Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 300 Newport Center Drive topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council upholds planning commission approval for 300 Newport Center Drive; Big Newport theater to be redeveloped
Summary
After hours of public comment and competing appeals, the council denied an appeal and sustained the planning commission approval for a 150‑unit, two‑tower condominium project that will require demolition of the Edwards 'Big Newport' theater; the decision was unanimous.
The City Council on April 28 denied an appeal of the planning commission’s decision on the 300 Newport Center Drive project, sustaining the commission’s March approval to replace the Edwards Newport Cinema (known locally as Big Newport) with two residential towers totaling 150 condominium units.
Liz West Morland, principal planner, summarized the project and entitlements: demolition of the existing theater, related non‑residential buildings and surface parking; construction of two towers about 22 stories tall (roughly 270 feet) over a podium housing 343 parking spaces, publicly accessible courtyards and a corner retail/café or amenity space, and street‑facing “home office” units restricted by conditions of approval. The applicant requested a major site development review (with deviations from some objective standards), a conditional use permit for the non‑residential component, and a vesting tentative tract map that could vest for up to seven years.
Staff reported a CEQA program/15183 analysis supported by 10 technical studies, including a cultural resources assessment that concluded the theater building, although over 50 years old, is not currently designated and was not determined eligible for federal, state or local historic listing in the staff analysis. The planning commission found the project consistent with applicable standards and unanimously recommended approval on March 5.
The appeal filed by community members (Save Our Theater and others) raised concerns about the cultural loss of the theater, the project’s scale and compatibility with the original Newport Center concept, parking and circulation impacts, and a perceived lack of transparency about how the site was identified in the housing‑overlay process. Appellant Ken Lacroy asked the council to require a more thorough review of parking, economic impacts on nearby businesses and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. Members of the public urged preservation of the theater for cultural and festival uses; several proposed an alternative scheme retaining the cinema as an event venue.
Applicant Jim Edwards acknowledged the theater’s local role and described changes in movie‑going economics that, in his view, made continued operation as a standalone cinema infeasible; the Edwards family notified the council the theater will close no later than June 2027 if an alternative use is not found. Edwards said the proposed residential project would be a high‑quality redevelopment and would generate roughly $8.9 million in in‑lieu park dedication fees and about $4.9 million in development impact fees (staff figures provided in the planning analysis).
Council discussion touched on process and transparency questions raised by several members of the public, the project’s compatibility with existing Newport Center high‑rise context, parking and traffic modelling, and the absence of a mandatory local inclusionary housing requirement (the project includes no affordable units because the city does not have a local inclusionary mandate). After hearing testimony from dozens of residents, business representatives, the applicant and the appellant, the council voted to deny the appeal by unanimous vote, sustaining the planning commission’s approval.
What this means: the planning commission approval stands; the applicant may proceed with entitlement steps required by the resolution (e.g., permitting, final design, and tract map procedures). The project's vesting tentative map and related approvals remain subject to the conditions adopted by the planning commission and the council’s resolution. Public commenters and several council members urged exploring ways to support the Newport Beach Film Festival and other cultural uses displaced by the redevelopment.
Next steps: with the appeal denied, the applicant may proceed under the adopted findings and conditions; community members and the festival organizers indicated they will pursue alternatives to preserve film programming and events elsewhere in the city.
