policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan that prioritize visitor-serving
commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal
recreation over other uses.
2. The trend in the hotel industry is to locate limited residential uses at a hotel property to
create resort amenities that can be shared by residents, visitors, and tourists alike.
3. This interpretation would restrict its applicability to hotel properties located outside of the
appeal areas identified in the California Public Resources Code Section 30603(a) as
generally depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 10 of 12
This applicability restriction ensures that coastal access and coastal-dependent uses
are not impacted.
4. Any development would be required to adhere to all LCP goals and policies including
those related to public access and resource protection, and the protection of lower-cost
visitor accommodations.
Finding:
I. The proposed use is not listed as allowable in another coastal zoning district; and
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are not listed as allowable in another coastal
zoning district. Separate or stand-alone residential uses operating as primary land uses,
which are allowable in another coastal zoning district, would not be permitted under this
interpretation.
Finding:
J. The proposed use is not a prohibited or illegal use.
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Hotels with an accessory residential use are neither a prohibited or an illegal use.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this Director’s
Determination is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“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, California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in
physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. The Director’s Determination
is also exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule
common sense exemption that CEQA applies only when there is the potential for causing
a significant effect on the environment. Specifically, the determination is for the purpose
of interpreting the Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan. This
action will not change the existing land use designations, will not increase intensity of
use, and will not authorize new development that would directly result in physical change
to the environment.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach has considered the reasons cited
in the appeal and finds that Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 interpreting that
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2021-016
Page 11 of 12
residential uses are permitted as an accessory use to hotels is authorized pursuant to
Director’s authority granted in NBMC Sections 20.12.020 and 21.12.020. The Planning
Commission finds that the determination is consistent with City Council Policy K-4. The
restrictions described in Section 3 below will further ensure that residential uses remain
an accessory use to the hotel, do not increase the level of activity on a site, and do not
change the primary use of the property from hotel to residential. As such, an amendment
to the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan to change the land use designations or
increase the development limits is not required, and the determination does not violate
City Charter Section 423 and/or City Council Policy A-18.
3. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies the appeal and
upholds the Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 interpreting that residential uses
are permitted as an accessory use to hotels subject to the following:
a. This interpretation shall only apply to resort hotels, a self-contained destination
that provides for all travel accommodation needs in one location, including but not
limited to restaurants, bars, shopping, and recreational facilities. Residents shall
enjoy access to the full range of services, facilities, and amenities provided by
the hotel operator or brand.
b. The hotel property relying upon this interpretation shall be located outside the
appeal area identified in California Public Resources Code Section 30603(a) as
generally depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction
Map.
c. Approved hotel rooms may be converted to residential units but only on a one-for-
one basis.
d. The residential use shall at all times be accessory to the hotel use, and the
residential units shall comprise no more than 30 percent of the approved hotel
rooms.
e. The residential units may be located within a repurposed hotel or in a new
residential structure.
f. A property owner that desires to have an accessory residential use at their hotel
shall process a conditional use permit and coastal development permit (if
applicable). In reviewing said permits, the review authority shall ensure adequate
parking is provided to accommodate the residential units through surplus parking,
shared parking, or the adoption of a parking management plan.
g. Potential impacts to public access, affordable housing, and the loss of transient
occupancy tax must be mitigated by entering into a Development Agreement with
the City or by some other means deemed appropriate.
Attachment 7
Attachment 8
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
May 12, 2022
Agenda Item No. 5
SUBJECT: The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005
Modification Permit No. MD2022-001
Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053
Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003
SITE LOCATION:
900 Newport Center Drive
(VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa)
APPLICANT &
OWNER: Newport Center Hotel, LLC
PLANNER:
Jim Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director
949-644-3210 or jcampbell@newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Ritz-Carlton Residences involves the conversion of up to 30 percent of the existing
532-room hotel at VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa (formerly known as
the Newport Beach Marriott) into hotel-branded residences pursuant to City Council
Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing) and Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 (“Project”). The Project is conditioned to require the
payment of a public benefit fee of $100,000 that will be assessed upon each hotel-
branded residence. A portion of this public benefit fee is comprised of an in-lieu affordable
housing fee, which will be deposited into a City controlled account and used at the City’s
discretion for the future acquisition and construction of affordable housing units. The
Project is located at 900 Newport Center Drive, which is currently occupied by VEA
Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing;
2) Find that potential environmental impacts have been previously mitigated through the
implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in Program
Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No.
2006011119) (“PEIR”); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the California
1
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
2
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 2
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously
certified PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the project; and
3) Approve The Ritz-Carlton Residences Project (PA2021-296) finding that the Project is
eligible for accessory residential uses pursuant to Director’s Determination No.
DD2021-001 and City Council Policy K-4, and adopt Resolution No. PC2022-011
(Attachment No. PC 1) approving Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 6
(ER2022-002), Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005, Modification
Permit No. MD2022-001, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053, Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2021-077, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
NT2021-003 (PA2021-296).
3
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
4
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 3
VICINITY MAP
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE
ON-SITE Visitor Serving
Commercial (CV)
Commercial Visitor
Serving (CV)
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott
Resort and Spa
NORTH Multiple Residential (RM) PC54 Santa Barbara
Residential
The Meridian Condominium
Community
SOUTH
Multiple Residential (RM) Multiple Residential (RM) Granville Condominium
Community
EAST Regional Commercial
(CR)
PC56 North Newport
Center
Fashion Island Regional
Commercial Retail Shopping
Center
WEST Parks and Recreation
(PR)
PC47 Newport Beach
Country Club
The Newport Beach Country
Club
5
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
6
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 4
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting
The subject property is 2.775 acres located at 900 Newport Center Drive, in the 9.53-acre
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa, immediately southwest of Fashion
Island, within the Newport Center-Fashion Island subarea. The development footprint of
the proposed building and the subterranean parking garage are approximately 25,023
square feet and 44,860 square feet, respectively. The site is located in a largely mixed-
use area of the City, surrounded by MacArthur Boulevard to the east, San Joaquin Road
to the north, Jamboree Road to the west, and Pacific Coast Highway to the south. The
Project site can be accessed from Newport Center Drive and Santa Barbara Drive.
Fashion Island is located to the east and the Newport Beach Country Club golf course to
the west. The VEA Newport Beach hotel is located to the north and the Granville
community to the south.
Project Description
The applicant, Newport Center Hotel, LLC, proposes to convert up to 30 percent of the
existing 532 hotel rooms into hotel branded residences pursuant to City Council Policy K-
4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The existing southernmost VEA
Newport Beach building, Harbor Landing, would be demolished to accommodate
construction of the proposed residential building. The project would result in the
conversion of up to 159 hotel rooms (i.e., conversion of 133 hotel rooms from Harbor
Landing and conversion of 26 hotel rooms of the 153 hotel rooms from Harbor Point), and
the construction of related amenities and parking facilities to support the hotel branded
residences.
The application conforms with all zoning and land use requirements and consists of the
following components:
Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005: A site development review in
accordance with Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 20.52.080 to allow
for the construction of the Project;
Modification Permit No. MD2022-001: A modification permit in accordance with NBMC
Section 20.52.050 to allow for the tandem parking spaces.
Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053: A conditional use permit in accordance with
NBMC Section 20.52.020 consistent with the requirement of Director's Determination No.
DD2021- 001.
Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077: A coastal development permit in
accordance with NBMC Section 21.52.015 authorizing the construction of the project
within the Coastal Zone.
7
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 5
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003: A vesting tentative tract map for
condominium purposes in accordance with NBMC Section 19.20.040.
Addendum to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report:
Pursuant to CEQA, the addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental
impacts resulting from the proposed development.
Project Components:
Accessory Hotel Branded Residences
The proposed new 22-story building would include up to 159 hotel branded residences
and the total number of hotel rooms at the VEA Newport Beach would be reduced from
532 currently existing to 373. The new building is proposed to be up to approximately 279
feet above ground level to the penthouse, with additional accessory improvements and
rooftop appurtenances such as elevator overruns and screened mechanical equipment.
The rooftop improvements would project up to 295 feet in height, consistent with the
existing high-rise height limitation zone that allows a building height of 300 feet.
The new building would include the building lobby area on level 1, which would also
provide space for administrative offices, a lounge, amenities, restrooms, and back of
house facilities. Residential units would start on level 2 with a range of sizes. Levels 2
through 22 will provide residential units, with the units getting larger on the upper floors.
Levels 16 and 17 will include indoor and outdoor common recreational spaces, in
additional to residential units. The building rooftop would include accessory
improvements, and house screened rooftop appurtenances. Eight elevators and two
stairwells will serve the building.
The design for the residential building draws inspiration from the California Post
Modernism architectural style which is embedded in the original vision of Fashion Island
as set forth by Master Architect William Pereira. William Pereira’s nautical inspired
building forms, most prevalent in Pereira’s work at the Pacific Life Building at Block 700
in Newport Center, combined with the vision from the original vessels of The Ritz-Carlton
Yacht Collection influenced the design of the Residences. Authentic Yacht inspired
detailing is integrated into the architecture through the abundant use of natural materials
and the emphasis on indoor/outdoor spaces. The building architecture respects the
design pillars rooted in the formation of Fashion Island, while showcasing a modern
interpretation that exemplifies the qualities of The Ritz-Carlton brand. The residential
building would be constructed using Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete (GFRC) natural
stone, metal, wood, steel, and glass glazing accents.
Operations for the hotel branded residences will be managed by professionally trained
Ritz-Carlton staff. While dedication of staff for the hotel and the hotel branded residences
8
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 6
will be separate, the hotel and residences will remain under the same Marriott umbrella
under common leadership of the General Manager.
Project Amenities
The existing hotel amenities include a lounge, a fitness center, a full-service spa, pools,
event lawns, bike rentals, a conference center, ballrooms, and restaurants that will remain
available for VEA hotel guests and resident use. The Project proposes a new resort style
pool and spa with lounge seating, a gym and fitness facility, locker rooms, spa treatment
rooms, meeting rooms, concierge services, on-site private storage, an owners room
featuring billiards and a library, and other uses including food service amenities for
exclusive use of the residents. In addition to the pool and spa area, outdoor amenities
would include a private garden, a dog relief area, and walking paths through the property
connecting to Newport Center Drive and the VEA property. Common indoor amenities
totaling approximately 32,000 square feet will be located at the ground floor, basement
level (B2), and on floors 16 and 17. Common outdoor amenities totaling approximately
9,500 square feet will be located on the ground level and on floor 16. In addition to outdoor
amenity areas, there will be approximately 65,000 square feet of hardscape and
landscape area. Each unit will contain private open space via a balcony. There is
approximately 143,000 square feet of private open space, which averages 899 square
feet per unit.
Parking and Vehicular Access
The main arrival area includes a new 44-foot wide entry driveway with two entry and exit
lanes. The entry will have a guard house and privacy rolling type gates. All guests and
visitors will be required to use the left lane leading to the guard house for authorization to
enter the site. A turnaround will be located directly behind the guardhouse in advance of
the entry gate. Residents will use the right lane to bypass the guard house and enter the
site through use of a gate transponder.
A new 5-level, 408-space subterranean parking structure would be constructed beneath
the new building under the porte cochere and entry drive area. Each subterranean level
(1 through 5) would be constructed with ADA accessible, standard, and tandem parking
spaces. The new residential building and the parking structure would be accessed via
Newport Center Drive where residents and guests would be directed to valet services
located at the porte cochere. All parking would be valet-served.
In addition to parking, level 1 would provide facilities such as a mailroom, employee
breakroom, trash enclosure, storage, security office, and kitchen. The loading dock would
also be located on subterranean level 1 and accessed by the service driveway from the
proposed fire access driveway on the southern boundary of the property. Subterranean
level 2 would house amenities for the building as well as electrical, engineering, utility,
and maintenance facilities. Subterranean levels 3, 4 and 5 would have storage facilities
and parking.
9
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 7
A new driveway is proposed along the southwesterly boundary of the property for use as
a service drive. The service road will have an access control gate, regulated by on-site
staff. The service drive will be 24 feet in width and provide access for all moving vans,
delivery vehicles (e.g., Amazon, FedEx, etc.), scheduled service deliveries and refuse
collection, and for emergency vehicle access. The service drive will provide direct access
to a service deck located below the building on the first basement level, to allow for
loading and unloading of large service, delivery and moving vans. Maintenance vehicle
parking spaces are provided adjacent to the service drive, out of the path of travel.
Hotel Parking Structure
The Project includes a new parking structure including four levels below ground and 2
levels above ground to serve the existing hotel. The new parking structure will replace the
existing parking structure in substantially the same location and provide 400 parking
spaces in a reduced footprint. A total of 808 parking spaces (408 for hotel-branded
residence and 400 for hotel use) are proposed for the Project in excess of the Zoning
Code (Title 20) and Coastal Implementation Plan (Title 21parking requirements.
Landscape and Hardscape Improvements
The proposed Project site would include extensive landscape and hardscape areas with
pedestrian circulation. The proposed conceptual landscape plan would include a
hierarchy of plant materials including trees, vines, shrubs, and turf throughout the Project
site and in open space areas. The landscape plan meets drought tolerant and non-
invasive species requirements of the Municipal Code and Coastal Implementation Plan.
Along Newport Center Drive, at the frontage of the Project site, several existing palm trees
in the right-of-way (ROW) may be temporarily removed during construction and or
relocated as a result on construction in compliance with the City’s Retention, Removal
and Maintenance of City Trees policy (City Council Policy G-1. Evergreen specimen trees
(Pinus species or similar) would be located towards the outer portions of the Project site,
near the boundary, while canopy shade trees would be located around the motorcourt
and event lawn. Smaller accent trees (such as Olea europea or similar) would be located
around the pool area.
A layered landscape concept along the Project site boundaries of the Project site would
provide a buffer between the Project site and the existing adjacent residential
development to the west, and the hotel uses to the north, and the public ROW to the west.
Landscape screening is also proposed for the parking structure, which includes
developing mature vines to cover the stucco-finished areas. Marriott maintenance and
groundskeeping staff would service both the hotel and the hotel branded residences.
Additionally, a new 8,000-square-foot event lawn would be located along the southern
boundary of the property near the new residential building and hotel pool area. The new
10
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 8
event lawn would be used for outdoor events by the VEA hotel with the added function
as a terminus for the fire access road.
Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fees
City Council Policy K-4 requires property owners “converting permitted hotel…rooms into
residential units to mitigate impacts as a result of the conversion…through a contribution
of in-lieu fees.” This Project has been conditioned to include the payment of an in-lieu
affordable housing fee set at $65,000 per hotel branded residence (which is included in
the overall $100,000 per door public benefit fee for this Project discussed later in this
report). The fee will be placed into an affordable housing fund maintained by the City and
will be used for the acquisition and construction of future affordable housing units.
DISCUSSION
General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code Consistency
The proposed Project site has a General Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial
(CV); a Coastal Land Use Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B); and a
Zoning designation of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV). General Plan Land Use Element
anomaly #43 allows 611 hotel rooms at the subject property. In 2012, the City approved
a conversion of 79 hotel rooms to residential units leaving 532 hotel rooms as the
maximum number of hotel rooms at the project site. There will be no net change with the
proposed conversion of up to 30 percent of the existing approved 532 hotel rooms into
residential units. All CV designations allow for overnight accommodations and accessory
land uses. The proposed hotel branded residences are an allowable accessory land use
within City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 and VEA
Newport Beach was one of the resort hotel properties specifically contemplated for
accessory residential uses in that Director’s Determination. As such, the proposed Project
is consistent with the applicable CV land use designations in the General Plan, Coastal
Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code.
City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001
On March 9, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-18 Reducing Barriers
to the Creation of Housing (City Council Policy K-4). City Council Policy K-4 directed City
staff to develop, modify as necessary, and aggressively implement various strategies
designed to accelerate housing production consistent with the policy, including
encouraging the development of mixed-use hotels. The goals of City Council Policy K-4
include interpreting ambiguities in the City’s General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Title
20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of
the NBMC to allow hotels and motels, located outside the Coastal Commission Appeal
Jurisdiction, to convert up to 30 percent of their approved hotel rooms into residential
units on a one-for-one basis. Such interpretation allows residential units to be deemed an
accessory use to the principal use of a hotel and find that such residential uses are
11
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 9
consistent with the hotel and motel’s underlying General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local
Coastal Plan Program land use and zoning designations.
On April 30, 2021, the Community Development Director issued Director’s Determination
No. DD2021-001. The Director’s Determination was considered on appeal by the
Planning Commission on July 8, 2021, and was considered by the City Council on appeal
on August 24, 2021. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council denied the
appeal and upheld the Director’s Determination. The time to challenge the Director’s
Determination has lapsed, the statute of limitations has run, and the Director’s
Determination is now final. Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 implemented City
Council Policy K-4 and found that residential uses are allowable as an accessory use
within resort hotels under certain parameters including the following:
Considerations for Accessory
Residential Use – City Requirements
Proposed Project
Applicable only to resort hotels, a self-
contained destination that provides for
most travel accommodation needs in one
location, including but not limited to
restaurants, bars, shopping, and
recreational facilities.
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort
and Spa is a self-contained destination
resort hotel including restaurants, bars,
shopping, and recreational facilities.
Must be located outside the appeal area
identified in California Public Resources
Code Section 30603(a) as generally
depicted on the Post-LCP Certification
Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map.
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort
and Spa is located outside of the appeal
area identified in California Public
Resources Code Section 30603(a).
Approved hotel rooms may be converted
to residential units, but only on a one-for-
one basis.
Up to 159 existing, approved hotel rooms
are proposed for conversion to accessory
hotel residential branded units on one-to-
one basis.
The residential use shall at all times be
accessory to the hotel use, and the
residential units shall comprise no more
than 30 percent of the approved hotel
rooms.
Residential uses will be accessory to hotel
and will be comprised of no more than 30
percent of the approved hotel rooms (532
existing hotel rooms: 373 remaining hotel
rooms + 159 hotel rooms converted to
residential units = 532 approved rooms.)
The residential units may be located within
a repurposed hotel or in a new residential
structure.
A new residential building is proposed.
A property owner that desires to have an
accessory residential use at their hotel
shall process a conditional use permit and
coastal development permit (if applicable).
In reviewing said permits, the review
A conditional use permit and coastal
development permit application are
included for this Project, in addition to a
site development review permit. The hotel
Hotels require 1 parking space per room
12
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 10
authority shall ensure adequate parking is
provided to accommodate the residential
units through surplus parking, shared
parking, or the adoption of a parking
management plan.
and the project will provide over 373
parking spaces. New accessory hotel
branded residence parking will be
provided at 2.5 parking spaces per
residential unit, resulting in an overall
increase in parking.
Potential impacts to public access,
affordable housing, and the loss of
transient occupancy tax must be mitigated
by entering into a Development
Agreement with the City or by some other
means deemed appropriate.
The Project will not result in impacts to
public access because there is no public
access on, or immediately surrounding the
Project site. This Project is conditioned to
require the payment of an affordable
housing in-lieu fee, and as explained in the
attached TOT Analysis, the loss of any
TOT is more than offset by the gains in
property tax attributable to the new hotel
branded residences when combined with
the TOT generated by the 373 remaining
hotel rooms.
The proposed application for the conversion of hotel rooms to hotel branded residences
as an accessory use at the existing VEA Newport Beach, a Marriott Report and Spa is
consistent with and implements City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No.
DD2021-001. The City has identified the VEA Resort property as a qualifying resort hotel
offering destination accommodations including restaurant and recreation facilities. The
proposed conversion of 159 hotel rooms to hotel branded residences is a 30 percent
conversion of the approved 532-room resort hotel and the site is located outside of the
appeal area identified in California Public resources Code Section 30603(a).
The Project has been conditioned to require the payment of $100,000 per unit fee as the
means determined appropriate by the Community Development Director to address
potential impacts to public services, public safety, public access, and affordable housing.
The $100,000 per unit fee will be utilized in the following manner: $22,300 per unit for
general public benefit to be used at City Council’s discretion; $2,000 per unit for public
safety; $10,700 per unit for future improvements to public coastal access; and $65,000
per unit for a future senior affordable housing project. Fiscal impact studies show that
residential units generally require more public services than commercial uses hence the
need for a general public benefit contribution. Residences also generate an increased
volume of emergency medical calls for services. The fee will partially fund new fire life
safety equipment addressing the needs for high rise structures. The City has conducted
a study for future inclusionary housing in-lieu fees. No in-lieu fee has been adopted at
this time but the proposed fee per unit for senior affordable housing project is
commensurate to the results of the study. The funds used for general public benefit may
be used to support recreational or public safety facilities. The reduction of high-cost hotel
rooms, while not an impact to lower cost accommodations, reduces general access to the
13
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 11
coastal zone. The fee will support improvements to public access within the coastal zone
to offset the reduction of hotel rooms. The improvements have not been identified at this
time. Lastly, the housing crisis has led to an unprecedented housing need as expressed
by the City’s Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA) allocation of 4,845 units with
approximately 50 percent for low and very low-income households. The funds allocated
for affordable housing supports the City’s housing goals as expressed in the 2022
Housing Element update. Each of these fees address the factors identified in Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 ensuring a conversion project does not impact municipal
resources, public access and contributes toward the City’s affordable housing needs.
Major Site Development Review
Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Review), residential
developments of five or more units that are processed in conjunction with a tentative tract
map require a major site development review by the Planning Commission. The required
findings for approval of a site development review must identify that: the project is allowed
within the subject Zoning District, that the project will not be detrimental to the harmonious
and orderly growth of the City, and that the project is in compliance with applicable criteria
including compliance with the General Plan, the Zoning Code, and any applicable specific
plan, the efficient arrangement of structures on-site, the compatibility in terms of bulk,
scale, and aesthetic treatment, the safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, the
adequacy of landscaping and open space area, and the projection of significant public
views.
The draft resolution provided in Attachment No. PC 1 provides a detailed discussion of
the facts in support of findings for the Major Site Development Review. A summary of the
facts has been provided below.
x The project is in compliance with the General Plan and Zoning Code. The
proposed hotel branded residences are an allowable accessory land use within
City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. As such,
the proposed Project is consistent with the applicable CV zoning district. The
Project will convert up to 30 percent of existing approved hotel rooms to accessory
residential dwellings and will not result in an increase in allowable intensity or
additional units beyond the General Plan development limit.
x The building’s material palate consists of Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete (GFRC)
and glass for the building façade along with metal railings, steel, wood and natural
stone accents will be compatible with the surrounding development in Newport
Center. The design will complement, enhance, and be compatible with the
adjacent hotel, retail and office properties. Massing offsets, curved and undulating
design and high-quality design accents on the elevation are integrated to enhance
the expression of a contemporary architectural style. The site design includes
substantial setbacks and landscaping, and will create visual interest in a high-
quality design, which is consistent with other high-rise buildings in Newport Center.
14
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 12
x The Project will provide adequate parking, will provide safe pedestrian access via
an accessible path of travel from the sidewalk along Newport Center Drive, to the
entrance of the lobby. Vehicular access will be provided via a primary access drive
to the porte cochere area for residents and guests. A separate entry drive will be
provided for all service-related vehicles including deliveries, moving vans,
emergency vehicles and refuse collection. The parking structure for the existing
hotel will be reconstructed in a similar location but with a consolidated footprint, in
order to enhance use of the property and improve vehicular circulation. The City
Traffic Engineer has reviewed the draft plans and determined that the proposed
project provides adequate sight distance at each driveway, access through parking
structures and separate service drive, and would not impact vehicular traffic along
Newport Center Drive.
In summary, Staff believes facts support each of the required findings, with the
adoption of the recommended conditions of approval. Draft findings are provided in
the resolution recommending Project approval (Attachment No. PC 1). The Project
provides housing in response to the City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 will provide hotel branded residences as an
accessory use to the existing VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa. The
Project provides harmonious site design with ample landscaping, setbacks, parking,
includes safe vehicle access related to service and emergency vehicles, and provides
for a net reduction in vehicular trips compared to the existing hotel.
Modification Permit
Consistent with NBMC Code Section 20.52.050(E), a Modification Permit may be
approved or conditionally approved if, on the basis of the application, materials, plans,
and testimony (orally and/or in writing) submitted, if all of the following findings first can
be made. The required findings include neighborhood compatibility, granting of the
modification permit is necessary because of the unique physical characteristics of the
property or of the use, practical difficulties associated with the property and the strict
application of the Zoning Code, there are no alternatives that could provide similar
benefits with less detriment to surrounding owners and occupants; and is not detrimental
to public health, safety or welfare of owners and occupants.
The draft resolution provided in Attachment No. PC 1 provides a detailed discussion of
the facts in support of findings for the Modification Permit. A summary of the facts has
been provided below.
x The modification permit is required to allow for tandem parking spaces. The Project
is required to provide 398 parking spaces, and 408 parking spaces are proposed.
Tandem spaces reduce the footprint and depth of the subterranean garage,
making it a more efficient use of land and it reduces excavation and grading. The
Project will provide all required parking on-site and will be managed by 100 percent
15
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 13
valet operations, which is compatible with the existing development in the
neighborhood.
x The tandem parking spaces will be consistent with the characteristics of the hotel
branded residential use, where valet parking will be utilized to access tandem
parking spaces.
x The Project will provide parking in excess of the residential parking requirements
to ensure that all residents, guests and employees have adequate access to
parking. The request meets the intent of the Code by providing the required
number of parking spaces on-site.
x The inclusion of tandem parking stalls will not be a detriment to the surrounding
neighborhood or general public because the number of parking spaces will exceed
the code requirement. Valet operations will manage all resident and guest parking,
thereby eliminating any impact to the general public or surrounding owners,
occupants and the neighborhood. The subterranean parking structure takes up the
majority of the property to the east of the building and allows for the above grade
surface to contain substantial setbacks, open space, and landscape treatments.
Conditional Use Permit
Pursuant to NBMC Section 20.52.020(E) (Findings and Decision), the City must make
findings to approve a conditional use permit including that the use is consistent with the
General Plan, allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with the Zoning
Code and Municipal Code, that the design, location, size and operating characteristics of
the use are compatible with allowed uses in the vicinity, the site physically suitable in
terms of design, location, shape, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and
emergency access, public services and utilities, and the operation would not be
detrimental to the harmonious growth of the City of otherwise constitute a hazard to public
health and safety.
The draft resolution provided in Attachment No. PC 1 provides a detailed discussion of
the facts in support of findings for the Conditional Use Permit. A summary of the facts has
been provided below.
x The proposal to convert up to 159-hotel branded residences is consistent with
General Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV); a Coastal Land Use
Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B); and a Zoning designation
of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV), which allows for the Project site to provide
overnight accommodations and accessory land uses. City Council Policy K-4 and
Directors Determination No. DD2021-001 permit residential dwellings as an
accessory use to the primary use of the site as a resort hotel. The Director’s
Determination contains regulations and restrictions that are implemented through
16
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 14
this permit to ensure the allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel
property does not change the primary land use, which remains resort hotel.
x The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the Project are
compatible with allowed uses in the vicinity, including existing residential, hotel,
retail and office uses. The site will be located within the City’s High-Rise Height
Limitation Zone and part of an existing resort hotel property.
x The Project will provide improved emergency access to the property including via
a new 24’ wide service drive and fire lane located along the southwesterly property
line.
x A trip generation analysis was prepared for the Ritz-Carlton Residences project.
The trip calculation is based on the conversion of 532 hotel rooms to a project
consisting of 373 hotel rooms and 159 high rise housing units. Using the trip
generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), the existing
532 hotel rooms generate 4,251 daily trips. The project with 373 hotel rooms and
159 high rise units generates 3,702 daily trips. The project will generate 30 less
AM peak hour trips, 43 less PM peak hour trips, and 549 fewer daily trips. The
Traffic Phasing Ordinance states that any project that generates no more than
three hundred (300) additional daily trips is exempt from preparing a TPO traffic
study.
x Parking management plans were submitted and reviewed by the Public Works
Department. The valet operation procedures, employee parking, and drop-off in
the porte cocheres were outlined in the plans and the implementation of the
management plans promotes efficient operations.
In summary, Staff believes facts support each of the required findings, with the adoption
of the recommended conditions of approval, to approve the Conditional Use Permit. Draft
findings are provided in the resolution recommending Project approval.
Coastal Development Permit
The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone. Therefore, the proposed Project
requires a coastal development permit. Per NBMC Section 21.52.015(F), the required
findings to approve a coastal development permit (“CDP”) are that the Project conforms
to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program, and that the Project
conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal
Act if the Project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of
any body of water located within the coastal zone.
17
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 15
The draft resolution provided in Attachment No. PC 1 provides a detailed discussion of
the facts in support of each of the findings for the approval of the proposed CDP. A
summary of the facts has been provided below:
Ɣ The hotel branded residences are consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan
designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B); and a Zoning designation of
Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV), which allows for the Project site to provide
overnight accommodations and accessory residential uses as part of a resort hotel
land use. City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001,
which allows for accessory residential uses within resort hotels. The Project
complies with the CV zoning district design standards including setback, height,
parking and open space. The Project complies with the restrictions contained in
Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 including, but not limited to, the Project
site is located outside of the Coastal Commission appeal jurisdiction, the Project
will not result in more than 30 percent of the approved hotel rooms being converted
to residential use, the residential use will remain accessory to the resort hotel, and
adequate parking will be provided.
Ɣ The Project is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline
of any body of water located within the coastal zone. The Project site is located
approximately 3,300 feet from Newport Harbor. As such, it is not necessary to
assess the consistency with the public access and public recreation policies of
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
Ɣ The existing hotel does not provide lower cost accommodations and therefore will
not impact the availability of lower cost accommodations due to the conversion of
existing hotel rooms as detailed in the Feasibility and Impact Analysis (Exhibit I of
Attachment No. PC 1) completed for the project. The Feasibility and Impact
Analysis further concluded that the project is consistent with Section 21.48.025
(Visitor Accommodations). Potential impacts from the reduction in market rate
hotel room accommodations is mitigated through the payment a $10,700 per unit
fee to the City to be used to improve public access.
For the reasons noted above, staff believes the required findings for the CDP can be
made.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
The proposed Project includes a request to establish up to a 159-unit hotel branded
residential condominium tract. NBMC Section 19.12.070 (Required Findings for Action on
Tentative Maps) provides required findings for approval of a tentative tract map. These
findings include: consistency with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, that
the site is physically suitable for development, that proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage to fish, wildlife, or their habitat, or cause
serious health problems, that the project will not conflict with easements, a “land project,”
18
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 16
solar access and passive heating requirements, the City’s share of the regional housing
need, or the discharge of waste into the sewer system, and finally, that the project will
conform with the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act, if applicable.
The draft resolution provided in Attachment No. PC 1 provides a detailed discussion of
the facts in support of each of the findings for the approval of the proposed Vesting
Tentative Tract Map. A summary of the facts has been provided below.
x The Project site and surrounding land area is fully developed with an existing resort
hotel and accessory support uses. The Project site and the surrounding area do
not contain any sensitive biological resources.
x The site is currently developed and is suitable for redevelopment.
x The vesting tentative tract map will maintain the existing 15-foot utility easement
along Newport Center Drive. The design of the development will not conflict with
any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of
property within the proposed development.
x Public Works staff has reviewed the proposed vesting tentative tract map and
believes it is consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision Code (Title 19) and
applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. Public improvements,
consisting of the reconstruction of disturbed curb, gutter, and sidewalks, two new
driveways along Newport Center Drive.
x The Project will contribute to the City’s share of regional housing need and will
provide funds to the City related to affordable housing.
x The site is located within the coastal zone, outside of the appeal jurisdiction. The
subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program as detailed in the
Findings for the Coastal Development Permit.
For the reasons noted above, staff believes the required findings for the Vesting Tentative
Tract Map can be made. Additionally, pursuant to NBMC Section 19.16.010(A) an
approved tentative tract map expires 24 months after the date of its approval or
conditional approval. Under NBMC Section 19.16.020(A), the subdivider shall have the
right to request an extension of the map for up to 5 years. The subdivider has submitted
an application for an extension of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003 and has
requested that the extension be granted after the Planning Commission adopts
Resolution No. PC2022-011; thus, providing for an initial term of the vesting tentative tract
map of 24 months, followed by extension of 5 years, for a total term of 7 years from the
date of approval of Resolution No. PC2022-011.
Environmental Review
On July 25, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-75, certifying the
adequacy and completeness of the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the General
19
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 17
Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). The EIR was prepared in compliance with
CEQA as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its
implementing State regulations set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14,
Division 6, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”) and City Council Policy K-3. Additionally, in
accordance with Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared the EIR as
a Program Environmental Impact Report (“PEIR”). This PEIR analyzed the potential
impacts of a citywide land use plan, and the goals and policies of 10 general plan
elements.
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent
EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence
in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions
of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to
the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous
EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
The City contracted with an environmental consultant (Psomas) to prepare an Addendum
to the PEIR for the proposed Project. The entire Addendum and its technical appendixes
20
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 18
are available online at the City’s website at: www.newportbeachca.gov/ceqa. The
conclusion of the Addendum supports the finding under Section 21166 of the California
Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines that no additional
environmental document is required by CEQA.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the Project will not result in any
new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General
Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). All potential impacts associated with this
Project would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR that have been
appropriately mitigated. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the
circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or
more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the PEIR, nor has any
new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental
impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted PEIR is the appropriate
environmental document for the Project.
Summary
In summary, staff believes the findings for Project approval can be made, with specific
conditions of approval. The proposed Project site has a General Plan designation of
Visitor Serving Commercial (CV); a Coastal Land Use Plan designation of Visitor Serving
Commercial (CV-B); and a Zoning designation of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV). All
CV designations allow for overnight accommodations and accessory land uses. The
proposed hotel branded residences are an allowable accessory land use. As such, the
proposed Project is consistent with the applicable CV land use designations.
The site development review will ensure the Project will be implemented consistent with
the approved development standards. The applicant proposes to convert up to 30 percent
of the hotel rooms into hotel branded residences on a one-to-one basis as allowed by City
Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The proposed
development with on-site recreation amenities and adequate provisions of parking will
create a resort complex for the City’s visitors and residents. The payment of an in-lieu
affordable housing fee will assist the City in its goal of acquiring or constructing affordable
housing units. The lack of an impact to lower cost accommodations and the payment of
an in-lieu fee to improve public access supports a finding of consistency with the City’s
certified Local Coastal Program.
Lastly, the prepared Addendum is the appropriate environmental document for the
Project. The technical reports prepare for this Project have demonstrated that the
proposed Project would not result in new or increased significant impacts to the studied
areas, so no subsequent EIR is required.
21
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission, May 12, 2022
Page 19
Public Notice
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights-of-way and
waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the NBMC. Additionally,
the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on
the City’s website.
Prepared and submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2 CEQA Addendum
PC 3 Relevant Materials/Studies
PC 4 Project Plans
22
Attachment No. PC 1
Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
23
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
24
RESOLUTION NO. PC2022-011
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM NO. 6
(ER2022-002), MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
SD2021-005, MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. 2022-001,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP2021-053, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. CD2021-077, AND VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2021-003 AND MAKING
FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH COUNCIL POLICY K-4 AND
DIRECTOR’S DETERMINATION NO. DD2021-001 FOR THE RITZ-
CARLTON RESIDENCES PROJECT LOCATED AT 900
NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE (PA2021-296)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by Newport Center Hotel, LLC, (“Applicant”) with respect to the
Vea Newport Beach, a Marriott Resort and Spa, property located at 900 Newport Center
Drive, and legally described as Parcel 2 in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange,
State of California. As per Map 2004-225 filed in Book 361, Pages 1, 2, and 3 of Parcel
Maps, in the Office of the Orange County Recorder, as modified by the Parcel Map
Certificate of Correction recorded April 23, 2008, as instrument No. 2008000190230 of the
official records (“Property”).
2. The Applicant proposes the conversion of up to 159 hotel units to residential units;
construction of a new building to accommodate the residential units, as well as a spa,
pool, gym/fitness center and other amenities; 408-space subterranean parking structure;
and 6-level (4-levels below ground and 2-levels above ground) 400-parking space
parking structure to replace the existing hotel parking structure in substantially the same
location which require the following land use approvals (“Project”):
x Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005: A site development review in
accordance with Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 20.52.080 to
allow for the construction of the Project.
x Modification Permit No. MD2022-001: A modification permit to allow for the tandem
parking spaces in conjunction with a parking management plan.
x Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053: A conditional use permit to allow
residential use as an allowed use at a resort hotel in conjunction with a parking
management program consistent with the requirement of Director's Determination
No. DD2021-001 and NBMC Section 20.52.020 (Conditional Use Permits and Minor
Use Permits).
25
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 2 of 72
x Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077: A coastal development permit in
authorizing the construction of the project within the Coastal Zone, consistent with
the requirement of Director's Determination No. DD2021-001.
x Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003: A vesting tentative tract map for the
creation of a condominium map.
x Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002) to the 2006 General Plan Update Program
Environmental Impact Report: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”), the addendum determined there are no new significant environmental
impacts resulting from the Project.
3. The Property is designated Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) by the General Plan Land
Use Element and is located within the Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV) Zoning District.
4. The Property is located within the coastal zone, but outside of the California Coastal
Commission Appeal Areas. The Coastal Commission does not have jurisdiction over the
Project because it is outside the Appeal Area and because prior development on the
Property (e.g., Santa Barbara Condos, CDP No. 5-07-085) has been processed under a
new Coastal Development Permit rather than an amendment to the original Marriott
Coastal Development Permit (CDP No. 5-83-139). The subject property’s Coastal Land
Use Plan category is Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B) and it is located within the
Coastal Zone Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV) Coastal Zone District.
5. A public hearing was held on May 12, 2022, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center
Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was
given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. (“Ralph M.
Brown Act”), and NBMC Chapters 20.62 (Public Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings).
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning
Commission at this public hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
All potential environmental impacts for this Project have been previously addressed and
mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan as evaluated in
Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No.
2006011119) (“PEIR”); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines,
an addendum to the previously certified PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation
for the Project.
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, when an environmental impact report has been certified for a Project, no
subsequent EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
26
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 3 of 72
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is
undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement
of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was
certified as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous
EIR;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure
or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the Project will not result in any new
significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the PEIR for the General Plan 2006
Update (SCH No. 2006011119). All potential impacts associated with this Project would either
be the same or less than those described in the PEIR. In addition, there are no substantial
increases in the severity of any previously identified significant environmental impacts and no
new mitigation measures are required for the implementation of the proposed Project; there
are no changes in circumstances under which the proposed Project would be undertaken that
would result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts; and there is no new
information of substantial importance that would result in one or more new or substantially more
severe significant impacts. Therefore, in accordance with Section 21166 of the California Public
Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously
adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental document for the Project.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with the NBMC, City Council Policy K-4, and Director’s Determination No.
DD2021-001, the following findings and facts in support of such findings for each of the required
approvals is set forth below.
27
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 4 of 72
I. Major Site Development Review
In accordance with NBMC Section 20.52.080(F) (Site Development Reviews), the Planning
Commission may approve or conditionally approve a site development review application, only
after first finding that the Project is:
Finding:
A. Allowed within the subject zoning district;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Property has a General Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV), a Coastal
Land Use Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B), and a zoning designation
of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV). General Plan Anomaly Number 43 allows for 611 hotel
rooms at the Property. In 2012, 79 of the 611 rooms were converted to residential dwelling
units leaving approved 532 allowed hotel rooms in General Plan Anomaly Number 43.
2. On March 9, 2021, the City Council adopted City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers
to the Creation of Housing) by way of Resolution No. 2021-18. City Council Policy K-4
directed City staff to develop, modify as necessary, and aggressively implement strategies
and action plans designed to accelerate housing production consistent with the policy,
including encouraging the development of mixed-use hotels.
3. The goals of City Council Policy K-4 include interpreting ambiguities in the City’s General
Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC to allow hotels and motels, located outside the
Coastal Commission Appeal Areas, to convert up to 30% of their approved hotel rooms into
residential units on a one-for-one basis.
4. On April 30, 2021, the Community Development Director issued Director’s Determination
No. DD2021-001. The Director’s Determination implemented City Council Policy K-4 and
found that residential uses are allowable accessory use within four resort hotels, including
the Newport Beach Marriott Resort Hotel. The Director’s Determination also found that such
residential uses are consistent with a hotel’s and motel’s underlying General Plan, Zoning
Code, and Local Coastal Plan Program land use and zoning designations. Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 was considered on appeal by the Planning Commission on
July 8, 2021 and was considered by the City Council on appeal on August 24, 2021. Both
the Planning Commission and the City Council denied the appeal and upheld the Director’s
Determination. The time to challenge the Director’s Determination has lapsed, all applicable
statutes of limitations has run, and the Director’s Determination is now final.
5. Project is located within the Newport Beach Marriot Resort Hotel which was identified in
Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 as one of the properties where conversion of
hotel rooms to residential units is allowable in order to spur housing.
28
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 5 of 72
6. The primary use of the Property will remain a hotel which is identified as an allowable use
within the Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV) zone.
7. Additionally, the Project is allowed as an accessory use within the zoning district in that it
would allow a maximum of 30% (up to 159 hotel units) of the 532 existing units to be
converted to residential units at the Property. As such, the Project, as an accessory use to
the primary use as a hotel, is consistent with the applicable Commercial Visitor-Serving
(CV) zoning district.
Finding:
B. In compliance with all of the following applicable criteria:
a. Compliance with this Section, the General Plan, this Zoning Code, any applicable
specific plan, and other applicable criteria and policies related to the use or structure;
b. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship
of the structures to one another and to other adjacent developments; and whether
the relationship is based on standards of good design;
c. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the
site and adjacent developments and public areas;
d. The adequacy, efficiency, and safety of pedestrian and vehicular access, including
drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces;
e. The adequacy and efficiency of landscaping and open space areas and the use of
water efficient plant and irrigation materials; and
f. The protection of significant views from public right(s)-of-way and compliance with
Section 20.30.100 (Public View Protection).
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Property has a General Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV), a Coastal
Land Use Plan designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B), and a zoning designation
of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV). All CV designations allow for overnight
accommodations and accessory land uses.
2. The Project is an allowable accessory land use to the primary use as a hotel based upon
the facts and findings set forth in finding I.A above. As such, the Project is consistent with
the applicable CV land use designations.
3. The Project is designed so as to be harmonious with the existing hotel and other adjacent
developments.
4. The residential building will be setback 15 feet from Newport Center Drive and 5 feet from
the westerly (interior) property line, in excess of City development standards. The height of
the 22-story building would be 279 feet with additional accessory improvements and rooftop
appurtenances such as elevator overruns and screened mechanical equipment up to 295
feet consistent with the existing high-rise 300 ft height limitation zone. Lastly, although there
29
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 6 of 72
is no minimum standard for open space, the proposed site plan provides approximately
42% of the site as open space consisting of hardscape and landscaping.
5. The Project is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces in terms of bulk,
scale and aesthetic treatments. The existing buildings at the Property range from 30 feet to
151 feet in height and overlook the Newport Beach Country Club golf course. The Project
is located in Newport Center which is characterized by high- and mid-rise office buildings
surrounding Fashion Island. The majority of the high-rise buildings are located nearby in
Blocks 400-600, with building heights exceeding 300 feet above ground level. Low- and
mid-rise buildings are concentrated in the southeastern portion of Newport Center closest
to MacArthur Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. Several other residential communities,
including Meridian, Granville, the Colony Apartment Homes, Villas at Fashion Island,
Vivante Senior Housing (currently under construction), and other approved projects, are
located in Newport Center. The residential building will be constructed using high-quality
materials including stone, metal, wood, steel, and glass glazing accents.
6. The Project draws inspiration from the California Post Modernism architectural style which
is embedded in the original vision of Fashion Island as set forth by Master Architect William
Pereira. William Pereira’s nautical inspired building forms, most prevalent in Pereira’s work
at the Pacific Life Building at Block 700 in Newport Center, combined with the vision from
the original vessels of The Ritz-Carlton Yacht Collection helped form the design of the
Residences. Authentic Yacht inspired detailing is integrated into the architecture through
the abundant use of natural materials and the emphasis on indoor and outdoor spaces. The
building architecture respects the design pillars rooted in the formation of Fashion Island,
while showcasing a modern interpretation that exemplifies the enduring qualities of The Ritz
-Carlton brand.
7. The Project has been designed as a 22-story building structure constructed to include a
range of indoor and outdoor common space and amenities. The indoor open space
amenities will include gym and fitness facilities, locker rooms, spa treatment rooms, on-site
private storage, concierge services, an owners room featuring billiards, a library and other
uses. The outdoor amenities will include a resort style pool and spa, lounge seating, tranquil
gardens, and a dog relief area. Common indoor amenities totaling 32,424 square feet will
be located at the ground floor, basement level (B2), and on floors 16 and 17. Common
outdoor amenities totaling 9,496 square feet will be located on the ground level and on floor
16. In addition to outdoor amenity areas, there will be 65,534 square feet of hardscape and
landscape area. Each unit will contain private open space via a balcony. There is 143,038
square feet of private open space, which averages 899 square feet per unit.
8. The Project is integrated as a unified development through the use of similar architectural
style and design elements, on-site parking, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian
circulation with adjacent properties. The residential building will replace an existing building
at the Property where setbacks along each street frontage are appropriate to support
pedestrian connectivity within Newport Center and reduce the appearance of bulk. The
street setbacks are consistent with surrounding zoning districts and afford a greater
interface with the adjacent rights-of-way to ensure compatibility with the pedestrian
environment.
30
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 7 of 72
9. The Project includes extensive landscape and hardscape areas with pedestrian circulation
throughout the Property with a variety of plant materials including trees, vines, shrubs, and
turf throughout the site and in open space areas. Evergreen specimen trees (Pinus species
or similar) will be planted at the outer portions of the site while canopy shade trees will be
planted around the motorcourt and event lawn. Smaller accent trees (such as Olea europea
or similar) are proposed around the pool area.
10. The height, bulk, and scale of the Project buildings are comparable to heights of existing
buildings within Newport Center. The Property is located within the City’s High-Rise Height
Limitation Zone, which in Newport Center includes the Property, and the seven surrounding
blocks to the north and east. Building heights in these blocks range from approximately 100
feet to 315 feet above ground level. The Property was originally contemplated to have
buildings with a height of 375 feet; however, this height limit was reduced in 2010 to the
current height limit of 300 feet above ground level.
11. Mechanical equipment for the residential units has been located within the parking garage
as well as enclosures at the roof level to reduce noise impacts and minimize aesthetic
impacts. The rooftop equipment, stairways, and elevator overrun will be screened from
street view.
12. The Project has been designed to avoid conflicts among uses, such as noise, vibration,
lighting, odors, and similar impacts. The Project’s new residential building will replace an
existing hotel building and is designed to maintain privacy and protection for the surrounding
residential and commercial uses as well as its residential tenants. Walkways and egress
are sufficient throughout the Project as reviewed by the Building Division and the City Traffic
Engineer. Existing pedestrian easements will be maintained at an appropriate width along
the eastern property line and along Newport Center Drive to ensure adequate access
across the site.
13. Pursuant to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, the Project exceeds the minimum
standard requirements for parking. All of the parking is provided on-site via a subterranean
valet-served parking structure with tandem parking approved by Modification Permit 2022-
001 and the Ritz-Carlton Residences Parking Management Plan dated April 13, 2022
(“Parking Management Plan”) that was prepared for the Project.
14. Access to the site, on-site circulation, and parking areas are designed to comply with City
standards. Vehicle traffic will be directed to an entrance on the south side of the Property
along Newport Center Drive (separate from the hotel entrance). The new access will align
with the existing intersection and direct vehicles to the new porte cochere to valet services.
Service and fire access will be maintained by a new secondary driveway constructed along
the southern boundary of the site. All parking will be valet-served with a new 5-level, 408-
space subterranean parking structure constructed under the porte cochere and entry drive
area.
15. On-site circulation, project access, and parking areas are designed to provide standard
sized parking spaces (with the exception of a number of tandem parking spaces), a
31
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 8 of 72
minimum 44’ wide driveway, 26’ wide drive aisles, and the minimum vehicle turning radius
to provide adequate access for residents and guests, including a new secondary drive for
emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the
City Traffic Engineer.
16. The site design provides a new curb cut for emergency access along Newport Center Drive.
The Project provides adequate sight distance at each driveway, as determined by the City
Traffic Engineer.
17. The Project’s material palate consists of a neutral stone and glass building façade
compatible with the surrounding development in Newport Center. The design will
complement, enhance, and be compatible with the adjacent retail and office properties. The
exterior will be comprised predominantly of concrete, metal finishes and glass; design
accents at the ground elevation such as finished wood coverings and other stone and metal
accents are integrated to enhance the expression of a modern architectural style.
18. The Project is subject to the City's Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Chapter 14.17 of
NBMC) and compliance will be confirmed at plan check prior to issuing building permits.
19. Addendum No. 6 prepared for the Project analyzed whether the Project would conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The Project uses would
be consistent with the CV zoning designation. The PEIR emphasizes that the General Plan
Update would concentrate infill development and redevelopment in several specific
subareas, including Newport Center/Fashion Island (i.e., high-density residential uses are
proposed in the Newport Center/Fashion Island area). The Project will demolish a 1970s
building and replace it with new hotel branded residences, and remove the existing
structured parking on-site to develop a new parking structure and subterranean parking for
the hotel branded residences. The Project’s new residential building will be aesthetically
compatible with existing surroundings and will not have a material impact on visual
character or public views.
20. The Project will be visible from SR-1, which is designated a Coastal View Road, and also
from several public view points within the City. The majority of these view points feature
views of the Newport Back Bay, and Newport Harbor, and are generally oriented in a
westerly orientation. The Project is located more than 3,000 feet from the water, and will
not block views from a Coastal View Road or public viewpoints because the predominate
view from SR-1 is to the coastline, which is in the opposite direction compared to the Project.
When the Project is developed as proposed, it would be of a comparable height to other
nearby structures in Newport Center with no potential impact to scenic resources visible
from SR-1. The photo simulations provided in Section 3.2 of Addendum No. 6 depict the
new structure from several view points and demonstrate that Project will not impact or
degrade coastal views.
Finding:
C. The proposed development is not detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the
City, nor endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience,
32
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 9 of 72
health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the proposed development.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project has been designed to ensure that potential conflicts with surrounding land uses
are minimized to the extent possible to maintain a healthy environment for both businesses
and residents by providing an architecturally pleasing Project with articulation and building
modulations to enhance the urban environment consistent with development in Newport
Center.
2. The Project provides an architecturally pleasing nautical/contemporary design theme, which
is consistent with the original master plan design for Newport Center, and features
articulation and building modulation to enhance the urban environment consistent with
existing buildings in Newport Center. The Project provides pedestrian paths and landscape
areas that will create connectivity to surrounding uses.
3. The Property is located in a developed commercial area with limited sensitive land uses
located nearby. The overall height of the Project is consistent with the High-Rise Height
Limitation Zone and will not materially impact any public views from General Plan
designated vantages or significantly shade surrounding properties as demonstrated in
Section 3.1, Aesthetics, of Addendum No. 6.
a. The Property is located in close proximity to the Granville Condominiums and will
introduce a new high-rise residential building where existing low-rise hotel rooms are
developed. Section 20.20.030 of the NBMC requires a 5-foot setback in the CV zone
when adjacent to residential development. The property line is located within a sloped
landscape area between the hotel and the Granville Condominiums. The nearest point
of the residential structure will be setback approximately 35 feet from the property line.
There will be a 5-foot setback from the internal property line to a 24’ to 30’ wide
emergency access and service drive. The service drive will gradually slope downward
and provide access to the subterranean parking structure. The service drive will provide
a buffer between the development at grade level.
b. A shade and shadow analysis was prepared to assess the impacts of the new residential
building on the Granville Condominiums and the Meridian condominium complex. The
Project would cast shadow on the garage portion of one residence at the Grandville
community at 9:00 a.m. during Midsummer Solstice (June 21), and over some
residences at the Meridian condominium complex at 9:00 a.m. during Midwinter Solstice
(December 21), as shown in Section 3.1.C, Aesthetics of Addendum No. 6 Exhibit 3.1-
1b and 3.1-1d, respectively. By 10:00 a.m., the shadows would not cover these
residences and there would be no impact from shade/shadow to people residing in the
area. Due to the short duration of anticipated shadows on off-site properties, Addendum
No. 6 concluded that the Project would result in less than significant shade and shadow
impacts and that no mitigation is required.
33
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 10 of 72
4. The proposed subterranean parking structure provides 408 parking spaces including ADA
accessible spaces, standard spaces and tandem parking spaces, and through the use of
valet parking will accommodate 100% of the Project's anticipated parking demand based
upon the Parking Management Plan. Additionally, the parking lot and vehicular access
thereto has been designed to accommodate and provide safe access for passenger
vehicles, emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, and refuse collection vehicles, as analyzed
in Section 3.17 (Transportation) of Addendum No. 6.
5. The Project includes a new parking structure including four levels below ground and 2 levels
above ground to serve the existing hotel. The new parking structure will replace the existing
parking structure in substantially the same location and provide 400 parking spaces. A total
of 808 parking spaces (408 for hotel-branded residence and 400 for hotel use) are proposed
for the Project which will adequately serve the Property. The Project will not result in any
changes in vehicular circulation for the hotel.
6. Direct vehicular access to the Project will be provided from an existing driveway on Newport
Center Drive along the south side of the Property. Vehicles will be directed along a new
access drive to the new porte cochere where valet service will deliver cars into a new
subterranean parking structure. A new secondary driveway will be constructed along the
southern boundary of the Property to provide service and fire access from Newport Center
Drive along the western boundary of the Property to the Event Lawn.
7. Emergency vehicles would access the Property along Newport Center Drive and onto the
new service drive. The staging area will be marked for exclusive use by the Fire
Department.
8. The Project has been designed to accommodate and provide access for delivery trucks,
moving trucks, and refuse collections vehicles, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer.
Delivery trucks will utilize the entry off of Newport Center Drive, while refuse collections
vehicles will load trash along the service driveway. The Project includes the provision of
freight elevators to ensure that residents can safely move in and staff can adequately
service the building.
9. The Project is subject to the City's Outdoor Lighting requirements contained within NBMC
Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting) of the Zoning Code. Condition No. 14 requires the
preparation of a photometric study based on the final lighting plans to ensure that site and
architectural lighting conforms with lighting requirements that the project is not excessively
illuminated. Condition No. 15 also provides additional protection where the Community
Development Director can order the diming of lighting should it be necessary.
10. The construction will comply with all Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes. All ordinances
of the City and all conditions of approval shall be complied with. The Project includes a Fire
Master Plan to ensure enhanced public safety and fire access to the property.
II. Modification Permit
34
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 11 of 72
This Project requires a modification permit, consistent with Section 20.52.050 (Modification
Permits) of the NBMC. In accordance with Section 20.52.050(E), the Planning Commission
may approve or conditionally approve a modification permit if on the basis of the application,
materials, plans, and testimony (orally and/or in writing) submitted, the Planning Commission
first finds all of the following:
Finding:
A. The requested modification will be compatible with existing development in the
neighborhood;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project requires the demolition of an existing hotel building and parking structure, and
construction of a new residential building, a new 408-space subterranean parking structure
and new 400-space above grade parking structure.
2. The residents will be served by valet service that will deliver vehicles into a new 408-space
subterranean parking structure that includes tandem parking. The Project is required to
provide 398 parking spaces, and 408 will be provided.
3. Tandem spaces reduce the footprint and depth of the subterranean garage, making it a
more efficient use of land. The Project will be adequately served by the new subterranean
parking structure. At grade, parking features include a porte cochere where residents and
guests will be met by a valet for vehicle drop off. Tandem parking in a subterranean parking
garage is compatible with the existing commercial, retail, residential, and hotel uses in
Newport Center.
4. Valet and tandem parking arrangements for hotel, commercial, and high-end residential
building operations are used within the City. When operated according to an approved valet
plan and by a professional valet service, valet parking has proven a proficient way to
maximize parking efficiency and on-site parking demand.
5. Access to the Property and valet-services is from Newport Center Drive and has been
determined to be adequate for the use and is compatible with the other commercial lots in
the area.
Finding:
B. The granting of the modification is necessary due to the unique physical characteristic(s) of
the property and/or structure, and/or characteristics of the use;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project is located in Newport Center which is characterized by high- and mid-rise office
buildings surrounding Fashion Island. The Property was originally developed in 1975 and
the existing parking garage was built in 1984. Because Newport Center Drive is circular,
35
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 12 of 72
many of the properties fronting it are not a precise square or rectangular shape. However,
the Property’s shape is even more unique in that it is elongated and can be characterized
as a cross between rhombus and trapezium shaped.
2. Due to the lot size, width and depth of the site, subterranean parking with tandem parking
spaces is necessary to accommodate the parking.
3. The Project’s 100% valet service for all residents and guests is consistent with the use of
the Property as a Ritz-Carlton Residence.
Finding:
C. The granting of the modification is necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the
property and that the strict application of the Zoning Code results in physical hardships that
are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project is located in Newport Center which is characterized by high- and mid-rise office
buildings surrounding Fashion Island. The Project will provide parking in excess of the
City’s residential parking requirements to ensure that all residents, guests and employees
will have adequate access to parking.
2. However, as indicated above, the shape of the Property is unique. Given its unique shape
of the property combined with the building setback requirements, landscaping, vehicular
access and open space requirements at the Property, tandem parking is appropriate.
3. The available on-site area to provide parking has been maximized and can accommodate
a maximum of 408 parking spaces in the Project’s subterranean parking structure while still
providing landscaping, adequate vehicular access, and open space at the Property.
4. Granting Modification Permit No. 2022-001 meets the intent of the NBMC by providing the
required number of parking spaces on-site without the need to use off-site parking spaces.
Finding:
D. There are no alternatives to the Modification Permit, that could provide similar benefits to
the applicant with less potential detriment to surrounding owners and occupants, the
neighborhood, or to the general public; and
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. An alternate solution would be to expand the footprint of the subterranean residential
parking structure or increase the size of the hotel parking structure. Both of those options
would require a significant change to the scope of work and may result in a structure with
undesirable bulk, or scale.
36
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 13 of 72
2. Vehicles for the Project will access the property from an existing driveway on Newport
Center Drive that will take residents and guests to the porte cochere where valet services
will park vehicles in the subterranean parking garage. On-site circulation is not expected to
be impacted by the use of tandem spaces for valet parking
3. The inclusion of tandem parking stalls will not be a detriment to the surrounding
neighborhood or general public because the number of parking spaces will exceed the code
requirement. Valet operations will manage all resident and guest parking, thereby
eliminating any impact to the general public or surrounding owners, occupants and the
neighborhood. The subterranean parking structure takes up the majority of the property to
the east of the building and allows for the above grade surface to contain substantial
setbacks, open space, and landscape treatments. Because the parking will be managed by
valet operations, as is standard for a Ritz-Carlton Residence, there is no alternative to the
tandem parking that would provide similar benefits of increased open space and landscape
treatments.
Finding:
E. The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare
to the occupants of the property, nearby properties, the neighborhood, or the City, or result
in a change in density or intensity that would be inconsistent with the provisions of this
Zoning Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The parking lot has been reviewed for adequate access and circulation for use by residents,
guests, employees, and access by emergency vehicles.
2. Prior to implementation of the Project a final valet parking management plan is required to
be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Community Development.
3. The inclusion of tandem parking will not be a detriment to public health, safety, or welfare
to the occupants of the property or nearby properties, the neighborhood or the City because
the parking will be managed by valet operation, and will exceed the required number of
parking spaces which will ensure that there is adequate parking on-site and that off-site
parking will not be required by residents, guests or employees. Tandem parking is allowed
by the zoning code, subject to a modification permit. The addresses the provision of valet
parking for the Project.
III. Conditional Use Permit
This Project requires a conditional use permit, consistent with NBMC Section 20.52.020
(Conditional Use Permits and Minor Use Permits) and the requirements of Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001. In accordance with Section 20.52.020(F), the Planning
Commission may approve or conditionally approve a conditional use permit, only after first
finding all of the following:
37
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 14 of 72
Finding:
A. The use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The conversion of up to 159-hotel branded residences is consistent with General Plan
designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV); a Coastal Land Use Plan designation of
Visitor Serving Commercial (CV-B); and a Zoning designation of Commercial Visitor-
Serving (CV), which allows for the Project site to provide overnight accommodations and
accessory land uses. City Council Policy K-4 and Directors Determination No. DD2021-001
permit residential dwellings as an accessory use to the primary use of the Property as a
resort hotel. The Director’s Determination contains regulations and restrictions to ensure
the allowance of residential accessory units within a hotel property does not change the
primary land use, which remains resort hotel.
2. The Project site is not located within a Specific Plan area.
Finding:
B. The use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable
provisions of this Zoning Code and the Municipal Code;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. On March 9, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-18 Reducing the Barriers
to the Creation of Housing (City Council Policy K-4). City Council Policy K-4 directed City
staff to develop, modify as necessary, and aggressively implement strategies and action
plans designed to accelerate housing production consistent with the policy, including
encouraging the development of mixed-use hotels.
2. The goals of City Council Policy K-4 include interpreting ambiguities in the City’s General
Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC. City Council Policy K-4 allows hotels and
motels, located outside the Coastal Commission Appeal Areas, to convert up to 30% of
their approved hotel rooms into residential units on a one-for-one basis.
3. On April 30, 2021, the Community Development Director issued Director’s Determination
No. DD2021-001. The Director’s Determination implemented City Council Policy K-4 and
found that residential uses are allowable as an accessory use within four resort hotels,
including the Newport Beach Marriott Resort Hotel. The Director’s Determination also found
that such residential uses are consistent with a hotel’s and motel’s underlying General Plan,
Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Plan Program land use and zoning designations.
Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 was considered on appeal by the Planning
Commission on July 8, 2021, and was considered by the City Council on appeal on August
24, 2021. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council denied the appeal and upheld
38
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 15 of 72
the Director’s Determination. The time to challenge the Director’s Determination has lapsed,
the statute of limitations has run, and the Director’s Determination is now final.
4. The conversion of hotel units to residential as an accessory use is consistent with City
Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The City has already
identified the Property as a qualifying resort hotel offering destination accommodations,
including restaurant and recreation facilities.
5. The Project complies with City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No.
DD2021-001 for a conversion of up to 30% (up to 159 hotel units) of the 532 existing units
to hotel branded residences. The conversion will result in a 30% decrease in number of
hotel rooms. The total number of units at the property will remain the same, at 532 units.
The VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa is located outside the California
Coastal Commission Appeal Areas, identified in California Public Resources Code Section
30603(a).
6. The new hotel-branded residence building complies with the CV zoning district design
standards. The proposed building will be setback 15 feet from Newport Center Drive and 5
feet from the southerly (interior) property line all in excess of the standards. The height of
the 22-story building would be 279 feet with additional accessory improvements and rooftop
appurtenances such as elevator overruns and screened mechanical equipment up to 295
feet consistent with the existing high-rise 300 ft height limitation zone. Lastly, although there
is no minimum standard for open space, the proposed site plan provides approximately
42% of the site as open space consisting of hardscape and landscaping.
Finding:
C. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the use are compatible with the
allowed uses in the vicinity;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project is located in Newport Center which is an area characterized by high- and mid-
rise office buildings surrounding Fashion Island. The majority of the high-rise buildings are
located nearby in Blocks 400-600, with building heights exceeding 300 feet above ground
level. Low- and mid-rise buildings are concentrated in the southeastern portion of Newport
Center closest to MacArthur Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. The Project height is
consistent with the City’s High-Rise Height Limitation Zone established in the Zoning Code.
2. The design of the structure will include high-quality materials including wood, stone, steel
and metal accents, and glass fiber reinforced concrete (GFRC), and expansive openings,
which is consistent with the high-quality design in Newport Center. The new hotel-branded
residence building will be oriented on the site in such a manner as to reduce the bulk and
scale as viewed from Newport Center Drive, and from surrounding properties.
3. The Project is compatible with the existing resort hotel, and the surrounding area. There
are several other residential communities, including Meridian, the Colony, Villas at Fashion
39
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 16 of 72
Island, Vivante Senior Housing (currently under construction), and other approved
residential projects, located in Newport Center.
4. The Project will provide residents the opportunity to access the shopping, dining and other
resident-serving amenities within the Fashion Island/Newport Center area.
Finding:
D. The site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, operating
characteristics, and the provision of public and vehicle (e.g., fire and medical) access and
public services and utilities; and
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The proposed improvement area consists of 2.775 acres within the 9.53-acre VEA Newport
Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa property. The new hotel-branded residence building will
replace an existing hotel building. The site can accommodate the new hotel-branded
residence building and provide adequate parking. The Project would result in less traffic
compared to the existing 532 room hotel. The hotel branded residences would generate 43
AM peak hour trips, 51 PM peak hour trips, and 722 average daily trips (ADTs). Combined,
the existing hotel and new hotel branded residences would generate 215 AM peak hour
trips and 271 PM peak hour trips, while the existing hotel generates 245 AM peak hour trips
and 314 PM peak hour trips. The ADT generation for the combined existing hotel and new
hotel branded residences is 3,702, and the ADT for the existing hotel is 4,251. The
anticipated trip generation for the combined existing hotel and the proposed hotel branded
residences would result in a trip reduction of 549 ADTs.
2. The Project is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces in terms of bulk,
scale and aesthetic treatments. The existing buildings at the Project site range from 30 feet
to 151 feet in height and overlook the Newport Beach Country Club golf course. The Project
is located in Newport Center which is characterized by high- and mid-rise office buildings
surrounding Fashion Island. The majority of the high-rise buildings are located nearby in
Blocks 400-600, with building heights exceeding 300 feet above ground level. Low- and
mid-rise buildings are concentrated in the southeastern portion of Newport Center closest
to MacArthur Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. Several other residential communities,
including Meridian, Villas at Fashion Island, Vivante Senior Housing (currently under
construction), and other approved projects, are located in Newport Center. The residential
building will be constructed using the highest quality materials including stone, metal, wood,
steel, and glass glazing accents.
3. Service and fire access will be maintained by a new secondary driveway from Newport
Center Drive and drive aisle along the southern boundary of the site. All parking will be
valet-served with a new 5-level, 408-space subterranean parking structure constructed
under the porte cochere and entry drive area.
4. The Project includes a new parking structure (4-levels below ground, 2-levels above
ground) to serve the existing hotel. The new parking structure will replace the existing
40
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 17 of 72
parking structure in substantially the same location and provide 400 parking spaces via four
subterranean levels and two above ground levels. A total of 808 parking spaces (408 for
hotel-branded residence and 400 for hotel use) are proposed for the Project which will
adequately serve the site. The Project will not result in any changes in vehicular circulation
for the hotel.
Finding:
E. Operation of the use at the location proposed would not be detrimental to the harmonious
and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to
the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project provides an architecturally pleasing theme with articulation and building
modulation to enhance the urban environment consistent with existing buildings in Newport
Center. The Project provides pedestrian paths and landscape areas that will create
connectivity to surrounding uses.
2. The Project will redevelop an old building with high-density hotel branded residences and
remove the existing surface parking on-site to develop a parking structure and subterranean
parking for the hotel branded residences.
3. The Project includes extensive landscape and hardscape areas with pedestrian circulation
throughout the site with a variety of plant materials including trees, vines, shrubs, and turf
throughout the site and in open space areas. Evergreen specimen trees (Pinus species or
similar) will be planted at the outer portions of the site while canopy shade trees will be
planted around the motorcourt and event lawn. Smaller accent trees (such as Olea europea
or similar) will be planted around the pool area.
4. Access to the site, on- site circulation, and parking areas are designed to comply with City
standards. Vehicle traffic will be directed to an entrance on the south side of the property
along Newport Center Drive (separate from the hotel entrance). The new access will align
with the existing intersection and direct vehicles to the new porte cochere to valet services.
Service and fire access will be maintained by a new secondary driveway constructed along
the southern boundary of the site. All parking will be valet-served with a new 5-level, 408-
space subterranean parking structure constructed under the porte cochere and entry drive
area.
5. The Project provides parking in excess of the parking requirements via the inclusion of
tandem parking spaces. The use of valet parking will allow for the active management of
tandem parking without resident or guests facing the task of tandem parking themselves.
The tandem parking combined with the valet parking program will accommodate 100% of
the Project' s anticipated parking for residents, guests and employees. Additionally, a
service drive is included to provide safe and separate access for emergency vehicles,
41
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 18 of 72
service and delivery trucks, moving vans, and refuse collection vehicles as detailed in the
Parking Management Plan.
IV. Coastal Development Permit
This Project requires a coastal development permit, consistent with NBMC Section 21.52.015
(Coastal Development Permits) and the requirement of Director's Determination No. DD2021-
001. In accordance with Section 21.52.015(F), the Planning Commission may approve or
conditionally approve a coastal development permit, only after first finding that the proposed
development:
Finding:
A. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program (e.g.
development standards, no impacts to public views, natural resources, etc.); and
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The hotel branded residences are consistent with the General Plan designation of Visitor
Serving Commercial (CV); a Coastal Land Use Plan designation of Visitor Serving
Commercial (CV-B); and a Zoning designation of Commercial Visitor-Serving (CV), which
allows for the Project site to provide overnight accommodations and accessory residential
uses as part of a resort hotel land use.
2. The proposed Project is consistent with City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to
the Creation of Housing) and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001, which allows for
accessory residential uses within resort hotels subject to seven separate requirements
including the following:
a. Accessory residential is only allowed within resort hotels, a self-contained destination
that provides for all needs in one location. The Project is part of the VEA Newport Beach,
A Marriott Resort and Spa, which is a self-contained destination providing restaurant,
bar, recreational facilities including a pool, spa, and a variety of other guest-serving
uses.
b. Must be located outside the appeal area identified in California Public Resource Code
Section 30603(a). The Project is located outside the appeal area identified in California
Public Resources Code Section 30603(a) as depicted on the Post-LCP Certification
Permit and Appeal Jurisdiction Map, and is located at the northeastern most boundary
of the coastal zone.
c. Approved hotel rooms may be converted to residential units but only on a one-for-one
basis. PA2012-020 set the General Plan limit for hotel rooms at 532 in Anomaly 43
where the Project is located, which is consistent with the Coastal Implementation Plan.
The proposed hotel branded residences would include up to 159 hotel branded
residences with a corresponding reduction in the number of hotel rooms. No new
intensity would be created, rather the units would be converted on a one-to-one basis
42
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 19 of 72
via the reduction in the existing number of approved hotel rooms. The total units at the
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa would remain at 532. Of the 532 units,
373 would be traditional hotel rooms and up to 159 would be hotel branded residences.
d. The residential use shall at all times be accessory to the hotel use, and the residential
units shall comprise no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms. The hotel branded
residences will be part of the resort hotel campus and are accessory to the hotel use.
The Project will result in up to 159 hotel branded residences which represents the
conversion of up to 30% of the existing 532 hotel rooms.
e. The residential units may be located within a repurposed hotel or in a new residential
structure. The proposed hotel branded residences will be located within a new hotel-
branded residential structure.
f. A conditional use permit and coastal development permit is required to ensure adequate
parking through surplus parking, shard parking, or the adoption of a parking
management plan. The Project exceeds the parking requirements for both the project
itself and the hotel. The parking will be managed via valet operations as detailed in the
Parking Management Plan, and the Parking Management Plan for the VEA Newport
Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa, dated April 13, 2022.
g. Potential impacts to public access, affordable housing, and the loss of transient
occupancy tax must be mitigated by entering into a Development Agreement with the
City of by some other means deemed appropriate.
(1) The Project does not result in impacts to public access insomuch as the property is
an existing resort hotel which is available to paying guests. The property does not
provide public access to the coast or public access to other recreational
opportunities. In addition, the existing resort hotel does not provide low-cost
accommodations, and the Project will not result in an impact to existing low-cost
accommodations as analyzed in NBMC Section 21.48.025 Feasibility and Impact
Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences dated March 18, 2022, and attached as
Exhibit I.
(2) The Project will result in the creation of new housing consistent with the purpose and
intent of City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The
City does not have an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or an Affordable Housing
Implementation Plan. Nevertheless, it is recognized that affordable housing is an
important component of any new residential housing project, and the proposed
Project will provide an in-lieu fee related to affordable housing as a condition of
approval to the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as detailed in those findings.
(3) The Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with Newport Beach City
Council Policy K-4 for Conversion of Hotel Rooms to Project dated March 18, 2022
and attached as Exhibit J analyzed the potential loss of TOT associated with the
reduction of up to 159 hotel rooms. The analysis concludes that although the
reduction in hotel rooms associated with Project implementation would affect TOT
43
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 20 of 72
receipts to the City, this reduction in TOT would be fully mitigated because the 373
remaining hotel rooms would be significantly upgraded compared to the existing 532
hotel rooms, and each upgraded room is expected to rent for a higher room rate –
and thus, generate higher TOT- than would the existing unrenovated rooms. The
analysis concludes that the projected 20-Year combined TOT and property taxes to
be generated by the Project would result in total tax receipts to the City of
approximately $136,413,736, which is $7,694,975 more than the City would
otherwise receive if the Project was not built. This represents a net increase in
revenue for the City compared to the hotel alone. As such, no mitigation is necessary
because the overall assessment of TOT and property taxes will result in a net
financial benefit to the City.
3. The proposed Project complies with the CV zoning district design standards including
setback, height, parking, open space as further detailed in the Site Development Review
findings. The proposed hotel-branded residence building will exceed all required setbacks.
The height of the 22-story building would be 279 feet with additional accessory
improvements and rooftop appurtenances such as elevator overruns and screened
mechanical equipment up to 295 feet which is within the existing high-rise height limitation
zone of 300 feet. Parking for the hotel branded residences will be subterranean, and the
Project will provide parking in excess of the code requirement. Although there is no
minimum standard for open space, the proposed site plan provides approximately 42% of
the site as open space consisting of hardscape and landscaping and provides parking in
excess of the parking requirements. The Project will include the construction of a new
parking structure to replace the existing hotel parking structure in a similar location but with
a smaller footprint and enhanced vehicular circulation. The hotel parking structure will
include four subterranean levels and two above ground levels and be setback from Newport
Center Drive approximately 15 feet.
4. The Project is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces in terms of bulk,
scale and aesthetic treatments. The property is within the High-Rise Height Limitation Zone,
allow for buildings up to 300 feet. The existing buildings at the Project site range from 30
feet to 151 feet in height and overlook the Newport Beach Country Club golf course. The
Project is located in Newport Center which is characterized by high- and mid-rise office
buildings surrounding Fashion Island. The majority of the high-rise buildings are located
nearby in Blocks 400-600, with building heights exceeding 300 feet above ground level.
Low- and mid-rise buildings are concentrated in the southeastern portion of Newport Center
closest to MacArthur Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. Several other residential
communities, including Meridian, Villas at Fashion Island, Vivante Senior Housing (currently
under construction), and other pending projects, are located in Newport Center. The
residential building will be constructed using high quality materials including stone, metal,
wood, steel, and glass glazing accents.
5. The Project site is not abutting a coastal view road, public access way, or Coastal Viewpoint
as identified in the Coastal Land Use Plan. Extensive photo simulations were prepared to
depict the proposed Project from more than 10 locations throughout the City, from vantage
points near and far. These photo simulations depict the proposed Project within the broader
context of large buildings in Newport Center. Public views and viewpoints were assessed
44
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 21 of 72
including views from Newport Harbor, Castaways Park, Back Bay View Park, and many
other prominent locations. The proposed Project does not inhibit public views of the bay nor
do they inhibit views from public viewpoints or parks.
6. The Project includes extensive landscape and hardscape areas with pedestrian circulation
throughout the site with a variety of plant materials including trees, vines, shrubs, and turf
throughout the site and in open space areas. Evergreen specimen trees (Pinus species or
similar) will be planted at the outer portions of the site while canopy shade trees will be
planted around the motorcourt and event lawn. Smaller accent trees (such as Olea europea
or similar) will be planted around the pool area.
7. Access to the site, on- site circulation, and parking areas are designed to comply with City
standards. Vehicle traffic will be directed to an entrance on the south side of the property
along Newport Center Drive (separate from the hotel entrance). The new access will align
with the existing intersection and direct vehicles to the new porte cochere to valet services.
Service and fire access will be maintained by a new secondary driveway constructed along
the southern boundary of the site. All parking will be valet-served with a new 5-level, 408-
space subterranean parking structure constructed under the porte cochere and entry drive
area.
8. The Project includes the replacement of the existing hotel parking structure with a new
parking structure to serve the hotel. The new parking structure will replace the existing
parking structure in substantially the same location but with a smaller footprint and
increased internal circulation. The parking structure will include four levels subterranean
and two levels above ground, with a total of 408 parking spaces. A total of 808 parking
spaces (408 for hotel-branded residence and 400 for hotel use) are proposed for the Project
which will exceed the parking requirements. The Project will not result in any changes in
vehicular circulation for the hotel.
9. The Project is subject to the City's Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Chapter 14.17 of
NBMC) and compliance will be confirmed at plan check prior to issuing building permits.
10. Addendum No. 6 analyzed whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality. The Project uses would be consistent with the
CV zoning designation. The 2006 EIR emphasizes that the General Plan Update would
concentrate infill development and redevelopment in several specific subareas, including
Newport Center/Fashion Island (i.e., high-density residential uses are proposed in the
Newport Center/Fashion Island area). The Project will redevelop an old building façade with
new hotel branded residences and remove the existing surface parking on-site to develop
a parking structure and subterranean parking for the hotel branded residences. The new
building will be aesthetically compatible with existing surrounding and will not have a
material impact on visual character or public views
45
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 22 of 72
Finding:
B. Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal
Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any
body of water located within the coastal zone.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Project is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any
body of water located within the coastal zone. The Project site is located approximately
3,300 feet from Newport Harbor. As such, it is not necessary to assess the consistency with
the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. The Project
site does not provide public access or public recreation opportunities and will not impact
any public access or public recreational opportunities as detailed in Chapter 3 of the Coastal
Act.
V. Vesting Tentative Tract Map
This Project requires a vesting tentative tract map, consistent with NBMC Section 19.20.040
(Filing and Review). In accordance with Section 19.12.070(A), the Planning Commission may
approve a vesting tentative tract map, only after first making the following findings:
Finding:
A. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent
with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable provisions of
the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Refer to Facts A. 1-2 and B. 1-2 under Site Development Review that discuss the Project’s
consistency with the Commercial Visitor (CV) General Plan land use designation.
2. The Tentative Tract Map (for condominium purposes) provides a cohesive development
with a pattern of dwelling unit orientations and vehicle circulation that provides a pedestrian-
friendly environment with strong connectivity to adjacent commercial and office areas.
3. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and found it
consistent with Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the NBMC and applicable requirements of the
Subdivision Map Act as set forth in California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.
4. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance with Title 19
(Subdivisions) of the NBMC.
Finding:
B. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development;
46
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 23 of 72
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The site is not located in a flood zone. The geotechnical feasibility study and geotechnical
report will provide additional recommendations for construction of the Project to ensure the
suitability for the proposed development that will be required for construction prior to the
issuance of building permits.
2. The 2.775-acre site is large enough to accommodate the proposed new residential building
while providing sufficient landscape setbacks, open space areas, as well as vehicle access
and guest parking areas that meet applicable standards. The existing developed site is
devoid of natural resources and it is located in an area that provides adequate access to
roadways and utilities.
3. Noise levels at the Project site are up to 58.3 dBA CNEL. Per the City’s General Plan Noise
Element, noise levels of up to 60 dBA CNEL are considered clearly compatible. Additionally,
the outdoor activity/amenity area including the proposed pools, lounge, and deck would be
set back from the adjacent roadways. With appropriate noise control measures under
conventional construction and design of the Project (e.g., closed windows, fresh air supply
systems or air conditioning), the interior noise levels will be well below the City and State
interior noise standard of 45 dB CNEL for residential units.
Finding:
C. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision making body may
nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared
for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California
Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental
impact report;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Under existing conditions, the Property and surrounding land areas are fully developed with
urban uses and do not contain sensitive biological resources. The vegetation that occurs
on-site is ornamental in nature, including trees and ornamental shrubs, groundcover, and
vines growing on the existing building’s facades and screen walls. A Mitigation Measure is
provided by the 2006 EIR to ensure adequate protection of nesting birds during the
construction process. The Project will have no substantial change from the previous EIR
analysis, as documented in the EIR Addendum.
2. No drainages traverse the property and no potential jurisdictional waters or wetlands areas
are present on or immediately adjacent to the Property.
47
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 24 of 72
3. Addendum No. 6 to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update Environmental Impact
Report (SCH No. 2006011119) was prepared for the Project. On the basis of the entire
environmental review record, Addendum No. 6 concludes that the Project will have no
substantial change to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and tribal
cultural resources from the previous EIR analysis, as documented in the EIR Addendum.
Finding:
D. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. At full build-out, air quality and Green House Gas (“GHG”) emissions associated with
construction of the Project will have no substantial change from the previous EIR analysis,
as documented in the EIR Addendum.
2. Potential impacts associated with biological resources, cultural resources, geology and
soils, and tribal cultural resources will have no substantial change from the previous EIR
analysis, as documented in the EIR Addendum.
3. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the planned subdivision pattern will
generate any serious public health problems.
4. All construction for the Project complies with Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes. Public
improvements will be required of the developer per NBMC Section 19.28.010 and Sections
66410 et seq. of the Subdivision Map Act. All ordinances of the City and all conditions of
approval will be complied with.
The anticipated trip generation for the combined existing hotel and the proposed hotel
branded residences would result in a trip reduction of 549 ADTs relative to the existing uses
on site.
Finding:
E. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the
proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision-making body may approve a map if
it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these
easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This
finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of
a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the City Council to
determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of
property within a subdivision;
48
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 25 of 72
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Public improvements, consisting of the reconstruction of the curb, gutter, and sidewalks,
one (1) new driveway along the Newport Center Drive frontage, and street trees along
Newport Center Drive will be required of the applicant per Title 19 (Subdivisions) and the
Subdivision Map Act. A common sewer and water connection will be provided for the Project
as approved by the Public Works Department that will connect to an existing main that
serves the existing hotel.
2. There are no easements that will be impacted by this Project.
Finding:
That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if the
land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of
1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would not be
too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in residential development
incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land;
Fact in Support of Finding:
The Property does not contain prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide
importance and no portion of the Property is covered by a Williamson Act contract.
Finding:
F. That, in the case of a “land project” as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business
and Professions Code: (1) There is an adopted specific plan for the area to be included
within the land project; and (2) the decision-making body finds that the proposed land
project is consistent with the specific plan for the area;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. California Business and Professions Code Section 11000.5 has been repealed by the
Legislature. However, this Property is not considered a “land project” as previously defined
in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code because the Property
does not contain 50 or more parcels of land nor is it located within the boundaries of a
specific plan.
Finding:
G. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied
in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act;
49
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 26 of 72
Fact in Support of Finding:
Tentative Tract Map No. 19222 and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Code
of Regulations, referred to as the California Building Code or CBC, which requires new
construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location
and climate. The Newport Beach Community Development Department ensures compliance
with the CBC through the plan check and inspection process.
Finding:
H. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and
Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City’s share of the regional
housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the public service
needs of the City’s residents and available fiscal and environmental resources;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Property is improved with hotel uses, and there are no residential units on the Property.
The Project includes the construction of up to 159 hotel-branded residence units to
contribute to the City’s population needs consistent with City Council Policy K-4, Reducing
the Barriers to the Creation of Housing and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 which
allows for accessory residential uses within resort hotels subject to seven separate
requirements including the following:
a. Accessory residential is only allowed within resort hotels, a self-contained destination
that provides for all needs in one location. The Project is part of the VEA Newport Beach,
A Marriott Resort and Spa, which is a self-contained destination providing restaurant,
bar, recreational facilities including a pool, spa, and a variety of other guest-serving
uses.
b. Must be located outside the appeal area identified in California Public Resource Code
Section 30603(a) as depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal Areas
Map. The Project is located outside the appeal jurisdiction, at the northeastern most
boundary of the coastal zone.
c. Approved hotel rooms may be converted to residential units on a one-for-one basis. The
existing resort hotel is allowed a maximum of 532 rooms in the Coastal Implementation
Plan. The proposed hotel branded residences would include up to 159 hotel branded
residences with a corresponding reduction in the number of hotel rooms. No new
intensity would be created, rather the units would be converted on a one-to-one basis
via the reduction in the existing number of approved hotel rooms. The total units at the
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa would remain at 532. Of the 532 units,
373 would be traditional hotel rooms and up to 159 would be hotel branded residences.
d. The residential use shall at all times be accessory to the hotel use, and the residential
units shall comprise no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms. The hotel branded
residences will be part of the resort hotel campus and are accessory to the hotel use.
50
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 27 of 72
The Project will result in up to 159 hotel branded residences which represents the
conversion of 30% of the existing 532 hotel rooms.
e. The residential units may be located within a repurposed hotel or in a new residential
structure. The proposed hotel branded residences will be located within the existing
resort hotel property, within a new residential structure.
f. A conditional use permit and coastal development permit is required to ensure adequate
parking through surplus parking, shard parking, or the adoption of a parking
management plan. The proposed Project exceeds the parking requirements for both the
hotel branded residences and the hotel. The parking will be managed via valet
operations as detailed in the Parking Management Plan, and the Parking Management
Plan for the VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa, dated April 13, 2022.
g. Potential impacts to public access, affordable housing, and the loss of transient
occupancy tax must be mitigated by entering into a Development Agreement with the
City of by some other means deemed appropriate.
(1) Any reduction in public access is limited to the reduction of hotel rooms available to
the general public to paying guests. The property does not provide public access to
the coast or public access to other recreational opportunities in the area. The existing
resort hotel does not provide low-cost accommodations, and the Project will not
result in an impact to existing low-cost accommodations as analyzed in NBMC
Section 21.48.025 Feasibility and Impact Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences
dated March 18, 2022, and attached as Exhibit I. The general decrease of access
associated with the reduction of up to 159 high-cost hotel rooms is mitigated through
the payment of $10,700 per unit fee to the City that will be used a condition of
approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
(2) The Project will result in the creation of new housing consistent with the purpose and
intent of City Council Policy K-1 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The
City Council is considering adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance in light of
the City’s RHNA allocation and State mandated housing requirements. As a result,
the Project will provide an in-lieu fee related to affordable housing as a condition of
approval to the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as detailed in those findings.
(3) The Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with Newport Beach City
Council Policy K-4 for Conversion of Hotel Rooms to Residential dated March 18,
2022, and attached as Exhibit J analyzed the potential loss of TOT associated with
the reduction of up to 159 hotel rooms. The analysis concludes that although the
reduction in hotel rooms associated with Project implementation would affect TOT
receipts to the City, this reduction in TOT would be fully mitigated because the 373
remaining hotel rooms would be significantly upgraded compared to the existing 532
hotel rooms, and each upgraded room is expected to rent for a higher room rate –
and thus, generate higher TOT- than would the existing unrenovated rooms. The
analysis concludes that the projected 20-Year combined TOT and property taxes to
be generated by the Project would result in total tax receipts to the City of
51
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 28 of 72
approximately $136,413,736. This represents a net increase in revenue for the City
compared to the hotel alone. As such, no mitigation is necessary because the overall
assessment of TOT and property taxes will result in a net financial benefit to the City.
Finding:
I. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system
will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board; and
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit is required from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”) for the proposed construction activities.
A permit is required for all construction activities that include clearing, grading, and/or
excavation that disturb at least 1 acre of total land area. Additionally, a Preliminary Water
Quality Management Plan (“WQMP”) has been prepared, pursuant to the requirements of
the NPDES permit.
2. Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control
Program involves the preparation and implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention
plan (“SWPPP”) for construction-related activities, which would specify the Best
Management Practices (“BMP”) that the Project would be required to implement during
construction activities to ensure that all potential pollutants of concern (including sediment)
are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged
from the Property.
3. Sewer connections will be installed per City Standards, the applicable provisions of NBMC
Chapter 14.24 (Sewer Connection, Permits), and the latest revision of the Uniform Plumbing
Code.
4. There is adequate sewer system capacity to serve the requirements of the Project. The
Project is served by existing sewer service. The Project will not adversely affect the system,
or cause any water quality affects, or violate existing requirements prescribed by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
5. NBMC Section 14.24.020 (Dwelling Unit and Business Structure Sewer Connection
Required) requires each dwelling unit to maintain individual water meter and sewer
connections. The Project has received a waiver of this requirement from the Utilities Director
since the units are located in one building and will together connect to the existing water
and sewer systems.
Finding:
J. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision conforms
with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public access and
recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act.
52
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 29 of 72
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Property is located in the Coastal Zone but outside of the California Coastal Commission
appeal jurisdiction. The subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program as
detailed in the Findings for the Coastal Development Permit. Public access and recreation
policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act are not applicable to the Project. Additionally,
pursuant to Section 19.16.010(A) of the NBMC, an approved tentative tract map expires 24
months after the date of its approval or conditional approval. Under Section 19.16.020(A), the
subdivider shall have the right to request an extension of the map for up to 5 years. The
subdivider has submitted an application for an extension of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
NT2021-003 and has requested that the extension be granted after the Planning Commission
adopts Resolution No. PC2022-011; thus, providing for an initial term of the vesting tentative
tract map of 24 months, followed by extension of 5 years, for a total term of 7 years from the
date of approval of Resolution No. PC2022-011.
VI. Consistency with Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001
The Project is consistent with City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of
Housing) and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001, which allows for accessory residential
uses within resort hotels subject to seven separate requirements including the following:
1. Accessory residential is only allowed within resort hotels, a self-contained destination that
provides for all needs in one location. The Project is part of the VEA Newport Beach, A
Marriott Resort and Spa, which is a self-contained destination providing restaurant, bar,
recreational facilities including a pool, spa, and a variety of other guest-serving uses.
2. Must be located outside the appeal area identified in California Public Resource Code
Section 30603(a). The Project is located outside the appeal area identified in California
Public Resources Code Section 30603(a) as depicted on the Post-LCP Certification Permit
and Appeal Jurisdiction Map, and is located at the northeastern most boundary of the
coastal zone.
3. Approved hotel rooms may be converted to residential units but only on a one-for-one basis.
PA2012-020 set the General Plan limit for hotel rooms at 532 in Anomaly 43 where the
Project is located, which is consistent with the Coastal Implementation Plan. The Project
would include up to 159 hotel branded residences with a corresponding reduction in the
number of hotel rooms. No new intensity would be created, rather the units would be
converted on a one-to-one basis via the reduction in the existing number of approved hotel
rooms. The total units at the VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa would remain
at 532. Of the 532 units, 373 would be traditional hotel rooms and up to 159 would be hotel
branded residences.
4. The residential use shall at all times be accessory to the hotel use, and the residential units
shall comprise no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms. The hotel residential units
will be part of the resort hotel campus and are accessory to the hotel use. The Project will
53
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 30 of 72
result in up to 159 hotel branded residences which represents the conversion of up to 30%
of the existing 532 hotel rooms.
5. The residential units may be located within a repurposed hotel or in a new residential
structure. The proposed hotel branded residences will be located within a new hotel-
branded residential structure.
6. A conditional use permit and coastal development permit is required to ensure adequate
parking through surplus parking, shard parking, or the adoption of a parking management
plan. The Project exceeds the parking requirements for both the project itself and the hotel.
The parking will be managed via valet operations as detailed in the Parking Management
Plan, and the Parking Management Plan for the VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and
Spa, dated April 13, 2022.
7. Potential impacts to public access, affordable housing, and the loss of transient occupancy
tax must be mitigated by entering into a Development Agreement with the City of by some
other means deemed appropriate.
(1) Any reduction in public access is limited to the reduction of hotel rooms available to the
general public to paying guests. The property does not provide public access to the
coast or public access to other recreational opportunities in the area. The existing resort
hotel does not provide low-cost accommodations, and the Project will not result in an
impact to existing low-cost accommodations as analyzed in NBMC Section 21.48.025
Feasibility and Impact Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences dated March 18, 2022,
and attached as Exhibit I. The general decrease of access associated with the reduction
of up to 159 high-cost hotel rooms is mitigated through the payment of $10,700 per unit
fee to the City that will be used a condition of approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract
Map.
(2) The Project will result in the creation of new housing consistent with the purpose and
intent of City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001. The City
is consideration adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or an Affordable
Housing Implementation Plan. Council Policy K-4 recognized that affordable housing is
an important component of any new residential housing project, and the Project will
provide an in-lieu fee related to affordable housing as a condition of approval to the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map as detailed in those findings.
(3) The Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with Newport Beach City
Council Policy K-4 for Conversion of Hotel Rooms to Project dated March 18, 2022, and
attached as Exhibit J analyzed the potential loss of TOT associated with the reduction
of up to 159 hotel rooms. The analysis concludes that although the reduction in hotel
rooms associated with Project implementation would affect TOT receipts to the City, this
reduction in TOT would be fully mitigated because the 373 remaining hotel rooms would
be significantly upgraded compared to the existing 532 hotel rooms, and each upgraded
room is expected to rent for a higher room rate – and thus, generate higher TOT- than
would the existing unrenovated rooms. The analysis concludes that the projected 20-
Year combined TOT and property taxes to be generated by the Project would result in
54
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 31 of 72
total tax receipts to the City of approximately $136,413,736, which is $7,694,975 more
than the City would otherwise receive if the Project was not built. This represents a net
increase in revenue for the City compared to the hotel alone. As such, no mitigation is
necessary because the overall assessment of TOT and property taxes will result in a
net financial benefit to the City.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission finds that potential environmental impacts for this Project have
been previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the General Plan
as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2006 General Plan Update
(SCH No. 2006011119) (“PEIR”); therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously
adopted PEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Project
(PA2021-296), which includes a finding that the Project is eligible for accessory residential
uses under Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001 and City Council Policy K-4, and
approval of Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 6, Major Site Development
Review No. SD2021-005, Modification Permit No. 2022-0001, Conditional Use Permit
No. UP2021-053, Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077, and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. NT2021-003, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit “A,” which is
attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
3. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution
was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance
with the provisions of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF MAY, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
BY:_________________________
Lee Lowrey, Chairman
BY:_________________________
Curtis Ellmore, Secretary
55
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 32 of 72
Attachments: Exhibit A – Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B – 2006 General Plan Update EIR
Exhibit C – Addendum No. 1 (North Newport Center)
Exhibit D – Addendum No. 2 (North Newport Center Planned Community
Amendment – ER2020-002)
Exhibit E – Addendum No. 3 (Newport Airport Village)
Exhibit F – Addendum No. 4 (Residences at Von Karman – ER2020-003)
Exhibit G – Addendum No. 5 (Residences at 1300 Bristol – ER2022-001)
Exhibit H – Addendum No. 6 (Ritz-Carlton Residences – ER2022-002)
Exhibit I - Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 21.48.025 Feasibility
and Impact Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences dated March
18, 2022
Exhibit J - Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with
Newport Beach City Council Policy K-4 for Conversion of Hotel
Rooms to Hotel-Branded Residences dated March 18, 2022
56
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 33 of 72
EXHIBIT “A”
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(Project-specific conditions are in italics)
Planning Division
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor
plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval (except as
modified by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless
specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of
any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use
Permit.
4. All proposed signs shall be in conformance with an approved Comprehensive Sign
Program for the project site and provisions of Chapter 20.42 (Signs) of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
5. Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-
053, Modification Permit No. 2022-001, Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077,
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003 shall expire unless exercised within
24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.91.050 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. Demolition of the
existing Harbor Landing building shall deem the approvals in this resolution exercised.
6. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003 shall expire 7 years from the date of
approval of Resolution No. PC2022-011. Pursuant to NBMC Section 19.16.010(A) an
approved tentative tract map expires 24 months after the date of its approval or
conditional approval. Under NBMC Section 19.16.020(A), the subdivider shall have the
right to request an extension of the map for up to 5 years. The subdivider has submitted
an application for an extension of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003 and has
requested that the extension be granted after the Planning Commission adopts
Resolution No. PC2022-011; thus, providing for an initial term of the vesting tentative
tract map of 24 months, followed by extension of 5 years, for a total term of 7 years from
the date of approval of Resolution No. PC2022-011.
7. The applicant shall pay a public benefit fee of one hundred thousand dollars $100,000 per
unit to be paid prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the hotel-branded
residences. The $100,000 per unit fee will be utilized in the following manner: $22,300
per unit for general public benefit to be used at City Council’s discretion; $2,000 per unit
for public safety; $10,700 per unit for future improvements to public coastal access; and
57
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 34 of 72
$65,000 of this shall be used at the City’s discretion for the future acquisition and
construction of senior affordable housing units.
8. Major Site Development Review No. SD2021-005, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-
053, Modification Permit No. 2022-001, and Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-
077 may be modified or revoked by the Planning Commission should they determine that
the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained is
detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as to
constitute a public nuisance.
9. Any substantial change in operational characteristics, expansion in area, or other
modification to the approved plans, shall require an amendment to said plans or
processing of new approvals.
10. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit “A” shall be
incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the
building permits.
11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the Site
Development Review/Modification Permit file. The plans shall be identical to those
approved by all City departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall
include architectural sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches.
The plans shall accurately depict the elements approved by this Site Development
Review/Modification Permit file and shall highlight the approved elements such that they
are readily discernible from other elements of the plans.
12. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and
irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall incorporate
drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be
approved by the Planning Division.
13. All landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and
growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All
landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be
kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of
regular maintenance.
14. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare photometric study
based on the final site and architectural lighting plans for approval by the Planning
Division. The study shall show that lighting values are “1” or less at all property lines and
the site and buildings are not excessively lighted.
15. The site shall not be excessively illuminated based on the luminance recommendations
of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the
58
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 35 of 72
Director of Community Development, the illumination creates an unacceptable negative
impact on surrounding land uses or environmental resources. The Director may order
the dimming of light sources or other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively
illuminated.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning
Division.
17. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the
specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher:
Between the hours of 7:00AM
and 10:00PM
Between the hours of
10:00PM and 7:00AM
Location Interior Exterior Interior Exterior
Residential Property 45dBA 55dBA 40dBA 50dBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial property 45dBA 60dBA 45dBA 50dBA
Mixed Use Property 45dBA 60dBA 45dBA 50dBA
Commercial Property N/A 65dBA N/A 60dBA
18. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future
owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the
current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent.
19. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise-generating construction activities that
produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise-generating construction activities are
not allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
20. No outside paging system shall be utilized in conjunction with this establishment.
21. All trash shall be stored within the building or within dumpsters stored in the trash
enclosure (three walls and a self-latching gate) or otherwise screened from view of
neighboring properties, except when placed for pick-up by refuse collection agencies.
The trash enclosure shall have a decorative solid roof for aesthetic and screening
purposes.
22. Trash receptacles for patrons shall be conveniently located both inside and outside of
the establishment, however, not located on or within any public property or right-of-way.
23. The exterior of the business shall be maintained free of litter and graffiti at all times. The
owner or operator shall provide for daily removal of trash, litter debris and graffiti from the
premises and on all abutting sidewalks within 20 feet of the premises.
59
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 36 of 72
24. The applicant shall ensure that the trash dumpsters and/or receptacles are maintained
to control odors. This may include the provision of either fully self-contained dumpsters
or periodic steam cleaning of the dumpsters, if deemed necessary by the Planning
Division. Cleaning and maintenance of trash dumpsters shall be done in compliance
with the provisions of Title 14, including all future amendments (including Water Quality
related requirements).
25. Deliveries and refuse collection for the facility shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays and between the hours of 10:00
p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Sundays and Federal holidays, unless otherwise approved by the
Director of Community Development, and may require an amendment to this Use
Permit.
26. Storage outside of the building in the front or at the rear of the property shall be
prohibited, with the exception of the required trash container enclosure.
27. A Special Events Permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside the
normal operational characteristics of the approved use, as conditioned, or that would
attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include any form of on-site
media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the Newport Beach Municipal
Code to require such permits.
28. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless
City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents
from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of
action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including
without limitation, attorney’s fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature
whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City’s
approval of The Ritz-Carlton Residences including, but not limited to, Environmental
Impact Report Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002), Major Site Development Review No.
SD2021-005, Modification Permit No. 2022-001, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053,
Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
NT2021-003 (PA2021-296). This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to,
damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other
expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or
proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or bringing such
proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees,
and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this
condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City
pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition.
Fire Department
29. The high-rise building shall be constructed with fire and life safety systems and
construction features as required for high-rise buildings per applicable California fire and
building codes as adopted by the City of Newport Beach. This includes but is not limited
to the following systems: an automatic fire sprinkler system, a stand pipe system, fire
60
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 37 of 72
pump system, a fire alarm system, an emergency responder radio system, a 2-way
communication system and a smoke control system.
30. A fire command center (fire control room) shall be constructed as part of the high-rise
building.
31. A generator (gas or diesel only) shall be installed to provide emergency power for the
high-rise building.
32. A fire master plan shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of any grading or
building permit. The fire master plan shall indicate fire department access for the high-
rise building; however, the fire department access shall not include any turf block or
other vegetative materials.
33. The developer/property owner shall record a reciprocal fire department access
easement for both parcels proposed with the tentative map. The “event lawn” is
considered part of the fire department access providing protection to both the existing
hotel complex and the proposed high-rise building.
Building Division
34. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City’s Building Division
and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City-
adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans must meet all
applicable State Disabilities Access requirements. Approval from the Orange County
Health Department is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
35. The applicant shall employ the following best available control measures (“BACMs”) to
reduce construction-related air quality impacts:
Dust Control
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
• Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
• Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas.
• Sweep or wash any site access points within two hours of any visible dirt deposits
on any public roadway.
• Cover or water twice daily any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty
material.
• Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph.
Emissions
• Require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off road equipment.
• Limit allowable idling to 30 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment
Off-Site Impacts
• Encourage carpooling for construction workers.
• Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods.
• Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways.
• Wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site.
61
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 38 of 72
• Sweep access points daily.
• Encourage receipt of materials during non-peak traffic hours.
• Sandbag construction sites for erosion control.
Fill Placement
• The number and type of equipment for dirt pushing will be limited on any day to
ensure that SCAQMD significance thresholds are not exceeded.
• Maintain and utilize a continuous water application system during earth
placement and compaction to achieve a 10 percent soil moisture content in the
top six-inch surface layer, subject to review/discretion of the geotechnical
engineer.
36. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the General Permit for Construction
Activities shall be prepared, submitted to the State Water Quality Control Board for
approval and made part of the construction program. The project applicant will provide
the City with a copy of the NOI and their application check as proof of filing with the State
Water Quality Control Board. This plan will detail measures and practices that will be in
effect during construction to minimize the project’s impact on water quality.
37. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the approval of
the Building Division and Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division. The WQMP
shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that no
violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements occur.
38. A list of “good housekeeping” practices will be incorporated into the long-term post-
construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be used,
stored or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may include frequent
parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills, limited use of harmful
fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of storm water away from potential sources of
pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list
and describe all structural and non-structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also
identify the entity responsible for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for
all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs.
Public Works Department
39. The Ritz-Carlton Residences and the VEA Newport Beach Resort and Spa shall
implement City-approved parking management plan(s) that include a valet operations
plan(s). The parking management plans, and valet operations plans, shall be reviewed
and approved by both the Public Works and Community Development Departments
prior to the issuance of certificated of occupancy. The parking management plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the Ritz-Carlton Residences and the VEA Newport
Beach Resort and Spa parking management plans, dated April 13, 2022.
40. Overhead utilities serving the site shall be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate
pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code.
62
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 39 of 72
41. County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits.
42. Prior to the commencement of demolition and grading of the project, the applicant shall
submit a construction management and delivery plan for the project to be reviewed and
approved by the Public Works Department. The plan shall include a discussion of project
phasing; parking arrangements for both the VEA Resort and Ritz-Carlton Residences
sites during demolition and construction; anticipated haul routes and construction
mitigation to ensure the orderly demolition and construction of the project. Parking
arrangements shall address construction worker parking as well as all operations
occurring at the VEA Resort during construction. Upon approval of the plan, the
applicant and their contractors and employees shall be responsible for implementing
and complying with the plan and all conditions set forth in the approved plan. Demolition
permits shall be issued once project approvals are final provided said permits are
deemed compliant with all applicable construction regulations and applicable conditions
of approval.
43. Traffic control and truck route plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
Department before their implementation. Large construction vehicles shall not be
permitted to travel narrow streets as determined by the Public Works Department.
Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of
construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and
flagman.
44. A Tract Map shall be recorded prior to the sale of any residential units. The Map shall
be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD83). Prior to recordation of the
Map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and
the City of Newport Beach a digital-graphic file of said map in a manner described in
Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange
County Subdivision Manual, Sub article 18. The Map to be submitted to the City of
Newport Beach shall comply with the City’s CADD Standards. Scanned images
will not be accepted.
45. Prior to recordation of the tract map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie
the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County
Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County
Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Sub article 18. Monuments
(one-inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved
by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to
completion of construction project.
46. Prior to the recordation of the Tract Map, a Subdivision Agreement shall be obtained
and approved by the City Council consistent with subdivision Code Section 19.36.010.
47. Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant shall provide a Faithful Performance Bond and
a Labor and Materials Bond, each for 100 percent of the estimated improvement cost
for improvements in the public right of way, as prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
63
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 40 of 72
and approved by the Public Works Director, for each of the following, but not limited to,
public and private improvements, street improvements, monumentation, sidewalks,
striping, signage, street lights, sewer system, water system, storm drain system, water
quality management system, erosion control, landscaping and irrigation within public
right of way, common open spaces areas accessible by the public, fire access and off-
site improvements required as part of the project.
48. Warranty bond for a minimum of 10 percent of the engineers cost estimate (final
percentage to be determined by the Public Works Director) to be released 1-year after
improvements have been accepted.
49. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
50. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right-of-way.
51. Reconstruct the existing broken and/or otherwise damaged concrete curb, gutter,
sidewalk along the Newport Center Drive frontage per City Standard.
52. All improvements shall comply with the City’s sight distance requirement. See City
Standard 110.
53. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by
the private construction, additional reconstruction within the public right-of-way could be
required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
54. Install a manhole per City Standard at the proposed sewer lateral within the sidewalk
area along the Newport Center Drive frontage.
55. Parking layout and ramp slopes shall comply with City Standard 805. All dead-end drive
aisle shall have a dedicated turn around space and 5-foot minimum drive aisle extension
to accommodate vehicular maneuvering.
56. A temporary bus stop shall be provided throughout the duration of project construction.
The location of the permanent post-construction bus stop shall be evaluated during
construction and coordinated and approved by the Public Works Department prior to
installation.
57. The ultimate dimensions of the landscape median at the center of the Ritz Carlton
Residences project’s porte cochere shall be reevaluated prior to issue of building
permits to ensure adequate vehicle circulation subject to the approval of the Public
Works Department.
64
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 41 of 72
Exhibit “B”
The 2006 General Update EIR (PEIR)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
65
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 42 of 72
Exhibit “C”
Addendum No. 1 (North Newport Center)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
66
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 43 of 72
Exhibit “D”
Addendum No. 2 (North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
67
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 44 of 72
Exhibit “E”
Addendum No. 3 (Newport Airport Village – ER2020-002)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
68
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 45 of 72
Exhibit “F”
Addendum No. 4 (Residences at 4400 Von Karman – ER2020-003)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
69
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 46 of 72
Exhibit “G”
Addendum No. 5 (Residences at 1300 Bristol – ER2022-001)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-repor
70
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 47 of 72
Exhibit “H”
Addendum No. 6 (Ritz-Carlton Residences – ER2022-002)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-plan/general-
plan-environmental-impact-repor
71
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 48 of 72
Exhibit “I”
Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 21.48.025 Feasibility and Impact
Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences dated March 18, 2022
72
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 49 of 72
73
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 50 of 72
74
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 51 of 72
75
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 52 of 72
76
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 53 of 72
77
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 54 of 72
78
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 55 of 72
79
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 56 of 72
80
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 57 of 72
81
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 58 of 72
82
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 59 of 72
83
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 60 of 72
84
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 61 of 72
Exhibit J
Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with Newport Beach
City Council Policy K-4 for Conversion of Hotel Rooms to Hotel-Branded
Residences dated March 18, 2022
85
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 62 of 72
86
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 63 of 72
87
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 64 of 72
88
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 65 of 72
89
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 66 of 72
90
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 67 of 72
91
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 68 of 72
92
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 69 of 72
93
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 70 of 72
94
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 71 of 72
95
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-011
Page 72 of 72
96
Attachment No. PC 2
CEQA Addendum
97
Addendum No. 6 (Ritz-Carlton
Residences – ER2022-002)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/gover
nment/departments/community-
development/planning-division/general-
plan-codes-and-regulations/general-
plan/general-plan-environmental-impact-
repor
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
98
Attachment No. PC 3
Relevant Materials/Studies
99
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
100
Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC
28 Dover Place
Manhattan Beach., CA 90266
March 18, 2022
Mr. Kevin Martin
Vice President, Development
Newport Center Hotel, LLC
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) Analysis Consistent with Newport Beach City Council Policy
K-4 for Conversion of Hotel Rooms to Hotel-Branded Residences
Dear Mr. Martin:
Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC (“MR&A”) has prepared this TOT analysis for Newport Center
Hotel, LLC (“Client”) with respect to your proposed project in Newport Beach, CA (the “Project”). The
Project would involve the reduction of 159 existing hotel rooms at the VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott
Resort and Spa (the “Hotel”), and the construction of 159 Ritz-Carlton Residences.
Client proposes to replace 159 hotel rooms with the same number of hotel-branded residences, which would
reduce the number of hotel rooms on the property from 532 to 373. City Council Policy K-4, Reducing the
Barriers to the Creation of Housing, requires a fiscal impact analysis to disclose and mitigate any reduction
in TOT due to the conversion of hotel rooms to residences. This analysis has been prepared consistent with
Policy K-4.
The reduction in hotel rooms would affect TOT receipts to the City of Newport Beach. The reduction in
TOT due to the replacement of 159 hotel rooms with hotel-branded residences would be fully mitigated,
however, because the 373 remaining hotel rooms would be significantly upgraded from their current
condition, and each upgraded room is expected to rent for a higher room rate – and thus, coupled with a
reduction in hotel supply, would collectively generate higher TOT- than would the existing unrenovated
rooms. The following analysis concludes that the projected TOT and property taxes to be generated by the
Project would, together, result in a net increase in revenue for the City of Newport Beach.
It is important to note that this analysis does not consider the anticipated increase in sales taxes generated
by the property’s food and beverage operations as a result of the Project. It also does not account for the
additional retail food and beverage sales in the area surrounding the property as a result of the project,
which would be expected to have a positive economic benefit for the City.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call us at 310-640-9656 or email us at
Maurice@MauriceRobinson.com. My CV is attached at the end of this report.
Sincerely,
R. Maurice Robinson, ISHC
President
101
1 | Page
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Analysis Consistent with City Council Policy K-4,
Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing
We have prepared an analysis of the potential future TOT from the Hotel under three scenarios:
Scenario 1: The Proposed Project, with 373 upgraded rooms (and 159 hotel-branded residences);
Scenario 2: No Project, with 532 unrenovated rooms (and no residential units); and
Scenario 3: The Hybrid Hotel Project, with 373 upgraded rooms and 159 unrenovated rooms for a
total of 532 rooms (and no hotel-branded residences).
Summary of Findings:
The table below summarizes the projected TOT only for each Scenario for the next twenty years:
As shown in the following table, combining the projected TOT and property taxes generated for
the City of Newport by the Project under each Scenario results in the following estimates of City
tax receipts over the next twenty years:
Year Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
2022 2,130,503$ 3,093,560$ 3,055,082$
2023 3,328,113$ 3,333,381$ 4,324,368$
2024 3,564,769$ 3,476,945$ 4,603,931$
2025 3,730,373$ 3,595,476$ 4,804,961$
2026 3,842,284$ 3,703,341$ 4,949,110$
2027 3,957,553$ 3,814,441$ 5,097,583$
2028 4,076,279$ 3,928,874$ 5,250,510$
2029 4,198,568$ 4,046,740$ 5,408,026$
2030 4,324,525$ 4,168,143$ 5,570,267$
2031 4,454,260$ 4,293,187$ 5,737,375$
2032 4,587,888$ 4,421,982$ 5,909,496$
2033 4,725,525$ 4,554,642$ 6,086,781$
2034 4,867,291$ 4,691,281$ 6,269,384$
2035 5,013,309$ 4,832,020$ 6,457,466$
2036 5,163,709$ 4,976,980$ 6,651,190$
2037 5,318,620$ 5,126,290$ 6,850,725$
2038 5,478,179$ 5,280,078$ 7,056,247$
2039 5,642,524$ 5,438,481$ 7,267,934$
2040 5,811,800$ 5,601,635$ 7,485,972$
2041 5,986,154$ 5,769,684$ 7,710,552$
20-yr total 90,202,225$ 88,147,162$ 116,546,960$
1. Applied STR recovery projections for US Hotels for
2022 through 2025; then 3% inflation through 2041.
Twenty-Year TOT projections (1)
102
2 | Page
In summary, the inclusion of property taxes in the analysis would result in Scenario 1’s projected
City tax receipts exceeding those of Scenario 2 (the No Project) by almost $38 million (~38%),
and Scenario 3 (the Hybrid Hotel Project) by almost $8 million, or ~6%.
Methodology and Sources of Data
We started with the Hotel’s most recent four years of historical performance, when it was operated
as the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel and Spa. 2018 and 2019 were the peak years in the previous
economic cycle, while 2020 and 2021 were negatively impacted by Covid-19. Additionally, the
Hotel’s 2021 performance was further impacted by an ongoing renovation at the Hotel. The table
below summarizes the actual historical annual occupancy levels, ADRs1, RevPars2, total room
revenues, and TOT realized/generated by the Hotel from 2018 through 2021:
1 ADR = Average Daily Room rate.
2 RevPar = Room Revenue Per Available Room; also, daily occupancy rate times ADR.
Year Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
2022 2,531,847$ 3,523,529$ 3,556,034$
2023 4,051,334$ 3,771,949$ 4,835,339$
2024 4,610,028$ 3,924,284$ 5,125,121$
2025 5,097,832$ 4,051,762$ 5,336,574$
2026 5,465,578$ 4,168,752$ 5,491,356$
2027 5,998,798$ 4,289,161$ 5,650,674$
2028 6,422,092$ 4,413,088$ 5,814,663$
2029 6,696,051$ 4,540,639$ 5,983,461$
2030 6,871,957$ 4,671,919$ 6,157,211$
2031 7,052,642$ 4,807,039$ 6,336,058$
2032 7,238,237$ 4,946,111$ 6,520,153$
2033 7,428,881$ 5,089,254$ 6,709,651$
2034 7,624,714$ 5,236,585$ 6,904,712$
2035 7,825,881$ 5,388,230$ 7,105,500$
2036 8,032,531$ 5,544,314$ 7,312,184$
2037 8,244,819$ 5,704,970$ 7,524,940$
2038 8,462,902$ 5,870,333$ 7,743,946$
2039 8,686,942$ 6,040,540$ 7,969,387$
2040 8,917,106$ 6,215,736$ 8,201,454$
2041 9,153,566$ 6,396,067$ 8,440,343$
20-year total 136,413,736$ 98,594,261$ 128,718,761$
20-year total of TOT + Property Taxes for the City
103
3 | Page
For the projected TOT for Scenario 1 (the Proposed Project), we reviewed Marriott’s proforma for
the proposed Project, and accepted their projections, on a per-room basis.3 In Scenario 1, the
upgraded rooms are forecast to achieve ADRs that are 47% more than would the unrenovated
rooms, which translates into an increase of approximately $100 per night by 2023. The table below
summarizes the proposed Project’s forecast occupancy levels, ADRs, RevPars, total room
revenues, and TOT by year for 2022 through 2025:
For the forecast TOT for Scenario 2 (the No Project Alternative), we obtained the current forecast
by STR for the U.S. hotel market’s recovery, using 2019 performance levels as the base Again,
2019 was used as the base year due to the anomalous impacts on the lodging market and the Hotel
in the years 2020 and 2021. As an example, room revenues per available hotel room (RevPar) are
expected to reach 99% of 2019 levels in 2022; 107% of 2019 levels in 2023; 112% in 2024; and
116% in 2025. The table below summarizes the STR US Hotel Recovery Forecast, as of January,
2022:
3 The Marriott proforma assumed a 400-room upgraded hotel at the completion of the renovation, and the current
estimate is 373 rooms. Since this analysis is based on 373 rooms, we used a pro-rata share of the Marriott
proforma.
Year # of rooms Occ ADR RevPar Room Revenues TOT @ 10%
2018 532 80.7% 198.76$ 160.40$ 31,145,978$ 3,114,598$
2019 532 78.9% 203.11$ 160.25$ 31,126,378$ 3,112,638$
2020 532 29.0% 186.23$ 54.01$ 10,531,213$ 1,053,121$
2021 532 33.0% 196.85$ 64.96$ 12,606,113$ 1,260,611$
Source: Marriott annual P&Ls
Historical Performance of the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (2018 - 2021)
Year # of rooms Occ ADR RevPar Room Revenues TOT @ 10%
2022 373 55.5% 281.96$ 156.49$ 21,305,032$ 2,130,503$
2023 373 76.6% 319.13$ 244.45$ 33,281,133$ 3,328,113$
2024 373 79.6% 328.94$ 261.84$ 35,647,695$ 3,564,769$
2025 373 80.8% 339.11$ 274.00$ 37,303,730$ 3,730,373$
Source: Marriott budget & proformas
Scenario 1: 373 upgraded rooms (The Project)
Year Occ ADR RevPar Occ ADR RevPar
2019 65.9% 131.30$ 86.53$ 100% 100% 100%
2020 41.8% 130.90$ 54.74$ 63% 100% 63%
2021 57.6% 125.00$ 72.00$ 87% 95% 83%
2022 63.8% 134.00$ 86.00$ 97% 103% 99%
2023 66.1% 140.00$ 92.00$ 100% 107% 107%
2024 66.8% 145.00$ 97.00$ 101% 110% 112%
2025 67.1% 149.03$ 99.94$ 102% 114% 116%
Source: STR 1/2022 forecast for US Hotel Market recovery
Summary of STR US Hotel Recovery Forecast 1/2022
as a % of 2019 levels
104
4 | Page
We applied these forecasted recovery factors to the actual 2019 performance levels achieved by
the existing Hotel to generate estimates of how the unrenovated hotel would perform in 2022
through 2025, if no renovations were undertaken. The table below summarizes the unrenovated
hotel’s forecasted performance, and its resulting TOT receipts, for these years:
For the forecasted TOT under Scenario 3 (the Hybrid Hotel Project), we used the forecasted
performance levels under Scenario 1 above, which reflects 373 upgraded rooms added to Scenario
2’s forecasted performance for the remaining 159 unrenovated rooms, to forecast room revenues
under the hypothetical 532-room Scenario 3, as shown in the table below:
In summary, Scenario 1 (the Proposed Project) is forecast to generate slightly more TOT than
Scenario 2 (the No Project Alternative) over the next twenty years, while Scenario 3 (the Hybrid
Hotel Project) would generate approximately 30% more TOT than either of the other two
Scenarios during this period, as shown in the table below.
Year # of rooms Occ ADR RevPar Room Revenues TOT @ 10%
2022 532 76.4% 208.59$ 159.31$ 30,935,605$ 3,093,560$
2023 532 79.1% 216.92$ 171.66$ 33,333,813$ 3,333,381$
2024 532 79.9% 224.03$ 179.06$ 34,769,445$ 3,476,945$
2025 532 80.3% 230.53$ 185.16$ 35,954,764$ 3,595,476$
Source: Growth rates from STR forecast applied to 2019 actuals
Scenario 2: 532 unrenovated rooms (No Project)
Year # of rooms Occ ADR RevPar Room Revenues TOT @ 10%
2022 532 61.7%254.83$ 157.33$ 30,550,823$ 3,055,082$
2023 532 77.4%287.88$ 222.70$ 43,243,682$ 4,324,368$
2024 532 79.7%297.50$ 237.10$ 46,039,315$ 4,603,931$
2025 532 80.7%306.79$ 247.45$ 48,049,609$ 4,804,961$
Source: MR&A calculations based on blended Scenarios
Scenario 3: 373 upgraded rooms & 159 unrenovated rooms (Hybrid Hotel Project)
105
5 | Page
Comparison of Scenarios With the Addition of Property Taxes
Although not required as part of the TOT comparison analysis, it is clear that the City would
receive additional tax revenues from Scenario 1 that would not accrue under Scenarios 2 and 3,
specifically an increase of about $2 million per year in property taxes once the sell-out of the 159
hotel-branded residences under Scenario 1 is projected to be completed.
We have prepared an analysis of the property taxes that would be expected to accrue to the City
for each of the Scenarios, assuming the sale of the residences during the 2026 through 2029 period.
Property taxes in Orange County are estimated at 1.05% of the sales price of each residence, and
the City receives approximately 17.15% of the property taxes paid each year to the County. The
sales of the proposed 159 hotel-branded residences under Scenario 1 are projected to occur during
the years 2026 through 2029, and once sold, would generate an estimated approximately $10.5
million of property taxes for the County, with approximately $1.8 million (17.15%) of those
monies flowing directly to the City of Newport Beach’s general fund. There would be no such
additional property taxes generated under Scenarios 2 or 3.
Year Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
2022 2,130,503$ 3,093,560$ 3,055,082$
2023 3,328,113$ 3,333,381$ 4,324,368$
2024 3,564,769$ 3,476,945$ 4,603,931$
2025 3,730,373$ 3,595,476$ 4,804,961$
2026 3,842,284$ 3,703,341$ 4,949,110$
2027 3,957,553$ 3,814,441$ 5,097,583$
2028 4,076,279$ 3,928,874$ 5,250,510$
2029 4,198,568$ 4,046,740$ 5,408,026$
2030 4,324,525$ 4,168,143$ 5,570,267$
2031 4,454,260$ 4,293,187$ 5,737,375$
2032 4,587,888$ 4,421,982$ 5,909,496$
2033 4,725,525$ 4,554,642$ 6,086,781$
2034 4,867,291$ 4,691,281$ 6,269,384$
2035 5,013,309$ 4,832,020$ 6,457,466$
2036 5,163,709$ 4,976,980$ 6,651,190$
2037 5,318,620$ 5,126,290$ 6,850,725$
2038 5,478,179$ 5,280,078$ 7,056,247$
2039 5,642,524$ 5,438,481$ 7,267,934$
2040 5,811,800$ 5,601,635$ 7,485,972$
2041 5,986,154$ 5,769,684$ 7,710,552$
20-yr total 90,202,225$ 88,147,162$ 116,546,960$
1. Applied STR recovery projections for US Hotels for
2022 through 2025; then 3% inflation through 2041.
Twenty-Year TOT projections (1)
106
6 | Page
Thus, for the twenty-year projection period, the Project would be expected to generate well over
$30 million more in property taxes for the City than either of the other Scenarios, as shown in the
table below:
Combining the projected TOT and the property taxes for each Scenario would, correspondingly,
be expected to result in the following amounts of these tax receipts for the City of Newport Beach
for the next twenty years, as shown in the following table:
Year Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
2022 401,344$ 429,968$ 500,951$
2023 723,221$ 438,568$ 510,970$
2024 1,045,258$ 447,339$ 521,190$
2025 1,367,459$ 456,286$ 531,614$
2026 1,623,294$ 465,412$ 542,246$
2027 2,041,246$ 474,720$ 553,091$
2028 2,345,812$ 484,214$ 564,153$
2029 2,497,483$ 493,898$ 575,436$
2030 2,547,432$ 503,776$ 586,944$
2031 2,598,381$ 513,852$ 598,683$
2032 2,650,349$ 524,129$ 610,657$
2033 2,703,356$ 534,612$ 622,870$
2034 2,757,423$ 545,304$ 635,327$
2035 2,812,571$ 556,210$ 648,034$
2036 2,868,823$ 567,334$ 660,995$
2037 2,926,199$ 578,681$ 674,215$
2038 2,984,723$ 590,254$ 687,699$
2039 3,044,418$ 602,059$ 701,453$
2040 3,105,306$ 614,101$ 715,482$
2041 3,167,412$ 626,383$ 729,792$
20-yr total 46,211,510$ 10,447,099$ 12,171,801$
Twenty-Year Newport Beach Prop Tax Projections
107
7 | Page
The total tax receipts to the City would be greatest in Scenario 3 for the early years, but because
the property taxes associated with the residences would reset with each sale of a residential unit,
eventually the total taxes generated by Scenario 1 would overtake those of Scenario 3. In this
instance, the lines cross in 2027, after which the projected annual taxes generated by the Project
under Scenario 1 exceed those of Scenario 3.
In summary, the inclusion of property taxes in the analysis would result in Scenario 1’s projected
City tax receipts exceeding those of Scenario 2 by almost $38 million (~38%), and Scenario 3 by
almost $8 million, or~6%.
Additional tables showing the assumptions and calculations for our analysis are presented in the
Excel workbook entitled “MRA model NB Ritz-Carlton 3.18.22”.
Year Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
2022 2,531,847$ 3,523,529$ 3,556,034$
2023 4,051,334$ 3,771,949$ 4,835,339$
2024 4,610,028$ 3,924,284$ 5,125,121$
2025 5,097,832$ 4,051,762$ 5,336,574$
2026 5,465,578$ 4,168,752$ 5,491,356$
2027 5,998,798$ 4,289,161$ 5,650,674$
2028 6,422,092$ 4,413,088$ 5,814,663$
2029 6,696,051$ 4,540,639$ 5,983,461$
2030 6,871,957$ 4,671,919$ 6,157,211$
2031 7,052,642$ 4,807,039$ 6,336,058$
2032 7,238,237$ 4,946,111$ 6,520,153$
2033 7,428,881$ 5,089,254$ 6,709,651$
2034 7,624,714$ 5,236,585$ 6,904,712$
2035 7,825,881$ 5,388,230$ 7,105,500$
2036 8,032,531$ 5,544,314$ 7,312,184$
2037 8,244,819$ 5,704,970$ 7,524,940$
2038 8,462,902$ 5,870,333$ 7,743,946$
2039 8,686,942$ 6,040,540$ 7,969,387$
2040 8,917,106$ 6,215,736$ 8,201,454$
2041 9,153,566$ 6,396,067$ 8,440,343$
20-year total 136,413,736$ 98,594,261$ 128,718,761$
20-year total of TOT + Property Taxes for the City
108
8 | Page
Statement of Qualifications
R. Maurice Robinson, ISHC
Mr. Robinson has over 40 years of experience as a consultant in the real estate and hospitality
development industry. He is an expert in the field of facilitating full-service hotel development,
ground leases, concession contracts, market and financial feasibility analysis, fiscal and economic
benefit studies, structuring public subsidies for new hotel development, and public/private
development partnerships. He specializes in public sector counseling, and typically assists California
and Federal agencies in:
x facilitating hotel, commercial and residential development on public properties
x structuring hospitality development deals using public financing vehicles
x negotiating ground and building leases for new hospitality developments
x identifying and soliciting hospitality brands, operators, and developers
x Performing economic feasibility and fiscal impact studies for hotel projects
x valuing private investment on public lands
x providing expert witness testimony in disputes; and
x analyzing and structuring development and management agreements.
A partial list of his public-sector clients in California follows:
x Alameda
x California Coastal Commission
x Cathedral City
x Crescent City
x Del Mar
x Department of State Parks and Recreation
x Escondido
x Fresno
x Glendale
x Golden Gate Bridge District
x Healdsburg
x Inglewood
x Laguna Beach
x Long Beach
x Los Angeles, Community Redevelopment Agency
x Los Angeles, Department of Airports
x Los Angeles, Department of City Planning
x Los Angeles, Grand Ave JPA
x Manhattan Beach
x Metropolitan Water District
x Monterey County
x Mountain View
109
9 | Page
x Napa
x National Park Service
x Oceanside
x Orange County
x Palm Desert
x Poway
x Richmond
x Riverside
x Riverside County Transportation Commission
x San Diego City
x San Diego County
x San Diego Metropolitan Transit System
x San Diego Unified Port District
x San Jose, Redevelopment Agency
x San Mateo County
x San Mateo County Harbor District
x Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
x Santa Monica
x Solano County
x South Coast Air Quality Management District
x Southern California Association of Governments
x U.S. Department of Justice
x West Sacramento
Public clients and the hotels that have been developed, or are now being developed:
x City of San Diego’s 170-room 5-diamond Lodge at Torrey Pines
x City of Manhattan Beach’s 400-room Westdrift Autograph Hotel and Golf Course
x City of San Jose’s downtown 506-room Marriott Hotel
x City of Beverly Hills’s 201-room Montage Hotel & 25 Branded Residences
x City of Laguna Beach’s 258-room Montage Resort and 27 Branded Residences
x National Park Service’s 252-room Argonaut Hotel in San Francisco (conversion of the
historic Haslett Warehouse on Fisherman’s Wharf)
x National Park Service’s 142-room Lodge at Cavallo Point in Golden Gate Park (conversion
of the historic Fort Baker Army post near Sausalito).
x City of San Diego’s Liberty Station 200-room Courtyard and 150-unit Homewood Suites
(conversion of the ex-Naval Training Center adjacent to the airport)
x Port of San Diego’s 253-room Springhill Suites and 147-unit Residence Inn
x Port of San Diego’s 400-room InterContinental Hotel
x City of Mountain View’s 255-room Ameswell Hotel
x City of Oceanside’s 161-room Mission Pacific hotel and 226-room Seabird hotel
x City of Mountain View’s proposed 180-room Joie de Vivre hotel (to be developed)
110
10 | Page
x City of Santa Monica’s Fairmont Miramar Hotel and 60 Branded Residences (to be
redeveloped)
Affiliations: Mr. Robinson is a member of the prestigious International Society of Hospitality
Consultants (ISHC), where he served for nine years on the Board of Directors and as Chairman of
the Professional Conduct Committee. Other professional memberships include the American Society
of Appraisers (ASA), and the Forensic Expert Witness Association (FEWA). He is also a member of
the Board of Arbitrators for the Financial Industry National Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
Background: Mr. Robinson is President of Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC, providing advisory
services to investors and developers in the Hospitality and Real Estate industries. Prior to founding
his current firm in 1999, he was a Principal with KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, leading their western
region Hospitality and Real Estate consulting practice for twelve years (1986-1998). Prior to KPMG,
he was a Senior Consultant and Manager in the real estate and hospitality consulting practice of
Pannell Kerr Forster (now PKF Consulting) for five years (1982-1986). His previous work experience
also includes three years as Senior Economist with the real estate consulting firm of Williams-
Kuebelbeck and Associates (1979-1982), and a year as an independent consultant (1978).
Education: Mr. Robinson holds a General Real Estate Appraisal certificate from the State of
California; a Master of Public Administration degree from the University of Southern California; a
Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota; a certificate
of environmental management with a specialty in public/private partnerships from the Environmental
Management Institute in Los Angeles; and a professional designation in financial planning from
UCLA.
Speeches, Teaching and Writing: Mr. Robinson is a frequent lecturer, having spoken more than
two dozen times at various real estate and hospitality industry-related seminars and conferences
across the United States, and was an annual guest lecturer at the UC Berkeley MBA program. He is
the author of numerous articles, book chapters, and was the editor of KPMG’s Hospitality Update
newsletter. He has co-authored an article entitled “How to Value Commercial Improvements in a
National Park” in the Winter 2000/Spring 2001 edition of Real Estate Issues; a chapter entitled
“Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Hospitality Industry” in the textbook Hotel Investments:
Issues and Perspectives, 4th edition (2006); a chapter entitled “Converting Existing Historic Buildings
into Hotels” in the textbook Hotel Sustainable Development: Principals and Best Practices, 1st edition
(2011); and an article entitled “Issue Review Boards™ – The Next Wave of Alternative Dispute
Resolution for the Hospitality Industry”.
Awards: Mr. Robinson received the coveted James Felt Creative Counselor Award from his peers in
the real estate counseling community for his ground-breaking work appraising the Grand Canyon for
the National Park Service. He is also the recipient of the Member of the Year award by his peers in
the ISHC for his efforts in establishing an Alternative Dispute Resolution training program. In 2016,
he facilitated the acquisition by the NPS of the final parcel of land to complete the 67-mile Backbone
Trail in the Santa Monica Mountains.
Contact info: 28 Dover Place, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. Tel: 310-640-9656. Fax: 310-640-
9276. Cell: 310-713-3220. E-mail: Maurice@MauriceRobinson.com; Web site:
www.MauriceRobinson.com.
111
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
13
4
135
136
137
1
Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC
28 Dover Place
Manhattan Beach., CA 90266
March 18, 2022
Mr. Kevin Martin
Vice President, Development
Newport Center Hotel. LLC
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Re: Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 21.48.025 Feasibility and Impact
Analyses for The Ritz-Carlton Residences
Dear Mr. Martin:
Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC (“MR&A”) has prepared a Feasibility and Impact Analysis
for Newport Center Hotel, LLC (“Client”) with respect to its proposed development and sale of up
to 159 hotel branded residences at 900 Newport Center Drive (“Project”).
In this report, we present our findings of the two requested analyses, as follows:
1) The feasibility of the Project to include lower-cost visitor accommodations; and
2) The impact of the Project on the existing lower-cost visitor accommodations in the City of
Newport Beach (“City”).
The following analyses conclude that it is not feasible to provide lower-cost visitor
accommodations as part of the Project, and the Project would not impact the availability of lower-
cost visitor accommodations in the City.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call us at 310-640-9656 or email us at
Maurice@MauriceRobinson.com. My CV is attached at the end of this report.
Sincerely,
R. Maurice Robinson, ISHC
President
138
2
I. Feasibility Analysis
Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 21.48.025(C)(2) requires “an analysis of the
feasibility of providing lower-cost visitor accommodations…for any application involving
the…conversion…of…visitor accommodations.” This analysis is required regardless of whether
the accommodations to be converted are “lower-cost.” The Project proposes to convert up to 159
high-cost visitor accommodations into hotel-branded residences. Thus, the NBMC requires the
preparation of this feasibility analysis, at the Client’s expense, to determine if the Project could
provide lower-cost visitor accommodations on the Project site.
As explained below, it is not feasible to include lower-cost visitor accommodations on the Project
site. This infeasibility is due to the site’s high land value, the Project’s high development costs,
the lack of annual operating revenue given the type of for-sale product created by the Project, and
other constraints related to the Ritz-Carlton brand.
Summary of Findings
Location
The Project is located on a 2.775-acre development footprint at 900 Newport Center Drive within
Newport Center (see map below). Newport Center is a mixed-use area of the City that is home to
Fashion Island, commercial office developments, residential developments, and the Newport
Beach Country Club. The location of the property makes it an inappropriate designation for lower-
cost accommodations. The property is within the urban nucleus of Newport Center, which is on
the inland side of Pacific Coast Highway, and does not allow for suitable access to public coastal
recreational resources or amenities. The property’s location is not suitable for lower-cost
accommodations to encourage coastal access.
Land Value
Land in Newport Beach is extremely valuable, and Newport Center is known to have some of the
most expensive real estate in the entire City. Land in Newport Center can typically trade for
$20,000,000 per acre, as supported by the purchase of the Newport Beach Marriott in 2020. This
high land value acquisition cost renders the property financially impractical and unsuitable for
139
3
lower-cost visitor accommodations. Additionally, given the relatively small size of the project,
there is no physical area to construct lower-cost visitor accommodations at the Project site.
High Development Costs
The estimated construction costs for the Project are nearly $1,200 per square foot. Additionally,
the project is burdened by nearly $400,000 per branded residence in design, financing and
permitting costs. Assuming 65% debt financing; 4 more years of design and construction costs;
and nearly 3 years of sales; the overall leveraged internal rate of return (“IRR”) of the Project is
projected at 20.0%. Inclusion of lowercost visitor accommodations would reduce the IRR to a level
that would dissuade investors from investing in the Project, and would ultimately have the effect
of preventing the Project from being developed.
Lack of Annual Operating Income
The Project is developing up to 159 hotel-branded residences. The Project does not include the
development of visitor accommodations. As a consequence, the Project will not generate any
annual operating income that could be used to develop, operate, or service lower-cost visitor
accommodations. Therefore, the lack of annual operating income further renders the Project
infeasible for lower-cost visitor accommodations.
Ritz-Carlton Brand
The contract with Ritz-Carlton to brand and service the Project does not allow for the on-site
operation of lower-cost visitor accommodations. The Ritz-Carlton brand is dependent on our
Client’s ability to provide operational exclusivity on the proposed 2.775-acre property. Ritz-
Carlton does not operate any lower-cost accommodations, and by including them on-site, the
Client will be unable to adhere to the terms of their agreement with Ritz-Carlton. Without the
Ritz-Carlton brand, the sales prices of the hotel-branded residential units would be severely
reduced. The pricing premium generated by a luxury hotel brand is typically 25% or more,
compared to comparably located and finished non-branded residential product. The RCLCO
market analysis dated 12/14/2020 concluded the premium was 35% for the Ritz-Carlton residences
studied.1
Without Ritz-Carlton and its associated premium pricing, the Project’s ability to be financed would
suffer, resulting in a reduction of the amount of debt that could be sourced, and an offsetting
requirement for additional, higher-cost equity. It would also be much more difficult to attract a
lender for the Project if there were lower-cost visitor accommodations at the property. Thus, it is
infeasible to include lower-cost visitor accommodations, because their inclusion would effectively
terminate the Project.
1 See “Market Analysis and Strategic Development Recommendations, Proposed Hotel-Branded Condominiums,
Newport Beach, California”, dated 12/12/2020, by RCLCO, pages 21 and 64.
140
4
Methodology and Assumptions
This section, along with the tables in our model2, discusses the key assumptions used in our
analysis of both scenarios, and the results of the analyses.
The Project as proposed is depicted in the architectural renderings document prepared by MVE +
Partners, dated 1/21/20223.
The proposed 22-story tower would contain 421,973 gross square feet of space, excluding 5 levels
of underground parking. The up to 159 residences would be located on floors 2 through 22, and
contain a total of 341,766 square feet of saleable residential space.
The hotel rooms would be considered “lower-cost” rooms, per the definition of the California
Coastal Commission and the definition provided in NBMC Section 21.48.025(C)(1)(a), and their
average daily rental rate (“ADR”) would be limited to $135 (stated in 2021 dollars), plus inflation.
For the duration of the projections, inflation has been assumed to average 3% per year for
development and operating costs, as well as for the pricing of the residences.
The price per square foot for the sale of the residential units with the Ritz-Carlton branding has
been estimated to be $2,500 per square foot, stated in 2021 dollars. This was derived from both
actual sales and current listings of several hotel-branded residential projects in Southern California,
and supported by an RCLCO market analysis dated 12/14/2020
4.
The Project development budget and timetable were prepared by the Client and seem reasonable.
The absorption period for the sale of the residential units is projected to be 20 units pre-sold, then
4 units per month until sold.
The proposed capital stack, interest rates, cap rates, and the various costs and fees are our estimates,
and are based on our observations of the current real estate development and investment
environment.
The hotel occupancy levels and operating ratios are our estimates, based upon our understanding
of lower-cost visitor accommodation operating metrics and our professional judgment as to how
such an operation would fit into the proposed Project, within the context of the Orange County
hotel market.
2 See Excel Workbook entitled “MRA model Newport Beach Ritz”.
3 See “The Ritz-Carlton Residences, Newport Beach, Site Development Review”, dated 1/21/2022.
4 See “Market Analysis and Strategic Development Recommendations, Proposed Hotel-Branded Condominiums,
Newport Beach, California”, dated 12/12/2020, by RCLCO, pages 9 and 32.
141
5
II. Impact Analysis
NBMC Section 21.48.025(C)(3)(a) provides that “an analysis of a development’s impact on the
availability of lower-cost visitor accommodations in the City shall be required for any application
involving…the…conversion…of…visitor accommodations….” The Project proposes to convert
up to 159 high-cost visitor accommodations into hotel-branded residences. There have never been
lower-cost visitor accommodations at the Project site. Thus, the NBMC requires the preparation
of this impact analysis, at the Client’s expense, to determine if the Project impacts the availability
of lower-cost visitor accommodations in the City.
As explained below, this Project does not impact the City’s existing lower-cost visitor
accommodations. The number of lower-cost visitor accommodations in the City will remain the
same, and both the supply and demand for them will be unchanged by this Project.
Summary of Findings
Existing Supply of Visitor Accommodations
There are a variety of visitor accommodations within the City, as depicted on the table below. The
majority of hotels within the City are located in the Coastal Zone. These hotels offer a range of
costs from economy class to luxury class, as further detailed below.
#Hotel Name Address Cost
Coastal
Zone
1 Balboa Bay Resort 1221 W Coast Hwy $579 X
2 Balboa Inn 105 Main St $299 X
3 Bay Shores Peninsula 1800 W Newport Blvd $399 X
4 Bayview Marriott 500 Bayview Circle $389 X
5 Dorymans 2102 West Oceanfront $499 X
6 Extended Stay America Suites 4881 Birch St $128
7 Holiday Inn Express 2300 W Coast Hwy $256 X
8 Hyatt JWA 4545 MacArthur Blvd $167
9 Hyatt Newport Beach 1107 Jamboree Rd $332 X
10 Lido House 3300 Newport Blvd $769 X
11 Little Inn by the Bay 2627 Newport Blvd $250 X
12 Marriott Newport Coast Villas 23000 Newport Coast Dr.$549 X
13 Newport Beach Hotel 2306 W Oceanfront $313 X
14 VEA Newport Beach Marriott 900 Newport Center Dr $319 X
15 Newport Channel Inn 6030 W Coast Hwy $259 X
16 Pelican Hill 22701 Pelican Hill Rd South $1,625 X
17 Renaissance Newport Beach 4500 MacArthur $161
18 Sonder Solarena 6208 W Coast Hwy $201 X
Source: Booking.com, March 17, 2021
142
6
143
7
Existing Supply of Lower-Cost Visitor Accommodations
NBMC Section 21.48.025(C)(1)(a) defines lower-cost visitor accommodations as the “average
daily room rate for all economy hotels and motels in the City that have room rates that are below
the Statewide average daily room rate or lower. Economy hotels and motels are AAA-rated one or
two diamond hotels, or equivalent.” Based upon our research, the City only has one lower-cost
visitor accommodation facility, the 164-room Extended Stay America motel, located at 4881 Birch
Street. As depicted below, this motel is located adjacent to John Wayne Airport and is sandwiched
between the 405 and 73 freeways. The Project is not located anywhere near this lower-cost visitor
accommodation facility, and the Project will have no impact on the lower-cost visitor
accommodations provided at this facility.
Future Supply of Lower-Cost Visitor Accommodations
Based upon our research, there are no proposed lower-cost visitor accommodation developments
in the City. This is likely due to the high cost of land in the City, which discourages investors from
developing any lodging facilities in the lowest-priced segment, as it is financially infeasible. High
land costs force investors to develop higher-priced lodging. This Project will not impact the
proposed development of lower-cost visitor accommodations.
Demand for Lower Cost Visitor Accommodations
Since there would be no loss to the supply of existing lower cost visitor accommodations due to
the Project, the question is whether the Project would cause an increase in the demand for lower-
cost visitor accommodations in the City. We are of the opinion that it would not. There has never
been any correlation between the demand for lower-cost visitor accommodation and providing
either high-cost visitor accommodations or hotel-branded residences.
Similarly, the conversion of the existing high-cost visitor accommodations at the Project’s site,
which rented for an average of $197 per night in 2021, will not generate demand for additional
lower-cost visitor accommodation, which has been defined by the California Coastal Commission
144
8
as hotels with pricing under $135 per night. STR categorizes hotels into six different levels by
their average daily room rates, as follows:
x Luxury Class
x Upper-Upscale Class
x Upscale Class
x Upper-Midscale Class
x Midscale Class
x Economy Class.
The existing high-cost hotel rooms at the Project’s site are currently in the Upper-Upscale class,
which is four levels above the Economy class of lodging, which covers the lower-cost visitor
accommodations segment. Hotel guests who would have stayed at the existing high-cost hotel
rooms have plenty of options for alternative lodging choices in the Upper-Upscale, Upscale,
Upper-Midscale and Midscale classes, and would not likely end up staying in an Economy hotel.
Virtually every other hotel in the City falls into these middle four classes, and the supply of these
alternative hotel choices is unchanged by the Project. Thus, the conversion of up to 159 Upper-
Upscale hotel rooms into hotel-branded residence would not create any new demand for the
Extended Stay America, the single lower-cost visitor accommodation in the City.
In summary, since neither the supply of, nor demand for existing lower-cost visitor
accommodations is impacted by the Project, we conclude the Project will not have any impact on
the City’s existing lower-cost visitor accommodations, and no mitigation measures are required.
145
9
Statement of Qualifications
R. Maurice Robinson, ISHC
Mr. Robinson has over 40 years of experience as a consultant in the real estate and hospitality
development industry. He is an expert in the field of facilitating full-service hotel development,
ground leases, concession contracts, market and financial feasibility analysis, fiscal and economic
benefit studies, structuring public subsidies for new hotel development, and public/private
development partnerships. He specializes in public sector counseling, and typically assists
California and Federal agencies in:
x facilitating hotel, commercial and residential development on public properties
x structuring hospitality development deals using public financing vehicles
x negotiating ground and building leases for new hospitality developments
x identifying and soliciting hospitality brands, operators and developers
x Performing economic feasibility and fiscal impact studies for hotel projects
x valuing private investment on public lands
x providing expert witness testimony in disputes; and
x analyzing and structuring development and management agreements.
A partial list of his public-sector clients in California follows:
x Alameda
x California Coastal Commission
x Cathedral City
x Crescent City
x Del Mar
x Department of State Parks and Recreation
x Escondido
x Fresno
x Glendale
x Golden Gate Bridge District
x Healdsburg
x Inglewood
x Laguna Beach
x Long Beach
x Los Angeles, Community Redevelopment Agency
x Los Angeles, Department of Airports
x Los Angeles, Department of City Planning
x Los Angeles, Grand Ave JPA
x Manhattan Beach
x Metropolitan Water District
x Monterey County
146
10
x Mountain View
x Napa
x National Park Service
x Oceanside
x Orange County
x Palm Desert
x Poway
x Richmond
x Riverside
x Riverside County Transportation Commission
x San Diego City
x San Diego County
x San Diego Metropolitan Transit System
x San Diego Unified Port District
x San Jose, Redevelopment Agency
x San Mateo County
x San Mateo County Harbor District
x Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
x Santa Monica
x Solano County
x South Coast Air Quality Management District
x Southern California Association of Governments
x U.S. Department of Justice
x West Sacramento
Public clients and the hotels that have been developed, or are now being developed:
x City of San Diego’s 170-room 5-diamond Lodge at Torrey Pines
x City of Manhattan Beach’s 400-room Westdrift Autograph Hotel and Golf Course
x City of San Jose’s downtown 506-room Marriott Hotel
x City of Beverly Hills’s 201-room Montage Hotel & 25 Branded Residences
x City of Laguna Beach’s 258-room Montage Resort and 27 Branded Residences
x National Park Service’s 252-room Argonaut Hotel in San Francisco (conversion of the
historic Haslett Warehouse on Fisherman’s Wharf)
x National Park Service’s 142-room Lodge at Cavallo Point in Golden Gate Park
(conversion of the historic Fort Baker Army post near Sausalito).
x City of San Diego’s Liberty Station 200-room Courtyard and 150-unit Homewood Suites
(conversion of the ex-Naval Training Center adjacent to the airport)
x Port of San Diego’s 253-room Springhill Suites and 147-unit Residence Inn
x Port of San Diego’s 400-room InterContinental Hotel
147
11
x City of Mountain View’s 255-room Ameswell Hotel
x City of Oceanside’s 161-room Mission Pacific hotel and 226-room Seabird hotel
x City of Mountain View’s proposed 180-room Joie de Vivre hotel (to be developed)
x City of Santa Monica’s Fairmont Miramar Hotel and 60 Branded Residences (to be
redeveloped)
Affiliations: Mr. Robinson is a member of the prestigious International Society of Hospitality
Consultants (ISHC), where he served for nine years on the Board of Directors and as Chairman of
the Professional Conduct Committee. Other professional memberships include the American
Society of Appraisers (ASA), and the Forensic Expert Witness Association (FEWA). He is also a
member of the Board of Arbitrators for the Financial Industry National Regulatory Authority
(FINRA).
Background: Mr. Robinson is President of Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC, providing
advisory services to investors and developers in the Hospitality and Real Estate industries. Prior
to founding his current firm in 1999, he was a Principal with KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, leading
their western region Hospitality and Real Estate consulting practice for twelve years (1986-1998).
Prior to KPMG, he was a Senior Consultant and Manager in the real estate and hospitality
consulting practice of Pannell Kerr Forster (now PKF Consulting) for five years (1982-1986). His
previous work experience also includes three years as Senior Economist with the real estate
consulting firm of Williams-Kuebelbeck and Associates (1979-1982), and a year as an independent
consultant (1978).
Education: Mr. Robinson holds a General Real Estate Appraisal certificate from the State of
California; a Master of Public Administration degree from the University of Southern California;
a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota; a
certificate of environmental management with a specialty in public/private partnerships from the
Environmental Management Institute in Los Angeles; and a professional designation in financial
planning from UCLA.
Speeches, Teaching and Writing:Mr. Robinson is a frequent lecturer, having spoken more than
two dozen times at various real estate and hospitality industry-related seminars and conferences
across the United States, and was an annual guest lecturer at the UC Berkeley MBA program. He
is the author of numerous articles, book chapters, and was the editor of KPMG’s Hospitality
Update newsletter. He has co-authored an article entitled “How to Value Commercial
Improvements in a National Park” in the Winter 2000/Spring 2001 edition of Real Estate Issues; a
chapter entitled “Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Hospitality Industry” in the textbook Hotel
Investments: Issues and Perspectives, 4th edition (2006); a chapter entitled “Converting Existing
Historic Buildings into Hotels” in the textbook Hotel Sustainable Development: Principals and
Best Practices, 1st edition (2011); and an article entitled “Issue Review Boards™ – The Next Wave
of Alternative Dispute Resolution for the Hospitality Industry”.
Awards: Mr. Robinson received the coveted James Felt Creative Counselor Award from his peers
in the real estate counseling community for his ground-breaking work appraising the Grand
Canyon for the National Park Service. He is also the recipient of the Member of the Year award
148
12
by his peers in the ISHC for his efforts in establishing an Alternative Dispute Resolution training
program. In 2016, he facilitated the acquisition by the NPS of the final parcel of land to complete
the 67-mile Backbone Trail in the Santa Monica Mountains.
Contact info: 28 Dover Place, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. Tel: 310-640-9656. Fax: 310-640-
9276. Cell: 310-713-3220. E-mail: Maurice@MauriceRobinson.com; Web site:
www.MauriceRobinson.com.
149
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
150
Attachment No. PC 4
Project Plans are available at the City's Website
at the following URL:
151
https://newportbeachca.gov/pln/CEQ
A_REVIEW/Ritz_Carlton_Residences
_(PA2021-296)/Ritz-Carlton_Residen
ces_ProjectPlans_Map(PA2021-296).
pdf
IN
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
B
L
A
N
K
P
A
G
E
152
From:Matt Holder
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:SUPPORT for Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 07, 2022 5:09:50 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Mr. Jim Campbell and The Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Matt Holder and I have been a resident in the City of Newport Beach for
over 30 years. I've lived in different parts of the city - the Peninsula where my
grandparents built our house in 1957, Newport North and Newport Coast. I have seen
the city grow from a relatively small beach town into one of the most desirable places
on the coast.
The city has grown the right way. It has been able to keep its character of villages and
has welcomed more people into our community.
I believe the agenda item, Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296) will continue to
allow the city to grow the right way.
Fashion Island is the right place for this building and this project is consistent with the
intent of the area. The project does not require a General Plan Amendment or a
change of use through a Zoning Change or Planned Community amendment. The
proposed height is permitted under the revised General Plan resulting in no height
variance being needed.
I am also supportive of the Ritz-Carlton Residences because the owners are Newport
Beach residents and they have taken time to speak to our community to ensure the
project includes public input. The owners care as much about the future of Newport
Beach as I do. The owners' love for Newport Beach and respect for residents is so
apparent, that SPON is supportive of this project.
For all of these reasons, I hope the Planning Commission will agree with city staff and
our community by supporting Ritz-Carlton Residences.
Thank you,
Matt Holder
Newport Coast
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5a - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
Memorandum
To: Planning Commissioners
From: James Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director
Date: May 10, 2022
Re: Ritz-Carlton Residences; File PA2021-296
________________________________________________________________
Psomas, the City’s environmental consultant for the referenced project, has
prepared the attached summary memorandum. The summary describes how the
proposed project furthers the City’s housing policy goals. It also provides a
comparative summary of the environmental impacts of the project as more fully
examined in Addendum No. 6 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program EIR.
The summary also makes clear that the proposed project would not result in
additional intensity of use that would generate new significant impacts.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 949-644-3210
or by email at jcampbell@newportbeachca.gov. Thank you.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 300 • Santa Ana, CA 92707 • T: 714.751.7373 • F: 714.545.8883
MEMORANDUM
ͳͲǡʹͲʹʹ
To:From:
ǡ
Subject: Ǧ Ȃ
1. SUMMARY REGARDING HOW THE PROJECT FURTHERS CITY’S HOUSING POLICY GOALS
x ͺǡʹͲʹʹǡ
ʹͲʹͳǦʹͲʹͺ
ȋ Ȍ ͶǡͺͶͷ
Ǥ ͳͳǡʹͲʹʹǡ
ͲǦǤ
ʹͲʹͳǦʹͲʹͺ ǡ
ǡǡʹͲʹͳǦʹͻ Ǥ
o Ǧ Ǣ
ǯǢ
ȋʹͲͳ͵Ȍ
Ǥ
o ǡǡ
ȋʹͲʹͳǦʹͲʹͺ ǡǦʹǡ
ȌǤ
x
ʹͲͲ
ȋDz dzȌȀ ǡ Ǥ
o
ʹͲͲ ͳͳ
Ǥ
o ʹͲͳʹǡͻ
Ͷͺǡ ͷ͵ʹ
Ǥ
o ͷ͵ʹ Ǥ
o ͳͷͻǦǡ ͳͷͻ
ǡ ͷ͵ʹ
Ǥȋ ǦͶ ǯ Ǥ
ʹͲʹͳǦͲͲͳǡ͵Ͳ
ǦǦǤȌ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
ͳͲǡʹͲʹʹ
ʹ
Psomas
x
̈́ͳͲͲǡͲͲͲ Ǧ Ǥ̈́ͳͲͲǡͲͲͲǡ
̈́ͷǡͲͲͲ Ǥ
ͳͷͻǦǡ̈́ͷǡͲͲͲ̈́ͳͲǡ͵͵ͷǡͲͲͲǤ
x ʹͲͲ
ǡʹͲʹͳǦ
ʹͲʹͺ ȋ ǡǡ
ǡʹͲͳͶǦʹͲʹͳ Ȁ
ǡ
ǯ ʹͲʹͳǦʹͻǤ
2. COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF HOTEL ROOMS AND HOTEL BRANDED
RESIDENCES
ȋȌ
ȋ ͳͷͳͶ
Ȍ
Ǥ
ǡʹͲͲ Ǧ
ȋ,
ʹͳͲͲͲǤȌǢ
ȋͳͶǡCalifornia Code of Regulations,
ͳͷͲͲͲǤȌǢǡǡ
Ǥ
Ǥ
DzdzDz dz
ǡ ǡ Ǥ
CEQA TOPICS EXISTING HOTEL ROOMS PROPOSED RESIDENCES
Aesthetics No differences identified
Agricultural and
Forestry Resources No differences identified
Air Quality Ǧ No differences identified with respect to construction activities. With respect to Project
operation, the proposed Project would not lead to new or substantially more severe
significant impacts associated with operation-related air quality beyond those identified in
the 2006 EIR.
Biological Resources No differences identified
Cultural Resources No differences identified
Energy Ǧ The Project would not lead to new or substantially more severe significant impacts
associated with energy demand beyond those identified in the 2006 EIR.
Geology and Soils No differences identified
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
ͳͲǡʹͲʹʹ
͵
Psomas
CEQA TOPICS EXISTING HOTEL ROOMS PROPOSED RESIDENCES
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Ǧ The Project’s total net annual emissions are 156 MTCO2e/yr less than the existing hotel.
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials No differences identified
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Ǧ Existing hotel peak flow for the 100-year
storm of 37.7 cfs
Ǧ Proposed residences - reduced peak flow of
32.6 cfs
Land Use and Planning Ǧ Hotel rooms allowable land use for the
Project site
Ǧ Would not contribute to the City’s
obligations to provide new housing units
in both the current Housing Element
(2013) and the pending Housing
Element and RHNA cycles
Ǧ Would not provide funding for affordable
housing
Ǧ Residential use allowable accessory land use
within City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001
Ǧ Would assist the City in meeting obligations
in both the current Housing Element (2013)
and the pending Housing Element and RHNA
cycles
Ǧ Would provide $10,335,000 in funding for
affordable housing alone
Mineral Resources No differences identified
Noise Ǧ Exterior noise level of up to 58.3 dBA
CNEL
Composite noise levels at nearest receptor
(residential condominium uses south of Project)
Ǧ Reduced traffic noise levels due to reduction
in ADTs
Ǧ Reduction of 23 dBA, interior noise levels =
39 dBA CNEL, less than 45 dBA CNEL limit
Population and Housing Ǧ No existing residential uses located on-
site.
Ǧ Proposed residences – net population
increase of 361 based on US Census data
generation factor (i.e., 5 percent of SCAG’s
projected population growth for City from
2016 to 2045 of 7,100 residents)
Public Services Ǧ The Project would not lead to new or substantially more severe significant impacts
associated with public services demand beyond those identified in the 2006 EIR.
Recreation Ǧ Existing on-site amenities
Ǧ Existing hotel – no demand for parks
Ǧ On-site amenities and open space (private
and common open space)
Transportation Ǧ Existing hotel - 245 AM peak hour trips
Ǧ Existing hotel - 314 PM peak hour trips
Ǧ Existing hotel - 4,251 average daily trips
Ǧ Proposed residences - 43 AM peak hour trips
Ǧ Proposed residences - 51 PM peak hour trips
Ǧ Proposed residences - 722 average daily trips
Tribal Cultural
Resources No differences identified
Utilities and Service
Systems
Ǧ Existing hotel peak wastewater flow –
0.337 cfs
Ǧ Proposed residences peak wastewater flow –
0.161 cfs
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
ͳͲǡʹͲʹʹ
Ͷ
Psomas
CEQA TOPICS EXISTING HOTEL ROOMS PROPOSED RESIDENCES
Ǧ Existing hotel wastewater generated –
79,800 gpd/room (150 gpd/room)
Ǧ Existing hotel solid waste generated –
1,330 lbs/room/day (2.5 lbs/room/day)
Ǧ Existing hotel water demand – 136 afy
Ǧ Proposed residences wastewater generated
– 33,867 gpd/du (213 gpd/du)
Ǧ Proposed residences solid waste to be
generated - 1,019 lbs/day (6.41 lbs/unit/day)
Ǧ Proposed residences water demand – 187
afy
Wildfire No differences identified
MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year; cfs: cubic feet per second; RHNA: Regional Housing Needs Allocation;
dBA: A-weighted decibels; CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level; ADT: average daily trip; gpd/du: gallons per day per dwelling
unit; lbs: pounds; afy: acre-feet per year
3. THE PROJECT DOES NOT RESULT IN NET NEW INTENSITY OF USE
x ǡ ͳͷͻͷ͵ʹ
ͳͷͻ Ǥ
o ȋǤǤǡ Ȍ
Ǥ
o ǡ ȋͷ͵ʹȌ
ǡ ǡ
ʹͲͲ
ǡͻ
ͳͳǤ
o ǡ Dzdz
Dzdz Ǥ
x ͻǡʹͲʹͳǡ ǤʹͲʹͳǦͳͺ
ȋ ǦͶȌǡ
ǦǤ
o ǦͶǡ
ǡ ͵Ͳ
ǦǦǤ
o
ǯ
ǡ ǡ
Ǥ
o ǯǤʹͲʹͳǦͲͲͳ ǦͶ
ǡ ǡǤ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
ͳͲǡʹͲʹʹ
ͷ
Psomas
o ͳͷͻͳͷͻ
͵Ͳ ͷ͵ʹ
Ǥ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5b - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Mario Marovic
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support for Ritz Residences
Date:May 09, 2022 9:46:56 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Chairman Lowrey and Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
Thank you for your service to the city of Newport Beach.
I am a resident and business owner in this city.
I am writing to urge your support for Agenda Item 5, Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296).
I own a number of properties in this city, including Muldoon's Irish Pub, which is in very close
proximity to this site.
The applicants are from Newport Beach and I have known them for many years. Whenever
possible, we should welcome good operators/builders with a proven track record to invest in
Newport Beach.
Please vote yes on Thursday evening and continue to support good projects with proven
applicants in our city.
Sincerely,
Mario Marovic
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Denise PauckTo:Planning CommissionersSubject:Support of Newport Beach Ritz CarltonDate:May 09, 2022 9:26:32 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>> >> >>
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Gregg Miller
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support of the Ritz Carlton Residences
Date:May 09, 2022 8:04:29 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Gregg Miller and my wife Celin and I live at the Meridian Newport Beach.
Unfortunately, we will not be able to attend and speak at the upcoming planning commission
meeting. Because of it, I wanted to write a letter explaining ourstrong support of the Ritz-Carlton
residences at the VEA Newport Beach property.
As you probably know, the “Meridian at Newport Beach” is one of the closest residential
communities to this site. I really enjoy living here. In fact, I moved to the community because of its
close proximity to all that Fashion Island has to offer.
After learning about the proposed project, I can tell the improvements to the VEA hotel will only
increase this experience. Furthermore, I know the future residents of the Ritz-Carlton building will
also get to share the same luxuries that my community enjoys by living in such a great location.
In addition to what this project brings to my community, the benefit fees from the project will help
the entire city of Newport Beach. These funds can be used to provide more housing, improve our
parks, roads, etc…
And finally (maybe most importantly), my neighbors and I appreciate that the owners are from
Newport Beach. And without being asked, they reached out to our community and we have
developed a trust with them that gives us even greater comfort with this project.
For all these reasons, I hope you vote yes.
Sincerely,
Gregg Miller
Miller Environmental, Inc.
1130 W. Trenton Ave
Orange, CA 92867
(714) 385-0099 main office
(714) 912-1300 direct line
(714) 606-1193 cell
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
(714) 912-1460 e fax
For Immediate Assistance contact Mindy at mindy@millerenvironmental.com at 714-912-1306.
www.millerenvironmental.com
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Sean Stanfield
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton
Date:May 10, 2022 7:00:40 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
My name is Sean Stanfield and I am a business owner and live in the City of Newport Beach. I sell
real estate in Newport Beach and work with a number of high net worth clients. Everybody I speak
to are excited about the Ritz Carlton project and they believe it is something the city needs and that
it will be great for investors and property owners.
The owners of the project are from Newport Beach, and they are willing to invest significant capital
to improve our city and they understand the unique qualities that make Newport Beach great.
It is my understanding that the projected 20-Year TOT and property taxes to be generated by this
project will be over $130 Million! The city would benefit from these funds and it can be
accomplished without any amendments to the general plan or heights variances that might disrupt
neighbors.
I hope you will approve this project and more projects like it that attract local investors that will
benefit the entire city.
Thank you for your time.
SEAN STANFIELD
Global Real Estate Advisor
949-244-9057|714-421-3377
sean@stanfieldrealestate.com | stanfieldrealestate.com
Each Office is Independently Owned and Operated. CalBRE 01024996
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Kevin Conklin
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton Project
Date:May 10, 2022 9:58:30 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Commissioners:
I have been a resident of Newport Beach during the 1990s and again as a homeowner with my
family since 2004. Through my own company and industry experience, I am acutely aware of the
challenges regarding housing across California and learned of this potential project associated with
the Ritz-Carlton. The owners of this project provided education on their concept and I am in full
support. Some of the issues that I believe will be beneficial to the City and our community is the
reduction in traffic from the current transitory use, the general benefit of significant investment
being brought into the City, the appeal to a buyer demographic that will patronize our City vendors
and businesses at a high level, and the significant building and permitting fees that will be generated
for the City. It just makes good sense, especially given the current use and vision for the future.
Thank you for your consideration,
Kevin P. Conklin
Managing Member
Back Bay Development, LLC
415 Redlands Ave, Newport Beach CA 92663
Direct: 562-726-1226
Fax: 562-726-1162 Cell 714-401-2911
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Thompson, Jenna
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Letter of Support for Ritz Project
Date:May 10, 2022 8:58:37 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Jenna Thompson and I am fortunate enough to live in the City of Newport Beach. One of
the reasons why this city is such an incredible place to live is because of the major investments that
property owners are willing to make in our city. The Ritz-Carlton residences are a shining example of
this. The owners of the project are from Newport Beach, willing to invest significant capital to
improve our city and understand the unique qualities that make this city the best.
It is my understanding that the projected 20-Year TOT and property taxes to be generated by this
project is over $130 Million! The city would benefit from these funds and it can be accomplished
without any amendments to the general plan or heights variances that might disrupts their
neighbors.
I hope you will approve this project and more projects like it that attract local investors that will
benefit the entire city.
Thank you for your time.
Jenna Thompson
DISCLAIMER: This email (including any attachments) is intended solely for the person or
entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary or privileged material.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
email in error, please notify the sender immediately then permanently delete the email and all
copies (including any attachments). This email (including any attachments) is not intended as
an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation to buy or sell, any security. All email sent to or
from the Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. (“LGP”) email system is subject to archiving,
monitoring, and/or review by LGP personnel.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Malis Family
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support for Ritz Carlton Newport Beach Project
Date:May 10, 2022 11:39:32 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Andrea Malis and I am fortunate enough to live in the City of Newport Beach.
One of the reasons why this city is such an incredible place to live is because of the major
investments that property owners are willing to make in our city. The Ritz-Carlton residences are a
shining example of this. The owners of the project are from Newport Beach, willing to invest
significant capital to improve our city and understand the unique qualities that make this city the
best.
It is my understanding that the projected 20-Year TOT and property taxes to be generated by this
project is over $130 Million! The city would benefit from these funds and it can be accomplished
without any amendments to the general plan or heights variances that might disrupt their
neighbors.
I hope you will approve this project and more projects like it that attract local investors that will
benefit the entire city.
Thank you for your time.
Andrea Malis
1-520-360-7843
1700 Galaxy Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Craig
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Please Approve Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 10, 2022 12:31:27 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hi City of Newport Beach and Planning Commission,
My wife and I live in the City of Newport Beachwith our two
children on University Drive.
I hope you will support for Agenda Item 5 at the upcoming
Planning Commission meeting to approve the Ritz-Carlton
Residences (PA2021-296).
The owners of VEA are significantly improving this property and
we cannot wait to visit the hotel once it is remodeled. The campus
will be a wonderful place to visit during the day and have friends
stay while they are in town. With your approval of the Ritz-
Carlton residences, the city will gain a gorgeous building to the
Fashion Island area.
It is refreshing to have a governing body that keeps our
community safe, respect property rights and is constantly making
improvements. Because of projects like the Ritz-Carlton
residences, our property values continue to increase and the city
is able to make improvements to our infrastructure without ever
raising our taxes.
Please vote yes on Thursday evening.
Best,
Craig Miller
Sent from my iPhone
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Cortland Lioi
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz-Carlton Residences Support
Date:May 10, 2022 1:25:46 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Cortland Lioi and I live in the upper Newport bay area. I moved to the city of
Newport Beach a few years ago. As a young professional, one of the many reasons why I love
Newport Beach is because it is a place where you can live, work and play.
The improvements to the hotel campus of the VEA Newport Beach with the construction of
the Ritz-Carlton residences exemplifies this. I am writing to ask that you support this project.
For years, the site has looked “tired” and in desperate need of a makeover. In this short period
that the new owners have taken over, we can already see they are transforming the location
into a site that is worthy of our great city.
My colleagues and I are anxious to visit the revitalized property. VEA will be a fun new place
where we can meet with friends and enjoy the incredible views that overlook the pacific.
The revitalization of the entire hotel campus will make our city an even more desirable place
to live and I ask that you please approve it.
Best Regards,
Cortland
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Debbie Millar
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Please approve Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 10, 2022 2:28:04 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commissioners,
My husband and I are residents, business owners and property owners in the City of
Newport Beach. We have lived on the peninsula, Lido Isle and currently reside in
Corona del Mar. We moved here in 1990 and raised our six children, who were all
born at Hoag Hospital!
When I am not enjoying time with my family, I have the privilege of selling homes in
this incredible community. I get to help families find the perfect home and
neighborhood to raise their families and create lasting memories. It is priceless to
help people become a part of this wonderful community that we are fortunate enough
to call home.
I am writing to express my support for Agenda Item 5, Ritz-Carlton Residences
(PA2021-296). The project is exactly what our city needs. The building is spectacular
and the perfect location for this type of residential development. An investment of this
type will undoubtedly increase property values for all homeowners in the city and
make Newport Beach an even more desirable place to live. For instance, the public
benefit fees the city will receive can be used to improve parks, libraries and streets of
neighborhoods to ensure every resident is positively impacted.
With your approval and construction of this project, it will bring a beautiful building to
the Fashion Island area and increase property values throughout the city.
Thank you for your time and please vote yes.
My best,
Debbie Millar
Corona del Mar
(949) 933-7393
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Jean H. Watt
4 Harbor Island, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Jwatt4@aol.com 949/673-8164
May 10, 2022
City of Newport Beach Planning Commission planningcommission@newportbeachca.gov
Lee Lowrey, Chair llowrey@newportbeachca.gov
Lauren Kleiman, Vice Chair lkleiman@newportbeachca.gov
Curtis Elmore, Secretary celmore@newportbeachca.gov
Sarah Klaustermeier, Commissioner sklaustermeier@newportbeachca.gov
Peter Koeting, Commissioner pkoeting@newportbeachca.gov
Mark Rosene, Commissioner mrosene@newportbeachca.gov
Eric Weigand, Commissioner eweigand@newportbeachca.gov
cc to:
Leilani Brown, City Clerk lbrown@newportbeachca.gov
Grace Leung, City Manager gleung@newportbeachca.gov
Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
Jim Campbell, Planning Director jcampbell@newportbeachca.gov
RE: Ritz Carlton Residences (PA 2021-296)
Dear Chairman Lowrey and members of the Commission:
My comments align with those of SPON as I am a Board member of SPON. I do not want to
comment on the building itself, but rather what I see as benefits that this project can bring to
the City. I understand that much of what I have to say is not under the direct purview of the
Planning Commission but believe it is relevant to your discussion and interest.
I keep in mind SPON’s mission which is “to protect and preserve the environmental and
residential qualities of Newport Beach”. Opportunities arise for us to oppose projects that are
detrimental, try to mitigate negative impacts and look for ways to initiate or support projects
that further the mission. I believe he latter is true in this case – that the project can bring
benefits such as development fees aimed at provision of affordable housing and, even more
importantly, a working relationship leading to a local housing trust fund.
I have in mind the problems stemming from RHNA and am more and more of the belief that a
local, Newport Beach affordable housing trust fund can be a solution to RHNNA and provide
housing to accommodate our workforce, senior citizens and young people who have grown up
here and wish to work and live here.
While discussing the Ritz Carlton project with the applicants, Kory Kramer and Peter Zak, the
subject of forming a local Housing Trust Fund became of interest to all of us and we have
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
formed a group including three from SPON and three from the developers to work on how best
to proceed and make this happen.
Our discussions have revolved around the benefits of a local Housing Trust Fund. Several of
these stand out and are of interest to the Planning Commission:
1. By subsidizing affordable developments we can avoid the increased density
and unwanted impacts on our neighborhoods from thousands of market
rate and luxury units which otherwise would be needed to provide the
necessary financing for builders.
2. By putting our best foot forward and providing matching funds, we can
receive some grants which would otherwise not be available. Many of the
government grants require that the application include both the City and a
non-profit trust and matching funds from the community.
3. By having an organization which has substantial community input, we can
provide for projects that meet our standards of livability, aesthetics and
balanced villages.
4. With this much interest and effort from both citizens and the City, we
should be able to successfully work with the State to accommodate RHNA
as it unfolds.
We appreciate the time that the Ritz Carlton project applicants, Kory Kramer for
Eagle Four and Peter Zac for Lyon Living, have spent with us in discussing and
planning for a local housing trust fund and appreciate their personal commitment
to make it happen. They have the genuine interest, expertise, willingness and
where-with-all that provides a unique opportunity. This has arisen because of the
Ritz Carlton application but has evolved into something that has is on its own
track. However, it can be a win/win situation where-by they have an approved
project and the City has a beneficial public/private partnership for affordable
housing. Hopefully we can develop a good working relationship with the Planning
Commission as this goes forward.
As always, thank you for your work and concern for our City.
Sincerely,
Jean Watt
949-673-8164
Jwatt4@aol.co
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:janjetton
To:Planning Commissioners
Date:May 10, 2022 3:11:14 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To Whom It May Concern,
As citizen of Newport Beach
I strongly oppose the building of the massive Ritz Carlton residencial building
that is slated to be reviewed by the N. B. Planning Department. This proposal presents a blyth
to the region and poses an environmental nightmare and a burden to the existing infrastructure
and traffic. Please consider all input from the local citizens.
Sincerely,
Janice Jetton
1915 Yacht Maria
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
To: planningcommissioners@newportbeachca.gov
Subject: A Great Model for Hotel Campuses
To whom it may concern:
The city of Newport Beach should support the residential building on the hotel campus
of the VEA Newport Beach at Fashion Island.
This project recognizes a trend in the resort hotel industry to provide onsite residences
alongside hotel amenities in a single resort campus. The Balboa Bay Resort shows this
model works in our city and is a great example of how successful this trend has
become. Not only will this reduce traffic, but it will also generate an extreme amount of
money to the city in public benefit fees.
Please support this project.
Best,
Amy McLarand
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Meredith Curci
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support of Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 10, 2022 4:13:56 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commissioners,
My family and I have lived in this city of Newport Beach for 45 years.
While I typically do not write letters to the city because your planning commission,
city staff and city council always does a fine job of running our city, I felt
compelled this time to encourage your commission to support the upcoming agenda
item of the Ritz-Carlton residences at the VEA site.
I want to applaud you, the owners/applicants, the city council and city staff for
finding creative ways to bring more revenue and housing into the city. This project
is a great example of “out-of-the box” thinking that can bring more funds to the city
and help solve our state’s housing crisis.
It is my understanding that an approval would bring Newport Beach a public benefit
fee of $100,000 for EACH unit that is built. By voting yes, all residents in Newport
Beach would benefit from these funds, regardless of where they live in the city.
Also, while I respect all property owner’s rights to do what they would like on their
property, I would much rather see residential built instead of more hotel rooms. We
currently have plenty of hotel rooms and as you know, more hotel rooms would
mean more traffic!
By voting in support of the project, you will bring more revenue to the city, allow
for a beautiful project to be built and reduce the amount of potential traffic in this
area. Please vote yes!
Sincerely,
Meredith F Curci
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Ruth Kobayashi
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Approval-The Ritz-Carlton Residences Project
Date:May 10, 2022 4:35:48 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Good afternoon!
The purpose of this email is to encourage your approval of the The Ritz-Carlton Residences Project (PA2021-296).
I live in Harbor Cove, across Jamboree from the project, and I look forward to the VEA Hotel and Ritz-Carlton
Residences-great additions to Newport Center.
Thank you for the important work that you do for our city.
Sincerely,
Ruth
Digital Enthusiast
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:jackie nuccio
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Vote NO on Proposed High Rise!!!
Date:May 10, 2022 4:43:41 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commissioners,
As a long time Newport Beach resident I strongly OPPOSE the idea of building the
Ritz Carlton/Marriott's view-blocking highrise to include 22 stories and up to 159
residential units. This proposal will certainly not enhance our beautiful city of Newport
Beach.
I ask that this email be read and placed on the record at the meeting on May 12,
2022.
Sincerely,
Jackylyne Nuccio
2025 Yacht Defender
Newport Beach
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5c - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:David
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Please build high rise
Date:May 10, 2022 5:55:15 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Please build new high-rise in Newport Beach.
As the population gets older and we want to move out of large homes in Newport
Beach, we also want to stay in Newport Beach, and need more high rise buildings.
Seniors are not going to create more traffic unless it is to spend their money at local
restaurants and shopping.
Thank you
David King
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Carl McLarand
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:A great model for hotel Campuses
Date:May 10, 2022 6:32:57 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Members of the Planning Newport Beach Commission
My name is Carl McLarand I have lived in Newport Beach for over 40 years and have had the great pleasure as an
architect to design a significant amount of the built environment in this great city, especially in and around the
Newport Center area.
It is my fervent hope that this Commission will approve the design and construction of the Ritz-Carlton residence
project located at 900Newport Center Drive.
This proposed project meets the needs of an increasingly growing segment of the local population that is aging.
These residents are anxious to remain in Newport Beach while down scaling their existing residences and desire to
relocate to a smaller, but very high quality and attractive residence that matches their lifestyle requirements.
Security, very high quality hotel like amenities and service as well as, outstanding outward views, are highly
desired by this group.
The project itself will.be visually stunning, provide significant view corridors and become a prized residential asset
for the City. In addition, it will have very little impact on traffic and other infrastructure issues within the City.
Newport Beach needs this product and I sincerely hope you will vote favorably for its approval.
Thank you in advance,
Carl McLarand,Architect
Chairman Emeritus, MVE Architects
Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Kelly Lombardo
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:sean@stanfieldrealestate.com
Subject:Ritz Carlton Newport Beach
Date:May 10, 2022 8:36:36 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
My name is Kelly Lombardo, I am a homeowner of Newport Beach, and I am in
full support of the Ritz Carlton Residences. Not only will the project contribute
millions of dollars to the city in the form of property taxes, but fulfill a need for
high end luxury housing. Newport Beach needs to be associated with a luxury
brand, and what better than the Ritz Carlton. The property owners will patronize
Newport Beach businesses and provide more revenue to keep our city as pristine as
it is. Thank you
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Phil Lombardo
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:Sean Stanfield
Subject:Planned Ritz-Carlton Residences, Newport Beach
Date:May 10, 2022 8:59:02 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
My name is Phil Lombardo and I'm fortunate enough live in the City of Newport Beach.
One of the reasons why this city is such an incredible place to live is because of the major
investments property owners are willing to make in our city. The Ritz-Carlton Residences are
a shining example of this. The owners of the planned project are from Newport Beach, willing
to invest significant capital to improve our city, and understand the unique qualities that make
this city the best.
It is my understanding that the projected 20-Year TO Tax and property taxes to be generated
by this project exceed $130 Million. The city would greatly benefit from these funds, and the
project can be realized without any amendments to the general plan, or height variances that
might disrupt its neighbors.
I hope you will approve this project and more projects like it that attract local investors,
benefitting the entire city. Thank you for your time.
Phil Lombardo
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Susan Skinner
To:Planning Commissioners; Harp, Aaron; Campbell, Jim
Subject:The proposed Marriott tower is in violation of the General Plan and our LCP
Date:May 11, 2022 7:33:50 AM
Attachments:CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton Residences) Coastal Commission Staff Comments 5.10.22 (3).pdfMarriotSite3-22.docx
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Planning Commissioners:
We are either a city that follows the rule of law or we are not. If you approve the proposed
luxury condo tower at the Marriott site (PA2021-296) as planned, you will be violating multiple
laws and we will NOT be a city that follows the rule of law. Your responsibility is to the residents
of our city and not to the developers who bring interesting projects in front of you.
I approached the Coastal Commission about this project and they submitted the letter attached below
yesterday. Interestingly, the city has not yet posted this letter on line. I think it is important that you read it
prior to your decision.
The Coastal Commission lays out in detail why this project is in violation of our LCP in a much more
eloquent way than I ever could.
In order to maintain standing, I will thus incorporate their letter and include a letter of my own to be entered
into the record.
Thank you,
Susan Skinner
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
May 11, 2022
Dear Planning Commission:
It appears to me that the residential towers on the Marriott site will be in
violation of the General Plan as well as the LCP if approved as planned on May 12.
As such, the city will be in violation of their own processes. We are either a city
that follows the rule of law or we are not. If the city approves this project,
Planning Commission and the City Council members will have violated their oath
to uphold the law, a reprehensible act for a city official to take.
In discussion with the city regarding this project, much is being made of the
Planning Director Determination approved last year. That action was taken
without a stated plan being associated with it and while the Director’s
Determination may have been legally appropriate without a specific project
attached to it, it is clearly NOT legal under the Municipal Code for the Marriott
project and per the Coastal Commission letter, it is also in violation of the LCP.
It appears to me that the residential towers on the Marriott site will require a
General Plan Amendment.
My primary reason for believing this is that the current General Plan only allows
hotel rooms at that site (initially 611 rooms, now 532 rooms). Because the
General Plan is so specific at this site, I don’t believe that a Director’s
Determination can effect a change in the entitlements at that location since the
zoning code notes that the General Plan take precedence if there is a conflict.
As you know, in 2021 the city accepted a Planning Director’s Determination that
allowed the Planning Director to add residential units to land zoned Visitor
Serving Commercial (CV) in the General Plan. The Director’s Determination also
stated that up to 30% of the hotel rooms allowed at a site could be changed into
dwelling units. This determination was appealed but was upheld by the city.
However, the zoning code sections under which the Director’s Determination was
made has some restrictions and although they were not accepted on appeal, they
may be able to be utilized in the specific case of the Marriott property. Code
section 20.12.020(D)(1) states that:
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
1. Zoning Code and Municipal Code provisions. If conflicts occur between
requirements of this Zoning Code, or between this Zoning Code and the
Newport Beach Municipal Code, or other regulations of the City, the more
restrictive shall prevail.
Code section 20.12.020(E)(1)(a) states that:
1. The characteristics of, and activities associated with, the proposed use are
equivalent to those of one or more of the uses listed in the zoning district
as allowable, and will not involve a greater level of activity, population
density, intensity, traffic generation, parking, dust, odor, noise, or similar
impacts than the uses listed in the zoning district.
It appears to me that both of these sections could be used to oppose the specific
project at the Marriott since the General Plan doesn’t allow dwelling units there
and so is more restrictive as well as the fact that the parking, intensity and
population density will be increased by the dwelling units. The preliminary info
on the Planning Commission’s website indicates that whereas the hotel had 1.3
parking unit per room, the condos will have 2.7 parking units per space. The
square footage of the proposed condo tower appears to be far in excess of the
current square footage of the hotel, thus increasing the intensity of the use.
On page 3-20 of the Housing Element of the General Plan is policy LU 4.2, which
states:
Prohibition of New Residential Subdivisions: Prohibit new residential
subdivisions that would result in additional dwelling units unless authorized
by an amendment of the General Plan (GPA). Lots that have been legally
merged through the Subdivision Map Act and City Subdivision Code
approvals are exempt from the GPA requirements and may be re-
subdivided to the original underlying legal lots. This policy is applicable to
all Single Unit, Two Unit, and Multiple Unit Residential land use categories.
(Imp 6.1)
I did point this out to the city, whose response was that LU 4.2 exclusively covers
the Single Unit, Two Unit and Multiple Unit Residential categories and was thus
not applicable to the Visitor Serving Commercial category. Since residential has
never been allowed in CV before, there could be an argument that this policy was
intended to cover any additional residential units. It could also be argued that the
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
language stating that it is applicable to “all … land use categories” creates a
broader rather than a more restrictive intent to cover anything that allows
residential use. In other words, although it does call out those three land use
categories, that this policy would apply to any land use category that allowed
single, two unit or multi-unit residential. In the general plan update that failed in
the mid 2010s, this policy had been updated to include multi use categories as
well, indicating an intent to cover all residential categories.
The Marriot project does meet the criteria for a residential subdivision under
state and municipal code.
Finally, I will add that although Newport is a charter city, the Municipal Code
requires consistency between the Zoning Code and the General Plan.
Thank you,
Susan Skinner
Planning Director’s Determination:
https://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/Web/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=2746591&pag
e=10&cr=1
Zoning code 20.12.020:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=662
Housing Element of the General Plan:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/PLN/General_Plan/04_Ch3_LandUse_web.pdf
Criteria for residential subdivision:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/pln/LCP/LCP_Zoning/37_Chapter%2021.70%2
0-%20Definitions.pdf
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Page 1 of 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
South Coast Area Office
301 E Ocean Blvd. #300
Long Beach, CA 90802
(562) 590-5071
Date: May 10, 2022
Re: Coastal Development Permit Application CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton Residences)
To: The Honorable Newport Beach Planning Commission
Coastal Commission staff received a Notice of Public Hearing for the referenced item on the Planning
Commission’s agenda of May 12, 2022. Thank you for the invitation to comment.
The notice may contain an error and a material inconsistency. First, the notice states that “the project
site is located within the appeal area of the coastal zone; therefore, final action by the City may be
appealed to the California Coastal Commission.” Staff would note that maps identifying geographic
appeals areas in the City identify the project site as being in a non-appealable area.1 There may be
other reasons the proposed development is appealable (e.g. proximity to wetlands, streams, and/or
components of the project that would qualify as a major public works project). The City should
determine whether the development is appealable and update its notifications accordingly. Second, the
notice identifies the zoning and land use for the project site as Visitor Serving Commercial (CV),
which is consistent with the LCP designations; however, the proposed project (conversion of 159 hotel
units to residential units) is plainly inconsistent with that zoning and land use and with the LCP, which
is the standard of review for the Coastal Development Permit application.2
This inconsistency appears to be related to Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01 (Accessory
Residential Uses Within Resort Hotels) reported to the City Council on August 24, 2021. Coastal
Commission staff provided a letter dated August 20, 2021, noting that the appropriate process for
changes to land use regulation in the coastal zone is an LCP Amendment, which may be initiated by
the City Council subject to certification by the Coastal Commission.
In fact, such a process was initiated for development of 79 townhome units on the subject site in 2007,
when the City Council directed City staff to submit LCP Amendment Application NPB-MAJ-1-06,
Part A, in conjunction with Coastal Development Permit Application 5-07-085.3 The LCP Amendment
was approved by the Coastal Commission and changed the land use designation of a 4.25-acre area
(occupied by tennis courts) at the Marriott Hotel from Visitor Serving Commercial to Medium Density
1 Locally issued coastal development permits authorizing development in the non-appealable area are
not appealable to the Coastal Commission unless they are appealable for some other reason. They may
be challenged in a court of law.
2 The LCP includes a Land Use Map which identifies development that may be authorized subject to a
Coastal Development Permit in specific areas of the City. Land Use Policy 2.1.1-1 includes a table that
identifies where hotels may be authorized (and prioritized) and where housing may be authorized.
3 The project applicant initially submitted Coastal Development Permit Application 5-06-168, but
withdrew that application and waited to file the subsequent permit application because it was agreed
that an LCP Amendment was required before the permit could be approved.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Coastal Development Permit Application CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton Residences)
Page 2 of 2
Residential. The Commission approved the permit application for the physical housing development
after approving the LCP Amendment to change the land use. Additionally, the approved permit
included a special condition requiring that: “the permittee shall undertake development in accordance
with the approved plan. Any proposed changes to the approved final plan shall be reported to the
Executive Director. No changes to the approved final plans shall occur without a Commission
amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no
amendment is legally required.”
The subject proposal to change 30% of the rooms on the site from hotel use to residential use requires
an LCP Amendment before a permit may be approved, and may require a Commission-approved
amendment to Coastal Development Permit 5-07-085 or another Commission-approved permit.
Construction of residential units in a location designated for Visitor Serving Commercial uses is
inconsistent with the LCP, and a permit for such a use cannot be approved without changing the land
use designation in the LCP. If the project, which is inconsistent with the LCP as currently proposed,
proceeds without the City first processing an LCP amendment with the Commission, the Commission
is authorized pursuant to Section 30810 of the Coastal Act, in certain circumstances, to issue a cease
and desist order to the applicant to enforce the provisions of the LCP. That said, we prefer to resolve
this matter in a cooperative manner with the City, as described in this letter.
When the City submits an LCP Amendment request for the subject site (or for multiple sites in the
coastal zone), Coastal Commission staff will also review the permit history for the site(s) in greater
detail and identify other issues that need to be analyzed aside from proposed changes in land use (e.g.
provision of public access and recreational opportunities, visual resources, water quality) and impacts
that may need to be mitigated. The subject site is governed not only by the referenced LCP
Amendment and permit, but by Coastal Development Permits 5-89-1006, 5-83-139, 5-83-139A, and
possibly earlier permits, as the hotel site appears to have been developed in the mid 1970s.
Coastal Commission staff are available to discuss the LCP Amendment process and other matters
related to the provision of housing in the coastal zone. As noted in our previous letter, the Coastal
Commission supports State and City goals of increasing housing in existing developed areas with the
appropriate land use and zoning designations authorized by the Commission.
Thank you for your collaboration.
Karl Schwing
Deputy Director, CCC
cc: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director, City of Newport Beach
Jim Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director, City of Newport Beach
Alex Helperin, Assistant Chief Counsel, CCC
Claire Wilkins, Attorney, CCC
Andrew Willis, Enforcement Manager, CCC
Zach Rehm, District Supervisor, CCC
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Margi Murray
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:high rise construction at marriott/fashion island
Date:May 11, 2022 8:00:06 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
dear fellow newport beach residents,
a twenty two story building is out of proportion to the surrounding neighborhood. while this is
not the first attempt to build high rise housing in this part of the town, i don’t agree to it at all.
true, we have housing numbers to work toward for the state mandate, but this is not the right
answer to that question.
greed and vanity are common human traits and in the interest of community sometimes need
to be reined in. this is one of those times. don’t allow this.
marjorie murray
corona del mar
As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not
to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at
election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests. --Gore Vidal, writer (3
Oct 1925-2012)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Judy perry
To:planningcommissioners@newportbeachca.gov.
Subject:Proposed Fashion Island Ritz Carlton
Date:May 11, 2022 9:39:43 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
As a resident of Granville Drive I wish to express my opposition to the proposed Ritz Carlton project. 22 stories
would loom over our serene, private enclave like the Queen Mary. The attraction that Granville has is that it feels far
removed from the city. The Ritz Carlton edifice would end that treasured privacy.
Judy Perry
1071 Granville Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
May 10, 2022
Delivered Via Email: planningcommissioners@newportbeachca.gov
Chair Lee Lowrey & Planning Commissioners
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Re: Support for Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Dear Chair Lowrey & Planning Commissioners:
I am the President of the Meridian at Newport Beach Association, which is a residential community
in Newport Center located next door to the Vea Newport Beach, a Marriott Resort and Spa. We
are submitting this letter in support of Newport Center Hotel, LLC’s application for the Ritz-
Carlton Residences,which is on the Newport Beach Planning Commission’s May 12, 2022
agenda.
Our Association appreciates the outreach, communication, and neighborliness that folks from the
project have extended to our community. We are appreciative for the meetings and telephone calls
they have had with members of our community, and we share their desire to improve and beautify
Newport Beach. We are particularly impressed by this project because it complies with the
General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program. Also, this project complies with the
height limits for the area, and will positively enhance the community’s lifestyle, commerce, and
social status in the area.
We strongly believe this project will bring value to the community and the much-needed revenue
to our local businesses and the City of Newport Beach which will result in continuous and
imperative revitalization and improvement within our immediate city life and its infrastructure.
We ask you and your fellow Planning Commissioners to join our Association in supporting the
Ritz-Carlton Residences.
Sincerely,
Dion Emami
Dion Emami
President
Meridian at Newport Beach Association
cc: Jim Campbell, Deputy CDD Director (JCampbell@newportbeachca.gov)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
WKŽdžϭϬϮͮĂůďŽĂ/ƐůĂŶĚ͕ϵϮϲϲϮͮϵϰϵ͘ϴϲϰ͘ϲϲϭϲ
ϱϬϭ;ĐͿ;ϯͿŶŽŶͲƉƌŽĨŝƚƉƵďůŝĐĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚ
ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůƋƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐŽĨEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘
^WKEE͘ŽƌŐͮ/ŶĨŽΛ^WKEͲEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘ŽƌŐ
^ŽĐŝĂůDĞĚŝĂΛ^WKEEΘΛ^WKEEĞǁƉŽƌƚ
0D\WK
1HZSRUW%HDFK3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
5( 9($+RWHO 5LW]&DUOWRQ5HVLGHQFHV3URMHFW3$
'HDU&KDLUPDQ/RZUH\DQG0HPEHUVRIWKH&RPPLVVLRQ
7KDQN\RXIRUWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRFRPPHQWRQWKLVSURMHFW:HDSSUHFLDWHWKHWLPHWKDWWKH
SURMHFWDSSOLFDQWV.RU\.UDPHUIRU(DJOH)RXU3HWHU=DNIRU/\RQ/LYLQJDQG(G6HOLFKZKR
KDVVHUYHGDVERWK3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQHUDQG0D\RUKDYHLQYHVWHGLQSXEOLFRXWUHDFK,Q
PHHWLQJWRGLVFXVVWKHDSSOLFDWLRQIRUWKH9($ 5LW]&DUOWRQ5HVLGHQFHVSURMHFWZHKDYHKDG
VRPHYHU\LQWHUHVWLQJDQGLQIRUPDWLYHVHVVLRQV%HFDXVH6321KDVEHHQFRQFHUQHGDERXWWKH
5+1$PDQGDWHDQGSUREDELOLW\WKDWEHWZHHQDQGXQQHHGHGPDUNHWUDWHKRXVLQJ
XQLWVZRXOGEHEXLOWWRPDNHDIIRUGDEOHXQLWVYLDEOHWKHLGHDRID+RXVLQJ7UXVW)XQGKDVEHHQ
RILQWHUHVWWRXV
7KHGLVFXVVLRQDERXWD+RXVLQJ7UXVW)XQGFDPHDERXWDWWKHWLPHRIPHHWLQJZLWKWKHSURMHFW
DSSOLFDQWVWROHDUQPRUHDERXWWKHGHWDLOVRIWKHSURMHFW7KHUHVXOWRIRXUPHHWLQJVLV
UHPLQLVFHQWRIDQHDUOLHUDJUHHPHQWWKDWZDVIRUPHGZLWKSURMHFWDSSOLFDQW7KH,UYLQH&RPSDQ\
LQ 7KDWDJUHHPHQWWKHDPLFDEOHVHWWOHPHQWRIDODZVXLWFDOOHGIRUDZLQZLQVLWXDWLRQ
ZKHUHE\WKHDSSOLFDQWEXLOWWKHFLQHPDZLQJDW1HZSRUW&HQWHUDQGZLWKWUDIILFDVWKHEDVLFLVVXH
DQGQH[XVWKH&RPSDQ\UHOLQTXLVKHGLWVSODQWREXLOGUHVLGHQWLDOXQLWVRQWKHDFUHSURSHUW\LQ
8SSHU1HZSRUW%D\$GHHGUHVWULFWLRQZDVLQFOXGHGDOORZLQJWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKH
VTXDUHIRRW0XWK,QWHUSUHWLYH&HQWHU
7KHVLPLODULW\LQWKLVFDVHLVWKDWZHDUHDJUHHLQJWRVXSSRUWWKH9($ 5LW]&DUOWRQ5HVLGHQFHV
SURMHFWZKLOHZHZRUNWRJHWKHUZLWKWKHDSSOLFDQWWRZDUGWKHIRUPDWLRQRIDORFDO+RXVLQJ7UXVW
)XQG7KHEDVLVDQGQH[XVLQWKLVFDVHIRUXVLVWKHDELOLW\RID+RXVLQJ7UXVW)XQGWROLPLWWKH
XQQHHGHGPDUNHWUDWHKRXVLQJDQGWKHGHQVLW\WKDWFRXOGFRPHZLWKRXWDPHDQVWRVXEVLGL]H
DIIRUGDEOHKRXVLQJRSSRUWXQLWLHV
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
WKŽdžϭϬϮͮĂůďŽĂ/ƐůĂŶĚ͕ϵϮϲϲϮͮϵϰϵ͘ϴϲϰ͘ϲϲϭϲ
ϱϬϭ;ĐͿ;ϯͿŶŽŶͲƉƌŽĨŝƚƉƵďůŝĐĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚ
ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůƋƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐŽĨEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘
^WKEE͘ŽƌŐͮ/ŶĨŽΛ^WKEͲEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘ŽƌŐ
^ŽĐŝĂůDĞĚŝĂΛ^WKEEΘΛ^WKEEĞǁƉŽƌƚ
:KHQD+RXVLQJ7UXVW)XQGLVIRUPHGZHKRSHWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQZLOOMRLQXVLQVHHNLQJ
DIIRUGDEOHKRXVLQJSURMHFWVWKDWVHUYHWKHFLW\ZHOOLQFOXGLQJLQORFDWLRQDQGFKDUDFWHU
7KDQN\RXIRU\RXUVHUYLFH
6LQFHUHO\
&KDUOHV.OREH3UHVLGHQW6321
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
WKŽdžϭϬϮͮĂůďŽĂ/ƐůĂŶĚ͕ϵϮϲϲϮͮϵϰϵ͘ϴϲϰ͘ϲϲϭϲ
ϱϬϭ;ĐͿ;ϯͿŶŽŶͲƉƌŽĨŝƚƉƵďůŝĐĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚ
ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůƋƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐŽĨEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘
^WKEE͘ŽƌŐͮ/ŶĨŽΛ^WKEͲEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘ŽƌŐ
^ŽĐŝĂůDĞĚŝĂΛ^WKEEΘΛ^WKEEĞǁƉŽƌƚ
K&&/ Z^
WZ ^/ Ed
ŚĂƌůĞƐ<ůŽďĞ
s/ WZ ^/ Ed
^ƵƐĂŶǀŽƌĂŬ
dZ ^hZ Z
ĞŶŶŝƐĂŬĞƌ
^ Z dZz
:ĞĨĨ,ĞƌĚŵĂŶ
ͺͺͺ
KZD D Z^
ĞŶŶŝƐĂŬĞƌ
dŽŵĂŬĞƌ
ƌƵĐĞĂƌƚƌĂŵ
^ƵƐĂŶǀŽƌĂŬ
:ĞĨĨ,ĞƌĚŵĂŶ
:ŽĂƌŽů,ƵŶƚĞƌ
DĂdž:ŽŚŶƐŽŶ
ŚĂƌůĞƐ<ůŽďĞ
ŽŶĂůĚ<ƌŽƚĞĞ
ŶĚƌĞĂ>ŝŶŐůĞ
ŽďďLJ>ŽǀĞůů
DĂƌŬŽWŽƉŽǀŝĐŚ
:ĞĂŶŶĞWƌŝĐĞ
^ŚĂƌŽŶZĂLJ
EĂŶĐLJ^ĐĂƌďƌŽƵŐŚ
DĞůŝŶĚĂ^ĞĞůLJ
EĂŶĐLJ^ŬŝŶŶĞƌ
:ĞĂŶtĂƚƚ
WŽƌƚŝĂtĞŝƐƐ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
WKŽdžϭϬϮͮĂůďŽĂ/ƐůĂŶĚ͕ϵϮϲϲϮͮϵϰϵ͘ϴϲϰ͘ϲϲϭϲ
ϱϬϭ;ĐͿ;ϯͿŶŽŶͲƉƌŽĨŝƚƉƵďůŝĐĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚ
ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůƋƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐŽĨEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘
^WKEE͘ŽƌŐͮ/ŶĨŽΛ^WKEͲEĞǁƉŽƌƚĞĂĐŚ͘ŽƌŐ
^ŽĐŝĂůDĞĚŝĂΛ^WKEEΘΛ^WKEEĞǁƉŽƌƚ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Alex Borrego
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:New Marriot/Ritz Carlton highrise in Newport Beach
Date:May 11, 2022 12:58:50 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To whom it may concern:
I live in the Seaview community in Newport Beach. We paid significant monies to purchase this
property primarily because of the view. This new proposed high rise will significantly negatively
impact our view. This is extremely upsetting and I am strongly opposed to it. I have been a proud
home owner in the city of Newport for over 10 years and in addition to this building blocking all of
our views it will bring with it more traffic, trash and pollution. One of the greatest things about
living in Newport is how clean and green it is compared to other parts of LA or even Orange county.
Thank you, ABF
Alexandra Borrego
Firm Administrator
ABorrrego@fwcllp.com
818.649.3577 DD
818.543.1389 F
100 West Broadway, Suite 650
Glendale, CA 91210
THIS ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN
INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT
RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR,
PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR BY TELEPHONE AT (818) 543-1380, AND DESTROY THE ORIGINAL TRANSMISSION
AND ITS ATTACHMENTS WITHOUT READING OR SAVING THEM TO DISK. NO WAIVER OF PRIVILEGE OR CONFIDENTIALITY SHOULD BE
INFERRED FROM ANY ERROR IN TRANSMITTAL.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:BGW
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Marriott/Ritz-Carlton proposed skyscraper
Date:May 11, 2022 1:10:40 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello,
Obviously, I am AGAINST the Marriott/Ritz-Carlton proposed skyscraper in Newport
Beach. The reasons are obvious as well, with the scar to the landscape, the traffic
which is already very problematic and the added noise and air pollution of
dramatically more high-rise living units. Please do not approve this project if you have
the slightest consideration about the quality of life in Newport/CdM.
Brian Wall
Corona del Mar
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:John Curry
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Marriott/Ritz-Carlton proposed skycraper
Date:May 11, 2022 1:22:29 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
I do not understand why this is needed. I only see downside for our community. Newport is
vibrant, based around homeowners, we do not need a large hotel. It would be a terrible
mistake to continue to build out a cityscape/skyline of building.
John T. Curry Jr.
1921 Yacht Colinia
Newport Beach CA
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Harry Myers
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Marriott/Ritz-Carlton proposed skyscraper in Newport Beach
Date:May 11, 2022 1:29:29 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
As residents of the city of Newport Beach for nearly 45 years, my wife and I place a high value on this
city’s low key, open space ambiance. In my opinion this proposed project, because of its size, will
have a negative impact on the city’s livability and am therefor requesting that, due to its size, the
Commissioners reject this proposed project.
Sincerely
Harry W. and Susan A. Myers
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:janjetton
To:Planning Commissioners
Date:May 11, 2022 1:37:35 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To Whom it May Concern,
As a resident of Newport Beach, I would like to express my opposition to the NB Planning
Commission approving the building of the proposed Ritz Carlton residences in
NewportBeach. The 22 stories and 159 residences would pose a risk to existing
infrastructures, water and other utilities, traffic congestion, parking as well as other
environmental impacts.
Please consider declining this proposal.
Sincerely,
Janice Jetton
1915 Yacht Maria
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Janjetton@aol.com
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Robert Henry MD
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton Residences
Date:May 11, 2022 2:19:09 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach (1710 Port Barmouth Pl) and would like to share my
thoughts on the proposed project. I grew up in Miami and saw firsthand how a very
negotiable, comfortable mid-sized city can transform into a metropolis with gridlock in a brief
period if the public does not have the will to oppose unbridled development. I know we are a
long way from Miami but as the ancient Chinese proverb says, a journey of a thousand miles
begins with the first step. I would be most appreciative if you are able to read my email at the
public hearing. Thank you.
Respectfully,
Robert P. Henry, M.D.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Scott Burnham
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz-Carlton Residences SUPPORT
Date:May 11, 2022 2:29:07 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Lowrey and Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
I respectfully ask that you support the city’s recommendation and approve Agenda Item 5, The
Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296) at your upcoming public hearing on Thursday, 12
May.
As the founder of Burnham USA and a substantial commercial property owner of in Newport
Center and the greater Newport Beach area, I have had the opportunity to work with and
review countless projects in our city. Your commission, city staff and city council have
consistently done a fine job in working with applicants to approve quality projects in Newport
Beach.
The Ritz-Carlton residences is another fine example of a top-notch project that provides
benefits to our community and will positively impact it’s surrounding area. As the staff report
explains, “The projected 20-Year combined TOT and property taxes to be generated by the
Project would result in total tax receipts to the City of approximately $136,413,736, which is
$7,694,975 more than the City would otherwise receive if the Project was not built”.
Furthermore, as a resident and member of the community, I believe the applicants
are excellent partners for our community. The owners are from Newport Beach
and they understand its unique characteristics with its best interest at heart. This is evident in
the location they picked and the style building they are proposing to build.
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter and please support staff’s recommendation by
approving the Ritz-Carlton residences.
Sincerely,
Scott Burnham
Scott T. Burnham, Founder | CEO
BURNHAM USA EQUITIES, INC.
1100 Newport Center Drive, Suite 200
Newport Beach, California 92660
Phone (949) 760-9150
Fax (949) 760-0430
sburnham@burnhamusa.com
www.burnhamusa.com
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
This electronic transmission, and any documents attached hereto, (a) are protected by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (18 USC §§ 2510-2521), (b) may contain confidential information, and (c)
are for the sole use of the intended recipient named above. If you have received this electronic message
in error, please notify the sender and delete the electronic message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution,
or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
It is understood that this email and any response hereto or any oral or written communication or any
document which may be sent by or on behalf of either party to the other shall not have any binding effect
on either party. Further, such understanding shall nullify any claim that either party or its representatives
or agents is obligated to perform any act or expend time, money or effort based on this communication.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Kevin Kaltenbach
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:kevin.kaltenbach@sbcglobal.com
Subject:Marriott/Ritz-Carlton proposed skyscraper in Newport Beach
Date:May 11, 2022 2:24:25 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear planning commission,
My wife and I oppose the construction of a skyscraper in
Newport Beach. I believe if this proposal passes, the city
of Newport Beach will never see the end of this type of
construction. We live in Corona Del Mar but my office is
located in Irvine, look what has happened to the Irvine
skyline and it seems to never end.
Please read my email at the meeting so it will be on
record.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Kevin Kaltenbach
kevin.kaltenbach@sbcglobal.net
949-910-0932
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Jeffrey Harty
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Fw: City of Newport Beach: CORRECTED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296)
Date:May 11, 2022 2:43:07 PM
Attachments:NEWPORT BEACH RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES 900 Newport Center Dr..pdfimage011.pngimage007.pngimage006.pngimage012.pngimage008.pngimage003.pngimage005.pngimage013.pngimage004.pngimage010.pngimage001.pngimage014.pngimage009.pngimage002.png
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC., 60 PERRY STREET WHIPPANY, NEW JERSEY 07981, Office
Phone: 973-922-1774
"BRIGHT IDEAS FOR ALL YOUR LIGHTING NEEDS"
Jeffrey M. Harty, President of Client Relations, Email: jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com
May 11, 2022
___________________________________________________________________________________
Good Afternoon
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DIVISION,100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach CA, 92660.
Re; RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296) Site Location: 900
Newport Center Drive
Commissioners,
I would like to have this opportunity on introducing HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC. to you
regarding the possibility of attending this board meeting for tomorrow night. Please forward me a link to
the meeting. If you are not having this meeting broadcast, can I receive the transcripts? Please contact
me at the information being provided
In the meantime, please see our introduction in addition to the PDF file below consisting of the agenda.
HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC., supplies lighting material to the construction industry of the
Hospitality - Commercial – Mixed Use Development – Residential Properties - Theatrical sector, all
through Architects, General Contractors along with Electrical Contractors in addition to Interior Designers.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC. has been in business since 2002 partnering with General
Contractors / Electrical Contractors and Interior Designers, through the distribution of lighting material
partnering with lighting design and home automation.
“CORE PRINCIPALS"
Perseverance: We will be better today than we were yesterday.
Respect: We treat others the way we would like to be treated.
Service: We deliver the best customer service and knowledgeable salesperson We are an architectural
lighting design and distribution firm that prides itself on excellent communication with our clients. And we
are charged with making them feel secure and satisfied on doing business with Harlo Wholesale Lighting
Inc.
Teamwork: Our associates are our family….
PORTFOLIO
1. ACCOR, PARIS FRANCE PARENT COMPANY to SOFITEL HOTELS, PULMAN HOTELS, NOVITEL
HOTELS
2. SOFITEL HOTEL NYC, 44th STREET, NEW YORK CITY
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
3. SOFITEL HOTEL CHICAGO MAGNIFICENT MILE, 20 E CHESTNUT ST, CHICAGO IL.
4. JAY Z 40/40 SPORTS BAR, WEST 25th STREET, NEW YORK CITY
5. MIKAIL BARYSHNIKOV, BAC THEATRE WEST 37th STREET, NEW YORK CITY,
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
6 QUEENS PUBLIC LIBRARY, QUEENS NY
7. ESSEX COUNTY 911 MEMORIAL, WEST ORANGE NEW JERSEY, ESSEX COUNTY EXECUTIVE
and COUNTY FREEHOLDERS
8. PARKER MERIDIAN HOTEL WEST 56 STREET, NEW YORK CITY
9. TRUMP INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB, BEDMINSTER NEW JERSEY, threw CRYSTAL
CHANDELIERS that was requested for a renovation of a reception room
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
10. PARK LAKE, Rockaway Township, Rockaway Borough, NEW JERSEY, Decorative Streetscape
Lighting
11. VILLA ENTERPRISE, MORRISTOWN NEW JERSEY – VILLA PIZZERIA CHATHAM NJ
12. FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH, NUTLEY NJ
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
13. CRYSTAL SPRINGS BUILDERS, VERNON, NJ
HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC. value comes into play at the beginning of the construction of
any HOSPITALITY - COMMERCIAL or RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY through design applications from
LED LIGHTING to COLOR CHANGING EFFECTS to Indirect Direct Lighting Systems to Custom
Applications to PROJECT MANAGEMENT to the DISTRIBUTION.
Thank You,
Jeffrey M. Harty, President of Client Relations
HARLO WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC.
Office; 973-922-1774 Email; jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jeffrey Harty <jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com>
To: Jeffrey Harty <jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022, 05:27:43 PM EDT
Subject: Fw: City of Newport Beach: CORRECTED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR RITZ-
CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA 2021-296)
RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296) Site Location: 900 Newport Center
Drive
Summary:
Request for a coastal development permit, vesting tentative tract map,
modification permit, conditional use permit and site development review to
convert up to 30% of the hotel rooms at the VEA Newport Beach,
(formerly the Marriott Resort and Spa) into hotel branded residences
pursuant to City Council Policy K-4 and Director’s Determination No.
DD2021-001. The new 22-story building would include up to 159 units and
provide amenities including a spa, pool, event lawn and gym/fitness
center. A new 5-level, 408-space subterranean parking structure would be
constructed beneath the new residential building. A new 6-level (4-levels
below ground & 2-levels above ground) 400-parking space parking
structure will replace the existing hotel parking structure in substantially
the same location and continue to serve the VEA Newport Beach hotel.
This item may not be appealed to the California Coastal Commission and is
only appealable to the City Council. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a
public hearing; 2. Find that potential environmental impacts have been
previously mitigated through the implementation of the policies of the
General Plan as evaluated in Program Environmental Impact Report for the
2006 General Plan Update (SCH No. 2006011119) (“PEIR”); therefore, in
accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”) Guidelines, an addendum to the previously certified PEIR is the
appropriate environmental documentation for the project; and 3. Approve
The Ritz-Carlton Residences Project (PA2021-296) finding that the Project
is eligible for accessory residential uses pursuant to Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-001 and City Council Policy K-4, and adopt
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Resolution No. PC2022-011 (Attachment No. PC 1) approving
Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 6 (ER2022-002), Major Site
Development Review No. SD2021-005, Modification Permit No. MD2022-
001, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053, Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2021-077, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003
(PA2021-296).
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: City of Newport Beach News <noreply@newportbeachca.gov>
To: "jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com" <jeffreyharty02@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022, 04:56:03 PM EDT
Subject: City of Newport Beach: CORRECTED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR RITZ-CARLTON
RESIDENCES (PA 2021-296)
CORRECTED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES
(PA 2021-296)
Post Date: 05/11/2022 8:00 am
The Planning Commission will be conducting a Public Hearing concerning The Ritz-Carlton
Residences project in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive starting at 6:30
p.m. on May 12, 2022. The original notice incorrectly indicated the project is located in an area
where a final action by the City could be appealed to the California Coastal Commission.
The project site is not located within the appeal area of the coastal zone; therefore, final action by the
City may not be appealed to the California Coastal Commission and is only appealable to the
Newport Beach City Council. The corrected notice can be found at the City website here. For more
information about the project, the Planning Commission agenda and staff report can be accessed at
the City’s website - https://www.newportbeachca.gov/PLN/planning_commission/current_agenda.pdf.
Having trouble viewing this email? View on the website instead.
Change your eNotification preference.
Unsubscribe from all City of Newport Beach eNotifications.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Sharon Naidus
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:High rise project in Fashion Island
Date:May 11, 2022 3:04:17 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
To whom it may concern:
This email is to voice our concerns and objections to this massive high rise project being planned in Fashion Island.
We have lived and worked in Corona Del Mar for almost 50 years and are not anti-growth; however the size of this
development will definitely impact and add to the congestion we are already presently experiencing. If this were
allowed to go forward it would definitely set a precedent for future gigantic projects which are inappropriate for our
beautiful community. We hope our city government has not been corrupted by development money. We would like
to have this email read at the planning commission meeting scheduled for tomorrow May 12, 2022.
Thank you,
George and Sharon Naidus
311 Goldenrod Ave
CDM
Sent from my iPhone
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
May 11, 2022
Newport Beach Planning Commission
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Chairman Lowry and Members of the Planning Commission:
As Newport Beach tourism emerges from the ravages of the pandemic, a period of
tremendous volatility, a new opportunity has been created that is transforming the city’s
hospitality industry.
With the soon to be open VEA Newport Beach, formerly the Marriott, the city has the
chance to elevate its profile in the luxury travel market. A critical companion to this project
will be the adjacent Ritz Carlton Residences. This project will be an essential ingredient
for this new luxury campus and Visit Newport Beach strongly urges your support.
The 22-story Ritz Carlton will be residential only, meaning it won’t be used for visitor stays.
But that point doesn’t negate the importance of the development, which is incredibly
significant.
First is the fact that the posh brand Ritz Carlton will have a presence in our community.
Just seeing that famous logo on a sign as you drive by adds to the upscale nature of
Newport Beach and will attract affluent new residents. But perhaps even more importantly,
this project is connected to VEA with a vision to become one integrated campus. That
means that the Ritz Carlton will drive business to VEA as residents dine, drink, and use
the hotel facilities. Maybe the residents will also bring a meeting here.
VEA was built with the expectation that the Ritz would be built at some point, so the
hotel’s design, amenities and service standards will be fully complementary to the Ritz
Carlton. Instead of just getting a refreshed hotel, Eagle Four and Lyon Living, the
property’s owners, went the extra mile to create a much better experience than what
would have created without the Ritz.
However, the positive impact of this project goes far beyond the development of the
residences. As part of the agreement, Eagle Four and Lyon Living will create a private,
non-profit housing fund. Ask almost anyone at City Hall, and you’ll hear that perhaps the
city’s biggest current challenge is to fulfil the new state mandated dwelling units for
affordable housing.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Much of the talk locally has been to chop up residential lots to accommodate them or build
another 11,000 to 25,000 new homes to pay for the affordable units. The great news is
that the creation of this private non-profit housing trust fund will allow the city to focus on
affordable housing only and not building so many new units that we could meet the
mandated 4,845-unit number.
Not only is the scope and design of the project beautiful and will add to the luxury
atmosphere of the city as well as drive business, this agreement on housing will also solve
a problem that have been perplexing city leaders for a couple of years.
This project goes far beyond the hospitality industry and will benefit every citizen in the
city. The Ritz Carlton Residences will be a transformative project for the city, and we
strongly encourage your support.
With Regards,
Gary C. Sherwin
President/CEO
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:ipostini1@mac.com
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Marriot International - Ritz Carlton Residences permit hearing
Date:May 11, 2022 11:25:26 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
I’d like to voice my objection to the proposed Marriot international development permit for Fashion
Island. This is a horrible idea and will have immeasurable negative impact to the area. We already
have large number of new residential units, commercial office units and Highrise hotels in the
Fashion Island center. This project will add another layer of traffic congestion and destroy the
pristine view of Fashion Island. As nice as Marriot International says this will be for the city of
Newport Beach, this will only bring nothing but unwanted traffic to the area.
Thank you.
Tim King
Resident
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Susan Skinner
To:Planning Commissioners; Harp, Aaron; Campbell, Jim
Subject:Re: The proposed Marriott tower is in violation of the General Plan and our LCP
Date:May 11, 2022 3:29:57 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Planning Commissioners:
Please add the following comments to my prior comments of 7:33 AM today:
1) The corrected public notice posted today (5/11/22) on the project hearing for the 5/12/22
Planning Commission meeting was done outside of the 72 hour cutoff, thereby not allowing
the public adequate time to be aware of and address the issues as well as creating a Brown Act
violation in the process.
2) The Coastal Commission permitting process was not adhered to by the city as they did not
update the Local Coastal Permit (LCP) ahead of processing the project application.
3) The Newport Beach Planning Director issued a zoning interpretation not directly addressing
the project specifically, but instead made a comparative declaration that ADUs described in
the proposed project were similar enough to hotel guest rooms to forgo any General Plan or
zoning changes.
4) The Planning Director’s zoning determination allowed the project to then avoid having to
abide by the city’s voter approved “Greenlight Initiative,” thereby denying the electorate their
voice.
Please confirm that you have received this EMail.
Thank you,
Susan Skinner
On May 11, 2022, at 7:33 AM, Susan Skinner <seskinner@me.com> wrote:
Dear Planning Commissioners:
We are either a city that follows the rule of law or we are not. If you approve the
proposed luxury condo tower at the Marriott site (PA2021-296) as planned, you will
be violating multiple laws and we will NOT be a city that follows the rule of law. Your
responsibility is to the residents of our city and not to the developers who bring
interesting projects in front of you.
I approached the Coastal Commission about this project and they submitted the letter attached
below yesterday. Interestingly, the city has not yet posted this letter on line. I think it is
important that you read it prior to your decision.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
The Coastal Commission lays out in detail why this project is in violation of our LCP in a
much more eloquent way than I ever could.
In order to maintain standing, I will thus incorporate their letter and include a letter of my
own to be entered into the record.
Thank you,
Susan Skinner
<CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton Residences) Coastal Commission Staff Comments
5.10.22 (3).pdf>
<MarriotSite3-22.docx>
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
May 12, 2022, Planning Commission Item 5 Comments
These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229).
Item No. 5. RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296)
x It seems very unusual for a proposal of this scope and complexity to come forward for
approval at a single hearing, with no prior public discussion at as much as a study
session.
x It seems at least as unusual for the Planning Commission to be the final of approver of
staff-negotiated monetary exactions from an applicant, such as those in Condition of
Approval 7 (handwritten page 57). Normally, those are part of a development
agreement, and the City Council has the final word on them.
o Did the City Council designate someone to review the amounts and purposes?
o Has the full Council approved them?
o Will those for specific purposes be put in restricted funds?
o Will they be subject to California’s Mitigation Fee Act, such that they must be
refunded if not used for the stated purpose in a certain time?
o Will this new housing be subject to park in lieu fees, as well?
If so, where is that mentioned in the approval?
If not, why not?
x The purported Director’s Determination notwithstanding, I do not believe this proposal is
consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning and Local Coastal Program, or, by
implication, exempt from Greenlight (Charter Section 423) analysis and vote.
o The City’s voters clearly never contemplated nor approved such a land use at
this site, nor has the Coastal Commission ever certified it as consistent with the
Coastal Act.
o Indeed, to the contrary, as recently as 2009, the Coastal Commission considered
the City’s request to include “condo-hotels”as an allowed use at this and other
CV-designated sites in the City’s Coastal Zone, and quite explicitly rejected it
(see their Item Th18d-2-2009).
o I do not believe the Community Development Director or the City Council is free
to substitute their judgement.
o What is the “statute of limitations”that the staff report claims to have “run”
(handwritten page 12)?
x There is a clear and proper path for approving this project, which involves first changing
the land use designation in the General Plan (with voter approval, if required) and
simultaneously seeking Coastal Commission certification of corresponding changes to
our Coastal Land Use Plan. After which the zoning can be implemented and then the
application considered.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
May 12, 2022, PC agenda Item 5 comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2
o The City followed those procedures when faced with a very similar proposal for a
smaller residential project (now called “Meridian”) on this same hotel’s property
(see, for example, the CCC’s Item W15e-9-2007).
o Why is the City ignoring those procedures now?
x As to comments on some random details of what I believe to be a wholly improper staff
recommendation:
o Am I to believe “The development footprint of the proposed building and the
subterranean parking garage are approximately 25,023 square feet and 44,860
square feet, respectively”(handwritten page 7)?
Is the 22-story building above ground really smaller than the 4 levels of
parking below?
Are the proposed 159 luxury condos really less than 200 square feet
each?
o Should I believe anything else about this?
o Should I believe handwritten page 141 (found with a PDF text search), which
says “The proposed 22-story tower would contain 421,973 gross square feet of
space, excluding 5 levels of underground parking. The up to 159 residences
would be located on floors 2 through 22, and contain a total of 341,766 square
feet of saleable residential space.”
Isn’t that a heck of a lot more development than voters would have
expected when they approved hotel rooms in the 2006 General Plan at an
estimated 1,000 sf of development per room?
Isn’t this a lot more than the 40,000 sf of new commercial development
that, if added to the General Plan, would trigger a Greenlight vote?
Of the 100 new residences that would do so?
How much floor area do the remaining hotel rooms occupy?
If these residences are thought of as “accessories”to the hotel rooms, will
the “accessories”now be larger than the rooms?
And by what stretch of the imagination is a private residence inaccessible
to the hotel guest an “accessory”to their room?
It appears to me they are an accessory to someone’s business model, not
to the hotel.
o Why is there no rendering (or even schematic) of what the proposed building
would look like in the printed agenda packet?
o Why does handwritten page 55 suggest there is no path for appeal of the CDP
(to be granted under Title 21) or the tract map (to be granted under Title 19), but
only one for Title 20 issues?
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Charles ordahl
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:High rise building
Date:May 11, 2022 4:19:11 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Please register my strong opinion against the proposed tall building at Newport Fashion Island
Charles Ordahl
Sent from my iPhone
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:suzie brierley
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Marriott High-rise
Date:May 11, 2022 4:37:26 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Please read my statement before the Planning Commission when they take up the issue of the Marriott Hotel’s plan
to add all those additional floors:
“Hello, my name is Suzanne Brierley and I have lived ‘a stone’s throw’ from Newport Center for 30 years, since
1992. I have seen many changes over the years, including the development of Newport Coast, which drastically
increased traffic.
I am totally against this planned development at the Marriott Hotel next to Fashion Island. It will ruin the views of
many residents who paid a fortune for homes, so they could enjoy ocean views. The traffic congestion is already
bad, especially during summer months. This will make it worse.
If you truly love Newport Beach and the lifestyle it offers residents please do NOT approve this expansion.
Thank you for listening,
Suzanne Brierley
Sent from my iPhone
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:mimi newport
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:High rise
Date:May 11, 2022 4:41:28 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Sent from my iPhone
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:mimi newport
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:High rise
Date:May 11, 2022 5:02:55 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Sent from my iPhone
Increasing the density population in Newport Beach by putting such high rise will bring more
traffic problems on our Roads. Yes it will bring more revenue to the city but at a very high
price to our citizens who will be more stressed on the roads and cause more accidents. Let’s
keep Newport Beach a destination for tourist toeenjoy our beaches and first class shopping
destination. Don’t turn it into a Los Angeles
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5d - Additional Materials Received
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
May 12, 2022
Mr. Karl Schwing, Deputy Director
California Coastal Commission
South Coast Area Office
301 E. Ocean Blvd., #300
Long Beach, CA 90802
RE: Coastal Development Permit Application CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton
Residences)
Dear Mr. Schwing:
This letter is sent in response to your May 10, 2022, correspondence regarding Coastal
Development Permit Application CD2021-077 (Ritz Carlton Residences) (“Project”),
which is on the Planning Commission’s May 12, 2022, agenda.
A number of the items contained within your correspondence are a retreading of grounds
that have already been answered in the City’s August 23, 2021, response letter to District
Supervisor Zach Rehm (attached hereto); however, given the importance of this Project
in providing new housing in our community, we will address each of the points raised in
your correspondence again.
As we address the points in your correspondence, we want you to know that the City
Council shares Governor Newsom’s, and the Governor’s top housing advisor Jason
Elliott’s goal, to remove barriers and focus “the whole government, in terms of housing,
wildfire, environment…toward building more downtown-oriented housing.” This Project
is located in Newport Center, which is close to City Hall, adjacent to Fashion Island, and
serves as the central or “downtown” area of our City. Our City’s prior actions to adopt
City Council Policy K-4 (Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing) and Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-01 (Accessory Residential Uses Within Resort Hotels) were
focused on removing barriers and increasing the City’s housing supply for current and
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
2
future residents. This Project is the first application the City has received that seeks to
rely upon these prior City actions to create more housing.
We also want the California Coastal Commission’s staff to understand that the City is,
and has been, focused on securing an approved, certified, 2021-2029 General Plan
Housing Element as required by State law. The Project site was identified in the City’s
draft 2021-2029 Housing Element sites inventory as a location where the City will
accommodate a portion of its regional housing needs assessment (“RHNA”). The
Housing Element has not yet received final certification from the California Department of
Housing and Community Development (“HCD”). The City is cognizant that its disapproval
of a proposed housing project on an identified housing opportunity site might be viewed
unfavorably by HCD with respect to the City’s compliance with Housing Element Law.
Scrivener’s Error in the Public Notice
Thank you for bringing the scrivener’s error in the Project’s public notice to our attention.
We had already caught this scrivener’s error and were in the process of correcting the
record prior to receiving your correspondence. Specifically, the public notice inadvertently
had a carry-over line from a prior public notice that incorrectly stated:
“The project site is located within the appeal area of the coastal zone;
therefore, final action by the City may be appealed to the California Coastal
Commission.”
As you correctly observed in your correspondence, this Project is not located within the
California Coastal Commission’s appeal jurisdiction, and it is not located in proximity to
wetlands, streams or have components that would qualify this Project as a major public
works project. This minor scrivener’s error was not prejudicial, and the Staff Report and
Addendum correctly note that this Project is not located in the appeal area. The Project
site’s location outside the appeal area was also well documented by the City in the
administrative records for Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01 and City Council
Policy K-4. The City has already updated our website to correct this scrivener’s error,
has hand delivered updated notices to all properties within 300 feet of the Project site,
and has sent updated notices via e-mail to interested parties. We will also make a public
announcement correcting this scrivener’s error at the Planning Commission’s public
hearing on May 12, 2022.
CCC Allegation: Proposed Project is Inconsistent with the Zoning, Land Use, and
the LCP and Requires an LCP Amendment
In your correspondence, you attribute this alleged inconsistency to Director’s
Determination No. DD2021-01. The City notes the California Coastal Commission’s
staff’s renewal of its objections to Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01; however, for
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
3
reasons already set forth in the City’s August 23, 2021 response letter to District
Supervisor Zach Rehm (attached hereto), the City has properly exercised its interpretive
discretion in concluding that resort residential accessory dwelling units are authorized for
this property without the need for a zoning, land use, or LCP amendment.
The City’s interpretation of its own land use plans, policies, and ordinances is entitled to
deference under state law. The courts have consistently determined that judicial review
is highly deferential to City interpretations because “policies in a general plan reflect a
range of competing interests” and the City “must be allowed to weigh and balance the
plan’s policies when applying them, and [the City] has broad discretion to construe its
policies in light of the plan’s purpose.” (Friends of Lagoon Valley v. City of Vacaville
(2007) 154 Cal. App. 4th 807, 816). And the City is the primary interpreter of the Zoning
Code. The City’s “view of the meaning and scope of its own [zoning] ordinance is entitled
to great weight….” (Anderson First Coalition v. City of Anderson (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th
1173, 1193).
As you know, LCP Implementation Plan (“IP”) Section 21.12.020 grants the Community
Development Director the authority to interpret the LCP in a way that expands the
permitted uses, provided certain findings are made. Additionally, Newport Beach
Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 20.12.020(E) and LCP IP Section 21.12.020(E), allow
the Community Development Director to determine that an unlisted land use may be
allowed, again provided that certain findings are made.
The Director’s Determination made the required findings and interpreted the existing LCP
and related regulations to allow accessory residential uses at certain hotels. Both the
Director’s Determination and City Council Policy K-4 restrict these accessory residential
uses to certain resort hotel properties located outside of the California Coastal
Commission’s Appeal Jurisdiction, and limit the number of accessory residential uses to
no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms. As provided in the LCP hotel definition,
hotels are allowed to have related accessory uses and those uses “may include
conference rooms and meeting rooms, restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities.” This
listing of accessory hotel uses is meant to be illustrative in nature and not exhaustive. In
this manner, the City is allowed discretion under the LCP to make interpretations about
other uses which may be appropriately classified within the hotel use category, which the
Director’s Determination and City Council Policy K-4 both do with regards to accessory
residential uses that are no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms at a resort hotel
property.
The Director’s Determination is an appropriate use of the Community Development
Director’s authority under the LCP, and is consistent with past practice. Most notably,
Director’s Determination No. DD2017-002/PA2017-207 was issued on October 13, 2017
for an expansion of permitted uses in the Title 20 CV Zoning District and Title 21 CV
Coastal Zoning District related to the fire station located at 2708 Newport Boulevard,
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
4
which is within the Coastal Zone. This interpretation occurred following certification of the
City’s LCP and expressly added a use that was not previously listed as a permitted use
in the CV Zoning District or the CV Coastal Zoning District.
The Director’s Determination was the final City action as of the City Council’s denial of
the appeal, and the statute of limitations has long since expired. The California Coastal
Commission staff’s disagreement with the Director’s Determination was noted in its first
letter on this topic, was considered during the course of the City’s resolution of the appeal,
and was found not to have merit for reasons set forth in the City’s August 23, 2021
response letter to District Supervisor Zach Rehm. Thus, the Director’s Determination is
now final, all applicable statutes of limitation have lapsed, and this Project is consistent
with the zoning, land use, and the LCP and does not require an LCP amendment.
CCC Allegation: The Project May Require a Commission-Approved Amendment to
Coastal Development Permit 5-07-085
The City has a certified LCP and this Project is not located in an appeal area or an area
of original jurisdiction. The suggestion that the California Coastal Commission has some
type of permitting jurisdiction over this Project is not supported by the existing CDP,
statutes, case law and deviates from your prior practice. First and foremost, CDP 5-07-
085 was an entirely new CDP for the adjacent Meridian Project, which was a 100%
residential project. CDP 5-07-085 was not an amendment to the 1983 CDP for the Marriott
Hotel (5-83-139 & 5-83-139A), which currently regulates the site. The 1983 CDP does
not include any language or condition requiring a future project to amend the 1983 CDP
or to submit to California Coastal Commission jurisdiction. In fact, Section IV(B) of that
1983 CDP notes that the California Coastal Commission certified the City’s LCP (Land
Use Plan) in May 1982 and the City is in the process of preparing the zoning and
implementation phase of its LCP. It states that after full certification of the City’s LCP, the
City will be the agency responsible for the issuance of coastal permits and that the
California Coastal Commission will be responsible for the review of appeals and the
issuance of coastal permits only in areas of original jurisdiction.
This line of reasoning is supported by the courts, which held in an unpublished appellate
opinion from the Sierra Club v. California Coastal Commission (2019, CA2/3) that the
California Coastal Commission’s “jurisdiction cannot be created by consent, waiver,
estoppel or fiat. (See Norman I. Krug Real Estate Investments, Inc. v. Praszker (1990)
220 Cal.App.3d 35, 47.) Such an inquiry presents a question of law for resolution by the
court. (See Harrington v. Superior Court (1924) 194 Cal.185, 188; Marlow v. Campbell
(1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 921, 928.) The obligation to address the issue is of such importance
that we do so sua sponte. (E.g., Jennings v. Marralle (1994) 8 Cal.4th 121, 128; Four
Point Entertainment, Inc. v. New World Entertainment, Ltd. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 79, 81,
fn. 1; see Wilson v. Southern California Edison Co. (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 123, 143
[subject matter jurisdiction may be raised for the first time on appeal].) As we now explain,
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
5
the Legislature allocated jurisdiction to consider CDP applications in the first instance
based on whether a LCP had been certified.
[California Public Resources Code] Section 30519, subdivision (a) provides: “. . . after a
local coastal program, or any portion thereof, has been certified and all implementing
actions within the area affected have become effective, the development review authority
provided for in Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 30660) shall no longer be exercised
by the commission over any new development proposed . . . and shall at that time be
delegated to the local government that is implementing the local coastal program or any
portion thereof.”
A similar mandate is set out in [California Public Resources Code] section 30604,
subdivision (b), which additionally indicates Commission’s jurisdiction after certification is
appellate only. This section provides: “After certification of the local coastal program, a
coastal development permit shall be issued if the issuing agency, or the commission on
appeal, finds that the proposed development is in conformity with the certified local
coastal plan.”
The words of [California Public Resources Code] sections 30519, subdivision (a) and of
30604, subdivision (b) are clear and unambiguous: Upon certification of the elements of
a local coastal program, authority for issuance of coastal development permits no longer
rests with the Commission, but becomes the responsibility of the local agency…. The
word used to convey this transfer of jurisdiction is mandatory: “shall.” No exception to
this transfer of permitting jurisdiction appears in the cited statutes; nor does either statute
suggest there is a gap in timing of the transfer once its condition precedent—Commission
certification—is satisfied. Rather, whether read together or separately, the two statutes
establish that upon certification of a local coastal plan, Commission’s jurisdiction is
thereafter limited to consideration of appeals from determinations made by the local
jurisdiction in applying the certified local coastal plan.” (Emphasis added.)
Thus, the California Coastal Commission does not have permitting jurisdiction over this
Project. The City has a certified LCP, and the City will review this Project under its LCP
and determine whether to issue a new CDP or not.
CCC Allegation: Potential Cease and Desist Issuance Under Section 30810 of the
Coastal Act
We do not believe this section is applicable to the present circumstances, and it is
unfortunate that California Coastal Commission’s staff felt the need to raise this issue at
all. The City is processing this Project consistent with its certified LCP. As previously
stated, this Project does not require a CDP from the California Coastal Commission
because it is not located in the appeal area or the original jurisdiction area. Nor is this
Project inconsistent with any previously issued CDP from the California Coastal
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
6
Commission. This Project is moving forward under the City’s certified LCP, and, if
approved, this Project will be conditioned to ensure on-going compliance with the City’s
certified LCP.
We appreciate your stated preference to resolve this matter in a cooperative manner. We
share that preference, and we trust that this letter responds to the concerns raised in your
correspondence and brings this matter to a close. Given the urgency of the housing crisis
and state law mandates such as RHNA and commercial and residential “as of right”
accessory dwelling units, the California Coastal Commission’s staff should refrain from
taking any action in this matter that would impede the City’s fulfillment of its legal and
policy obligations to support the production of new housing.
Sincerely,
___________________________
Seimone Jurjis, PE, CBO
Community Development Director
cc: Chair Lee Lowrey
Planning Commissioners
Deputy CDD Director Jim Campbell
Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Seimone Jurjis, PE, CBCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Community DevelopmmmmenentDire
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
August 23, 2021
Mr. Zach Rehm, District Supervisor
California Coastal Commission
South Coast Area Office
301 Ocean Blvd., #301
Long Beach, CA 90802
RE: Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01 (Accessory Residential Uses
Within Resort Hotels)
Dear Mr. Rehm:
This letter is sent in response to your August 20, 2021 correspondence regarding the
upcoming appeal of Director’s Determination No. DD2021-01 (“Director’s
Determination”), which is on the City Council’s August 24, 2021 agenda.
We appreciate the support you expressed for the City of Newport Beach’s (“City”) City
Council Policy K-4, Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing, and its stated goal
to increase the City’s housing supply for current and future residents.
We would like to take this opportunity to address the questions raised in your
correspondence:
This [Director’s Determination], however, is not supported by the plain language of
the Local Coastal Program (LCP)…which defines [a] hotel use….”
The Director’s Determination and City Council Policy K-4 interpret the existing LCP and
related regulations to allow accessory residential uses at certain hotels. Both the
Director’s Determination and City Council Policy K-4 restrict these accessory residential
uses to certain resort hotel properties located outside of the Coastal Commission’s
Appeal Jurisdiction, and limit the number of accessory residential uses to no more than
30% of the approved hotel rooms. As provided in the LCP hotel definition, hotels are
allowed to have related accessory uses and those uses “may include conference rooms
and meeting rooms, restaurants, bars, and recreational facilities.” This listing of
accessory hotel uses is meant to be illustrative in nature and not exhaustive. In this
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
2
manner, the City is allowed discretion under the LCP to make interpretations about other
uses which may be appropriately classified within the hotel use category, which the
Director’s Determination and City Council Policy K-4 both do with regards to accessory
residential uses that are no more than 30% of the approved hotel rooms at a hotel
property.
The Community Development Director does not have the authority to change land
uses or interpret the LCP differently from the plain language and designated uses.
The appropriate process for changes to land use regulation in the coastal zone is
an LCP amendment….
LCP Implementation Plan (“IP”) Section 21.12.020 grants the Community Development
Director the authority to interpret the LCP in a way that expands the permitted uses,
provided that certain findings are made. The Community Development Director made said
findings, which are included in the Staff Report for the City Council’s agenda. Additionally,
Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 20.12.020(E) and LCP IP Section
21.12.020(E), clearly allow the Community Development Director to determine that an
unlisted land use may be allowed, again provided that certain findings are made.
The Director’s Determination is an appropriate use of the Community Development
Director’s authority under the LCP, and is consistent with past practice. Most notably,
Director’s Determination No. DD2017-002/PA2017-207 was issued on October 13, 2017
for an expansion of permitted uses in the Title 20 CV Zoning District and Title 21 CV
Coastal Zoning District related to the fire station located at 2708 Newport Boulevard,
which is within the Coastal Zone. This interpretation occurred following certification of the
City’s LCP and expressly added a use that was not previously permitted in the CV Zoning
District or the CV Coastal Zoning District.
…[W]e can schedule a Dispute Resolution hearing before the Coastal Commission
consistent with Section 21.50.050(B)(4) of the LCP.
As clearly explained in Footnote 8, Table 21.50-1 (Review Authority) of LCP Section
21.50.020(A), “Appeal procedure for interpretations shall only apply to interpretations
made by the Director on the determination of whether a development is categorically
excluded, exempt, non-appealable or appealable to the Coastal Commission according
to the dispute resolution process in compliance with Section 21.50.50(B).” First and
foremost, there is no coastal development permit application or project before the City at
this time; therefore, LCP Section 21.50.050(B)(4) is not applicable in this instance.
Instead, the Director’s Determination is contemplated by, consistent with, and in
furtherance of, City Council Policy K-4. Both City Council Policy K-4 and the Director’s
Determination require any project located within the coastal zone to obtain a coastal
development permit. Thus, there is no question as to whether a future project is subject
to a coastal development permit. If a project is located in the coastal zone, it requires a
new coastal development permit, period. Similarly, both City Council Policy K-4 and the
Director’s Determination exclude properties that are located within the Coastal
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
3
Commission’s Appealable Jurisdiction. Thus, there is no question as to whether a future
project is appealable to the Coastal Commission. If a project is located within the Coastal
Commission’s Appealable Jurisdiction it is not eligible for consideration under City Council
Policy K-4 or the Director’s Determination.
Again, thank you for supporting City Council Policy K-4 and sharing your thoughts about
the Director’s Determination. The clarifications provided above should bring this matter to
a close. We share the California Coastal Commission’s goals of increasing the State’s
housing supply, and we believe the Director’s Determination is an important first step
towards this worthy and critical goal.
Sincerely,
cc: Mayor Brad Avery
City Council Members
Grace Leung, City Manager
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5e - Additional Materials Received from Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Trisha Sanchez
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:New Fashion Island Highrise
Date:May 11, 2022 5:11:15 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Opposed
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:John French
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:Campbell, Jim
Subject:FW: Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 11, 2022 5:37:19 PM
Attachments:CCF_000005.pdf
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Newport Beach Planning Commissioners:
I just noticed that this email and attachment may not have gone through due to
a typo in the email address below. Original email was sent with attachment at
4:32pm today. Jim Campbell was copied on the original email and attachment.
John French
French Asset Management, Inc.
949.300.3803
john@frenchassetmanagement.com
From: Phoebe Loos <stayloos@cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 4:32 PM
To: planningcommissioners@newporbeachca.gov; jcampbell@newportbeachca.gov;
mark@sussonlaw.com; 'Denise Mitchell' <denise@vintagegroupre.com>; John French
<john@frenchassetmanagement.com>
Subject: Ritz-Carlton Residences
Phoebe LoosPresident, Granville Homeowners Association
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Sandy Dahlin
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:High rise in Newport Beach
Date:May 11, 2022 5:54:35 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
To whom it may concern,
We are extremely concerned regarding the proposed building of a tall
high rise in Newport Beach. It is already congested and the additional traffic
will add much more. Also, there will be loss of views.
Please consider the concerns of those who live here and will be impacted by this.
Thanks,
Sandy and Larry Dahlin
Newport Coast
Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Marge Romberg
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Another (& Massive) High-Rise in Newport Beach! NO!NO!NO!
Date:May 11, 2022 5:56:41 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
The large, high-rise building being considered for construction in Newport Beach should definitely NOT be
allowed. The traffic is bad enough & already has become worse with the fairly new structures already built in &
near Fashion Island. PLEASE, do not allow any more large structures to be built within our city, especially one as
large as is being considered!!! The massive traffic is already too dangerous!!!!!!
A very concerned resident of Newport Beach,
Margaret Romberg
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Frank Freitas
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:New High Rise
Date:May 11, 2022 11:27:54 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Honorable Planning Commissioners,
I only just received the information of a planned hotel being built by Marriott/Ritz-Carlton here in Newport Beach.
I recognize I’m several hours late in presenting my views to the Commission and I apologize for that.
I believe that with the ongoing problems we’re having with traffic, parking, and view blocking and other high
density issues, that this has not been well thought out. An even greater problem may be the water shortages that are
upon us with no end in sight.
I respectfully suggest this subject be tabled for now so that more public input may be considered.
Yours truly,
Frank Freitas
2027 Yacht Defender
Newport Beach, CA
92660
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Peter Kazin
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton Residences
Date:May 11, 2022 9:39:32 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To Whom it May Concern:
I have lived in Newport Beach for several years. It has come to my attention that a very
reputable developer with a strong track record of success in our community wants to help
bring a world class facility to Newport Beach. This will make us all proud, provide an
outstanding housing option and generate both income and jobs.
The site is located across the street from Fashion Island at 900 Newport Center Drive, on the
hotel campus of the Vea Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa (formerly known as the
Marriott Fashion Island).
This property was purchased by local owners during the height of the global COVID-19
pandemic in 2020. The Marriott Fashion Island has been languishing in disrepair for some
time. The local owners live in Newport Beach, are raising their families in our community,
reinvesting in our City, and they intend to improve and hold this property for the long-term.
This project recognizes a trend in the resort hotel industry to provide onsite residences
alongside hotel amenities in a single resort campus. In 2021, the Newport Beach City Council
acknowledged this trend and our City’s resort destination status by adopting City Council
Policy K-4 and by upholding Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001, which allows select
resort properties to convert up to 30% of their existing hotel rooms into hotel branded
residences on a one-for-one basis.
This project is seeking approval to convert up to 159 hotel rooms into hotel branded
residences, which is 30% of the currently entitled 532 hotel rooms. The total number of units
at the property will remain at 532 following the conversion. As part of this conversion the
existing Harbor Landing hotel building will be removed and replaced with a new residential
building. This project also includes the following:
- A 22-story residential building consisting of up to 159 hotel branded residences. This
residential building is within the height limits for the area and complies with all General Plan,
Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Code requirements.
- A reduction in traffic because residential uses generate less traffic than hotel uses.
- An increase in property values for surrounding communities and the City generally.
- A public benefit fee of $100,000 paid to the City for each converted hotel room, of which
$65,000 of each fee will be allocated to the creation of affordable housing.
- A resort style pool and spa with lounge seating, a gym and fitness facility, locker rooms, spa
treatment rooms, meeting rooms, concierge services, on-site private storage, an owners room
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
featuring billiards and a library, and other uses including food service amenities for exclusive
use of the residents.
- A private garden, an event lawn, a dog relief area, and walking paths throughout the hotel
campus. A new subterranean parking structure, and a layered landscape buffer that separates
the hotel branded residences from existing residential development.
I could not more strongly support the project and I hope the planning commission approves it
without delay. As the stock market continues to implode and interest rates rise, as a city, we
will be courting successful developers to take on large and impactful projects like this one. It
would be a mistake to waste this opportunity.
Regards,
Pete Kazin
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:AMD
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:Andrew DiNuzzo
Subject:Ritz-Carlton Residences approval
Date:May 12, 2022 6:05:56 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
To begin, thank you for your service to our community. My name is Andrew DiNuzzo and I live in
Irvine Terrace with my wife and three young boys. I am respectfully writing to request the
Commission approve Item 5 on your Agenda, the Ritz-Carlton residences (PA2021-296).
The applicants are proposing a beautiful 22-story building that will attract more great residents to
Newport Beach. The developers have thoughtfully considered an architectural look that is befitting
of our community, and I believe the building will be looked upon very favorably in years to come -
much like our City Hall structure.
There are very few, maybe no other places, that could accommodate a building like this in Newport
Beach. I am a strong believer in property rights, so long as property owners are complying with
regulations. This building is within the height limits for the area and complies with all General Plan,
Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Code requirements.
Please support the land owner’s property rights and approve this project.
Respectfully yours,
Andrew M. DiNuzzo
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:DJ Countess
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:The Ritz Residences Newport Beach CA
Date:May 12, 2022 7:10:07 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
My family and I live in the Dover Shores community and we excited to see the potential Ritz-Carlton
residences in Fashion Island.
Put simply, this project makes sense for the city of Newport Beach. And I ask that you vote in favor of
it at your public hearing.
It makes sense because the city will receive an enormous amount of funding that can be used to
better our community.
It makes sense because residential units will create far less traffic than a hotel use.
It makes sense because there is no better location for a building like this.
It makes sense because it will beautify the entire property.
Please support this project because it makes perfect sense!
Best regards,
DJ Countess
President | Inklogic
Direct: (949) 922-6364
dj@inklogic360.com
www.inklogic360.com
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Sara Bryan
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 12, 2022 7:38:27 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Sara Weber and unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the
Planning Commission hearing. Nevertheless, as a concerned Newport
Beach resident, I wanted to write to you my strong support for your
agenda item #5, Ritz Carlton Residence project. Our city will benefit
immensely from the public benefit fees generated from this project and we
should not pass this up! Thank you for your service to our community and
please vote in favor of the Ritz-Carlton residences.
Best,
Sara Weber
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Keith Frankel
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support - the Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 12, 2022 9:06:47 AM
Attachments:image578860.pngimage929944.pngimage356094.png
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Planning Commission,
My name is Keith Frankel. I live in the Port Streets with my wife
and three children. I plan to attend your upcoming meeting, but
also wanted put in writing my strong support for the Ritz-Carlton
Residences.
I am grateful to this commission for having a history of supporting
property rights in our city.
My wife and I welcome more housing in the city of Newport
Beach and believe this project is a great opportunity to show the
state that Newport Beach is pro-housing. As you know, our state
is currently in a housing crisis and I commend the city staff for
approving this project, which will bring more housing units into
the city and more importantly, provide a lot more funding for
affordable housing units.
I feel this project is a great opportunity for older clientele who are
looking for single story living. As it stands, my Newport based
75-year-old parents are struggling to find single level housing in
Newport Beach. This project would provide an opportunity for
that buyer demographic.
Please support staff’s recommendation and approve this project.
Thank you again for your time.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Keith Frankel
949.500.9548
Keith Frankel
PROJECT MANAGER
E Keith.Frankel@TriPointeHomes.com
O 949.478.8665 M 949.500.9548
W TriPointeHomes.com
A 5 Peters Canyon Road, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92606
2021ဩ2022 GREAT PLACE TO WORKဩCERTIFIED™ COMPANY
Hiring Greatness at Every Level
2019 BUILDER OF THE YEAR
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual
named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have receivedthis e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmissioncannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender
therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of thismessage, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Jamie McConnell
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Support - Agenda Item 5
Date:May 12, 2022 9:25:39 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commission,
I am writing to express my support of the Ritz-
Carlton residences. Agenda Item 5 at 900 Newport
Center Drive.
My family and I live in Corona Del Mar and we would
love to see this project approved.
The proposed building is stunning and will offer so
much to those who wish to live there. The residents
will have a resort style pool, fitness center, spa
treatment rooms, concierge services, unground
parking, private garden/lawn area and so much more!
Not to mention, the breathtaking views of our harbor
and the Pacific Ocean.
This will be a dream place to live and we should
encourage property owners that are willing to make
this type of investment into our city.
Please vote in favor of this project because it is
EXACTLY what this area needs!
Thank you,
Jamie McConnell
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Mark McConnell
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton Residences
Date:May 12, 2022 11:32:07 AM
Attachments:image361697.pngimage339871.pngimage097036.pngimage619731.png
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Mark McConnell, and over a year ago, my family moved to Spy Glass Hill in Corona Deal
Mar. Before that, we lived in the EastBluff community for five years. One of the reasons we love
Newport Beach is because of the unique villages, variety, and characteristics it holds.
I am emailing you today because I was delighted to see that city staff is recommending approval of the
Ritz-Carlton residence building at 900 Newport Center Drive, on the Vea Newport Beach hotel
campus, A Marriott Resort and Spa.
Our city should continue to grow responsibly and welcome projects that allow for more housing
without losing the unique charm of Newport Beach.
This location is the right area for this type of project. The proposed building will not exceed any height
limits and is consistent with our General Plan.
Please vote in favor of the project.
Thank you,
Mark McConnell
+ Mark McConnell
SENIOR MANAGING DIRECTOR
McDermott + Bull Interim Leaders
office: 949.529.2675
mobile: 949.402.4002
2 Venture, Suite 100, Irvine CA 92618
mbexec.com
WE'RE PRO YOU.
Learn more about our team >
The contents of this email are privileged and confidential. McDermott + Bull strictly complies with all applicable regulations regarding candidate
history to combat intentional and unintentional compensation discrimination.
If you do not wish to receive e-mail messages from McDermott + Bull, please click here to email us, with the subject line "Unsubscribe". v6.2020
I understand that McDermott + Bull will protect my data as outlined in their Privacy Policy and California Privacy Policy.
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5f - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Fitz Ollison
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:The Ritz-Carlton Residences
Date:May 12, 2022 2:46:26 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
May 12, 2022
The City of Newport Beach Planning Commission
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commission,
My name is Patrick Ollison and I reside in the city of Newport Beach with my wife and
family.
I do not write letters to the city regarding development projects. Ever. HOWEVER, I felt
compelled to do so after receiving too many unsolicited, misleading email messages regarding
the Ritz-Carlton Residences project.
Among other things, I was told this project was low-income housing, and it included a
skyscraper, would require approval of the Coastal Commission, it would destroy my property
value and it would turn our city into ‘tacky Miami’!
After reading the staff report, it is obvious that the author of the messages was using
disinformation, fear-mongering and intimidation tactics to try and rile up our community.
It is very concerning that this disinformation is originating from ‘100 Civic Center Drive’,
especially the threats made to those companies that are willing to invest in our community and
that help local small businesses thrive with the customers they attract.
The Ritz-Carlton residences building is magnificent addition and brings a trend in the resort
hotel industry by providing onsite residences alongside hotel amenities in a single resort
campus. A project of this caliber will not only increase property values throughout the entire
city but also continue to elevate and showcase our wonderful city and it’s residents to the
world by offering ‘luxury living in many of the world's most vibrant cities and stunning resort
destinations.’
Please do not believe these lies and vote in favor of this amazing project that will help our
entire city thrive!
Thank you for your time.
Patrick Ollison
Patrick ‘Fitz’ Ollison
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5g - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
pfollison@gmail.com
(408) 595-4917
www.linkedin.com/in/fitzollison
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5g - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Michael Schreiber
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz-Carlton Residences - Don"t believe the lies
Date:May 12, 2022 2:21:19 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
To: The City of Newport Beach and Planning Commissioners,
I have lived in the city for over fifteen years and we would like to send this email
stating my clear support for the “RITZ-CARLTON RESIDENCES (PA2021-296)”
at 900 Newport Center Drive.
Over the last week, there has been misinformation about this project. The rumors
are being sent from an anonymous account with the sole focus of scaring residents
into thinking this project will change the character of our city.
These types of misinformation campaigns should not be stood for in Newport
Beach and our community will see through them.
My understanding is the project is consistent with the General Plan, it will reduce
traffic and we will all benefit from the public benefit fees that are collected.
Please do not believe the lies about this project.
Michael Schreiber
949-910-0513 - cell
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5g - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
From:Andy Keif
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Ritz Carlton Residences in Newport Beach
Date:May 12, 2022 1:32:09 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Chairman Lowrey and Fellow Planning Commissioners in Newport Beach:
I’m writing to you in regards to the upcoming Planning Commission agenda item tonight regarding
the proposed Ritz Carlton Residences in Newport Beach.
This city has been my home for over 30 years. It’s where I live and where I’ve built a successful
business. I love Newport Beach, and have seen you and the City grow and make many great
improvements.
I think the proposed Ritz Carlton residences would be another great project and improvement to the
city. I also think that 900 Newport Center Drive and Fashion Island is an excellent location for this
project. Ritz Carlton and Marriott are both world class, well recognized names in the hospitality
industry. And a perfect fit for our world class city!!
Please support this item and thank you for your commitment to serving Newport Beach.
Andy Keif
Crystal Cove Resident
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5g - Additional Materials Received After Deadline
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Ritz-Carlton Residences
Planning Commission Public Hearing
May 12, 2022
Jim Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Vicinity Map
900 Newport Center Drive
VEA Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort and Spa
Newport Beach
Country Club
Fashion
Island
Meridian
Granville
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Ritz-Carlton Residences
•Project involves ~2.78 acres of the 9.53-acre VEA
Newport Beach, A Marriott Resort & Spa
•Demolition of pre-coastal act portion of hotel
•Convert up to 159 existing hotel rooms to hotel-
branded residences (30% of existing 532 room hotel)
•Construction of a 22-story, 295-foot-tall residential
condominium tower
•No affordable Housing Included
•408-space subterranean parking garage
•Re-construction of existing VEA Newport Beach
parking structure creating a 400-spaces for the hotel
3Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Site Plan
4
Existing Hotel Complex
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Entry Plan
5
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Amenity Plan
6
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
•Major Site Development Permit No. SD2021-005
•Modification Permit No. MD2022-001
•Conditional Use Permit No. UP2021-053
•Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-077
•Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2021-003
Applications
Environmental Review
•Addendum No. 6 to the 2006 General Plan Update
Program Environmental Impact Report
Community Development Department 7
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
•Notice was provided pursuant to the Municipal Code
•Mailed, posted, newspaper, agenda posting, website
•Scrivener’s Error
•Site is not within the CCC appeal jurisdiction
•Corrected Notice provided
•Hand delivered yesterday to all addresses within 300 feet
•Mailed to entire mailing list
•Agenda updated for meeting and on website
•Correction emailed to each interested party that submitted a
comment by email
•Notice not legally deficient
Notice
Community Development Department 8
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Accessory Residential Use
March 2021, City Council adopts Policy K-4
•Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing
•Directs Staff to develop/modify strategies to accelerate
housing including mixed-use hotels
•Limits conversion to 30% of existing hotel rooms at
resorts to residential units on a one for one basis
•Not located in Coastal Commission appeal area
9Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Director’s Determination No. DD2021-001
•Residential use up to 30% of resort hotel is accessory to the
hotel – conversion on a one for one basis
•Reviewed by the Planning Commission on two occasions
•Reviewed by the City Council on appeal, determination upheld
•No legal challenge, statute of limitations expired
•Director Interpretations or Determinations of allowed unlisted
uses is common
•New Fire station on the peninsula in the CV Zone with no Coastal
Commission concern voiced
Accessory Residential Use
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
General Plan Consistency
•Consistent with Visitor Serving Land Use Category
•Residential use no more than 30% of resort hotel rooms
•Land Use Element limits site to 611 hotel rooms – 79
transferred rooms = 532 rooms
•Combined residences and rooms will not exceed 532
•Project Assists the City to Achieve Housing Goals
•Produces of up to 159 new units
•Project contribution - $65,000 per unit for affordable housing
•History of Conversions of Use
•2012 - City Council approved tennis courts to hotel rooms and
Coastal Commission endorsed by issuing a subsequent CDP
•2012 - City Council approved hotel rooms to residential units
11Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Zoning Consistency
•Consistent with CV - Visitor Serving Zoning District
•Residential use no more than 30% of resort hotel rooms
•Project Complies With Development Standards
•Height Below Highrise Height Limitation of 300 feet
•Parking exceeds residential and hotel requirements
•Exceeds minimum required setbacks
12Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
High Rise Zone
13Community Development Department
Implements
General Plan Policy
LU 6.14.4 to locate
taller buildings
closer to San
Joaquin Hills Road
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Local Coastal Program Consistency
•Consistent with Visitor Serving Land Use Category
•Residential use no more than 30% of resort hotel rooms
•No Impact to Coastal Resources
•No impact to public coastal views
•No impact to the visual quality of the coastal zone
•No Impact to Lower Cost Accommodations
•Impact to General Public Access by reduction of hotel
rooms to paying guests addressed
•Payment of $10,700 per unit for public access or recreational
improvement
•Site Not in Coastal Commission’s Appeal Jurisdiction
14Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Local Coastal Program Consistency
•Received letter dated 5/10/2022 from California
Coastal Commission staff
•Response
•No potential violation of City’s LCP or the Coastal Act
•No permit is required from the Coastal Commission
•New Development is reviewed by the City
•Site is not appealable to the Coastal Commission
•Section 30810 of the Coastal Act is inapplicable because
not permit from the CCC is required
•No LCP amendment is required
15Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
CEQA
•Psomas prepared Addendum No. 6 to the 2006
General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report
•No New Significant Effects from the Project relative to
the 2006 General Plan PEIR
•Development will be visible, but no Public Views
Obstructed
•Shading does not affect sensitive uses
•Traffic Trips Reduced
•Average Daily
•AM and PM Traffic Trips Reduced
•Helps City to meet housing policy goals
16Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Fiscal Benefits
Development Fees
•$65,000 – Senior Affordable Housing
•$10,700 - Public Coastal Access
•$22,300 - Public Benefit
•$2,000 - Public Safety
•$100,000 - Total per unit
Tax Increases
•TOT & Property tax analyzed
~ $7.7 million increase over next 20 years
($128.7 million to $136.4 million)
17Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Recommended Actions
•Conduct a Public Hearing
•Find Addendum No. 6 appropriate
•Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-011 approving the
project and all applications listed
18Community Development Department
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
19
Questions and Discussion
Jim Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director
jcampbell@newportbeachca.gov
949-644-3210
Planning Commission Public Hearing
May 12, 2022
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5h - Additonal Materials Presented at the Meeting by Staff
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Ritz-Carlton ResidencesPA2021-296
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Project Summary
•Hotel-branded residences key component to thriving hospitality campus
•Conversion of up to 30% of existing approved hotel rooms to accessory residences – no net increase in intensity
•Demolition of pre-Coastal Act Harbor Landing building and existing hotel parking structure
•Construction of new accessory residences with subterranean parking and new hotel parking structure in consolidated footprint
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Project Team
•Property Owner: Newport Center
Hotel, LLC
•Eagle Four Partners
•Lyon Living
•MVE Architects
•Burton Studios - Landscape Architect
•Fuscoe Engineering
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
•Transformational revitalization to the former Newport Beach Marriott – now VEA Newport Beach, a Marriott Resort and Spa
•VEA is all about local community engagement which is critical to the success of the resort hotel
•There are three target guests:
•Enjoy
•Stay
•Live
•Ritz-Carlton Residences is an accessory use which compliments the incredible renovation at VEA Newport Beach
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Hotel-Branded Residences Operated Under Marriott Campus
Marriott Management Team
GM – Debbie Snavely
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Hotel-Branded Residences Chronology
City Council adoption of Policy K-4, Reducing the Barriers to the Creation of Housing, March 9, 2021
Policy K-4 directed staff to aggressively implement various strategies designed to accelerate housing production including encouraging the development of mixed-use hotels
Planning Commission reviewed and upheld DD upon appeal July 8, 2021
Director’s Determination DD2021-001, Interpreting Accessory Residential as an Allowed Use within Resort Hotels, April 30, 2021
City Council reviewed and upheld the DD on appeal from the Planning Commission action August 24, 2021
In 2020, hotel industry devastated by COVID-19 pandemic, hotel business plans destroyed. HCD provides RHNA allocation revealing the need to plan for thousands of housing units in Newport
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Entitlement Application
1. Major Site Development Review
2. Modification Permit (Tandem Parking)
3. Conditional Use Permit (Required by DD2021-001)
4. Coastal Development Permit
5. Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Project Site
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Project Site
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Completed Site
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
•Consistent with all City design
standards
•Exceeds parking requirement
•Main residential entry aligned
with existing intersection at
Cucina Enoteca in Fashion Island
•Fire/Service drive ensures access -
no impact to Newport Center
Drive
•Substantial increase in open
space/landscaping
•High-quality building materials
consistent with Newport Center
Site Development Review
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
No Net Increase in Intensity
532x30%= 373 hotel rooms and 159 accessory residential 611-79=532
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Reduction in Traffic Trips Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Building Height
High Rise Height Area Original Master Plan
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
East Elevation Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Site Section Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Residential Structure Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Fire Access and Service Drive Section Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Hotel Parking Structure Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Building Materials Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Building Architecture Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Compatibility with Newport Center Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Castaways Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Yacht Streets Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Spy Glass Hill Rd Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Granville Entry Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Modification Permit – Tandem Parking
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Conditional Use Permit
Required to ensure adequate parking and to analyze potential financial impact associated with loss of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
•Project exceeds parking requirement for both the hotel and accessory residential
•TOT from VEA and Property Tax combined will result in $136 million in revenues to the City over 20 years, which is $40 million more than without this reinvestment and hotel branded residences
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
City Issued Coastal Development Permit
•Project site at outermost boundary of Coastal Zone within City’s Certified LCP
•Located outside of Coastal Commission appeal jurisdiction
•Harbor Landing Building pre-Coastal Act, not subject to Coastal Commission authority or prior Commission issued CDPs
•No impacts to coastal resources or low-cost accommodations
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Public Benefit Fee - $100,000 Per Unit
•General Public Benefit - $22,300 per unit
•Public Safety - $2,000 per unit
•Future Improvement to Public Coastal Access - $10,700 per unit
•Future Acquisition and Construction of Affordable Housing -
$65,000 per unit
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Public Outreach
•Outreach initiated prior to application submittal
•Conducted more than 25 formal outreach meetings
•Met with the following groups:
•SPON
•Interested land-owners
•Neighbors
•City leaders
•Community members; and
•Business leaders
•Written acknowledgement/supported by: SPON, Granville HOA, Meridian HOA, Newport Beach Country Club, Tennis Club
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Project Conclusions
•Consistent with all City development standards
•No plan amendments or variances required
•No new intensity – consistent with prior conversions
•No new environmental impacts, reduction in traffic trips
•Consistent with City Council Policy K-4 and DD2021-001
•TOT from VEA and Property Tax combined will result in $136 million in revenues to the City over 20 years
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Requested Action
•Approve the proposed project consistent with the Staff Recommendation including:
•Major Site Development Review,
•Modification Permit,
•Conditional Use Permit,
•Coastal Development Permit, and
•Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Planning Commission - May 12, 2022
Item No. 5i - Additional Materials Presented at the Meeting by Applicant
The Ritz-Carlton Residences (PA2021-296)
Attachment 9