Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - Irvine Business Complex• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 16 February 14, 2006 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robin Clauson, City Attorney 949 - 644 -3131, rclauson @city.newport- beach.ca.us Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager 949 - 644 -3222, swood @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Newport Beach Response to Ongoing Residential Development in Irvine Business Complex ISSUE: • How should the City of Newport Beach respond to ongoing development in the Irvine Business Complex (IBC), including the City of Irvine's proposed overlay zone that would allow up to 10,000 additional residential units? RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Direct the City Attorney to utilize special counsel to review and prepare comments on draft EIRs for individual development projects in the IBC, follow up with review of responses to comments, and report back to the City Council, as well as continuing to pursue any environmental concerns raised during review of the negative declaration on the proposed overlay zone. 2. Adopt the attached Resolution extending the term of the Newport Beach - Irvine Borders Committee, and direct the Committee to meet with Irvine City Council members to inform them of Newport Beach's concerns and potential actions by Newport Beach if full environmental review is not done. DISCUSSION: Background: The City of Irvine adopted General Plan and zoning provisions for the IBC in 1992, •based on a Final Program EIR (88 -EIR -0087, or "88 EIR "). Among other things, this General Plan and zoning allowed the transfer of development rights from one property Newport Beach Response to Ongoing Development in IBC February 14, 2006 Page 2 • to another, and allowed residential development to replace office or industrial entitlement, as long as the traffic generated by the project is within a "trip budget" established in the 88 EIR. The 88 EIR and the General Plan also established a cap of 3,896 dwelling units. The 88 EIR found that the project would have significant unavoidable environmental impacts (impacts that could not be mitigated), and the City of Irvine adopted a statement of overriding considerations to approve the project. Among the areas where significant unavoidable impacts were found are transportation and traffic and recreation. Since 1992, numerous projects that transfer development rights and /or projects that convert office and industrial entitlement to residential have been approved by the City of Irvine. Many of these projects have been approved with addenda to the 88 EIR, and some have been studied further with supplemental EIRs. The residential cap in the Irvine General Plan is currently 8,734 units, and applications for approximately 5,134 additional units are pending. Newport Beach's Responses Beginning in January 2004, starting with the Scholle office development at Jamboree and Fairchild, Newport Beach's Environmental Quality Affairs Committee (EQAC) and City Council have commented on Irvine's environmental documents for projects in IBC — • when these documents have been circulated for public review. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not require public review of an addendum to a previous EIR, and many of the earlier projects were approved with addenda to the 88 EIR and without notice to Newport Beach. Newport Beach staff has commented on addenda to the 88 EIR when we have received them in time, and EQAC and the City Council commented extensively on a supplemental EIR for the Central Park mixed use project at Jamboree and Michelson. As a result of our comments on addenda to the 88 EIR for two residential projects in September 2005, Irvine agreed not to use addenda to the 88 EIR for IBC projects, but to conduct environmental review as required for each case. Last month, staff responded to notices of preparation for supplemental EIRs on two residential projects. Councilmember Ridgeway and Irvine Councilmember Larry Agran, who were both Mayors at the time, met in March 2004, to discuss sphere issues and development issues in the border area shared by the two cities. This meeting resulted in formation of the Newport Beach/Irvine Borders Committee in April 2004 (Resolution attached). The Borders Committee has met twice. At the first meeting in July 2004, Newport Beach gained Irvine's agreement to notify us of all IBC projects, and to provide us with environmental documents, whether or not public review is required by CEQA. This meeting also set in motion the two cities' cooperative effort to design an improvement at the Jamboree /MacArthur intersection and Newport Beach's agreement with Scholle to pay their fair share for circulation system improvements in Newport Beach ($396,000, • which has been paid in full). The second meeting, in October 2005, consisted of Newport Beach Response to Ongoing Development in IBC February 14, 2006 • Page 3 sharing updates on each city's planning efforts and more general conversations about the Airport Area and IBC. Beginning in late 2003, the City of Irvine began work on a comprehensive planning effort to guide residential development in the IBC. Newport Beach staff has followed this process, and attended and testified at a number of meetings of the Irvine Planning Commission, Community Services Commission and City Council. In every case, the message was the same: Newport Beach does not wish to interfere with planning in Irvine, but we do expect Irvine to study the environmental impacts of their planning. The two areas of greatest concern to Newport Beach that have always been presented are traffic and recreation. Next Steps The City of Irvine released a draft negative declaration for a zone change to create the IBC Mixed use Overlay Zone on January 25, 2006, and comments are due on February 16, 2006. The overlay zone establishes standards for future residential development, and is accompanied by the "Irvine Business Complex Draft Vision," which fosters additional residential development in the IBC. The negative declaration repeatedly •states that there is the potential for an additional 10,000 residential units to be developed in the IBC, through the approval of individual General Plan amendments to increase the residential unit cap, but that the zoning overlay does not approve any residential development. Staff believes that a negative declaration is not adequate environmental review for this project, and that Irvine should prepare a new EIR. The Newport Beach members of the Borders Committee (Council members Daigle and Selich), as well as special counsel, concur that an EIR should be prepared. With assistance from outside counsel, we have begun drafting comments on the negative declaration, expressing Newport Beach's concerns that the negative declaration does not adequately address the potentially significant environmental impacts of the overlay zone, especially without analysis of the already approved and pending applications for projects that could result in over 20,000 residential units in the IBC. While adoption of the overlay zone is pending, Irvine is continuing to consider individual residential projects in the IBC. As a result of our comments on earlier projects, Irvine is beginning to prepare supplemental EIRs on these projects, giving Newport Beach the opportunity to review and comment on the analysis of environmental impacts and mitigation measures. We are recommending that special counsel also be used to review and comment on these draft supplemental EIRs, follow up with review of responses to comments, and advise the City Council on any further action. Finally, it has come to our attention that the Borders Committee had a sunset date of December 31, 2004, and its term has not been extended. Continuation of this •Committee is more important now than ever for Newport Beach to retain all options for avoiding impacts from IBC development, and to explore ways that Newport Beach and Newport Beach Response to Ongoing Development in IBC February 14, 2006 Page 4 Irvine might jointly resolve traffic, recreation and other issues. A resolution extending the term of the Committee is attached for the City Council's consideration. Alternatives: Staff did not refer the current negative declaration to EQAC, because the short 20 -day review period did not allow enough time. EQAC has been a valuable resource to the City in the review of previous IBC environmental documents, and the City Council could ask that EQAC continue to review these documents, in addition to or instead of special counsel. The City Council could direct the City Attorney and other in -house staff to review environmental documents for development in the IBC. Submitted by: Robin Clauson City Attorney Sharon Wood Assistant City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution 2004 -29 2. Resolution Extending Term of Newport Beach /Irvine Borders Committee • • • l • RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 29 . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ESTABLISHING THE NEWPORT BEACH/IRVINE BORDERS COMMITTEE WHEAREAS, the City of Newport Beach ( "Newport Beach ") is in the process of updating its General Plan, and has identified the John Wayne Airport area (Airport Area), which borders the Irvine Business Complex ( "IBC "), as a geographic area for special study; and WHEREAS, the City of Irvine is experiencing demand for new office and residential development within the IBC, and the Irvine City Council has directed its staff to prepare General Plan and zoning amendments to allow additional residential development; and WHEREAS, the Newport Beach and Irvine City Councils recognize that development on their borders has the potential to impact one another, and WHEREAS, the City Councils of the two cities desire to cooperate with one another to (a) identify potential solutions to current and future traffic congestion in and around IBC and the Airport Area; (b) identify opportunities for • reducing the number of automobile trips generated by development in the Airport Area and IBC; and (c) establish a mechanism for mitigating traffic and land use impacts related to new development or redevelopment in the Airport Area, IBC and adjacent areas; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach as follows: Section 1. The Newport Beach/Irvine Borders Committee is hereby established. Section 2. The Committee shall be comprised of three (3) members of the Newport Beach City Council, appointed by the Mayor, and two (2) members of the Irvine City Council. Section 3. The duties of the Committee shall be as follows: a. Share information regarding planning for development in the border areas shared by the two cities; b. Evaluate the potential impacts of such development on areas including traffic, public safety, air travel demand, and parks and recreation; and consider the possibility of joint efforts by the two cities to mitigate impacts; c. Discuss other issues that may affect the border areas shared by the • two cities; and d. Report to each City Council on the progress and recommendations of the Committee. Section 4. The Committee shall sunset on December 31, 2004, unless its term is extended by the two City Councils. ADOPTED this 131' day of April, 2004. ATTEST: 4�0 M- CITY CLERK 1, 3 WAY-6R 2 • W I STATE OF CALIFORNIA • COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, LaVonne M. Harkless, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2004.29 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 13th day of April, 2004, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Heffernan, Rosansky, Adams, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Ridgeway Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 14th day of April, 2004. • ! (Seal) L City Clerk Newport Beach, California A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF • THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE NEWPORT BEACH /IRVINE BORDERS COMMITTEE WHEAREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach established the Newport Beach /Irvine Borders Committee ( "Committee ") by adoption of Resolution 2004 -29, which Resolution provided for the Committee to sunset on December 31, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, due to ongoing residential development in the Irvine Business Complex ( "IBC'), and proposed changes to Irvine zoning provisions and potential changes to Newport Beach General Plan provisions, the Committee is needed to protect Newport Beach from the impacts of development in IBC and to coordinate planning efforts with the City of Irvine; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that the term of the Newport Beach /Irvine Borders Committee is extended indefinitely. ADOPTED this day of February, 2006. • ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR 1 CJ