Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/29/2016 - Special MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Special Meeting November 29, 2016 I. ROLL CALL - 7.00 p.m. Present: Council Member Peotter, Council Member Duffield, Council Member Selich, Council Member Curry, Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon H. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council Member Selich M. INVOCATION - Council Member Curry IV. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS Fred Ameri read a statement from retired Judge James Gray regarding racist campaign election signs. He questioned why Mayor Dixon objected to Council Member Curry's proposed resolution. Jim Mosher discussed the last minute agenda materials and recommended the City Clerk be held to the same standard as Planning Commission staff: He discussed Council Member Curry's requested resolution and believed the Brown Act was violated by not allowing the public to address the Council on the matter. VI. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Museum House Residential Project (PA2015-152) - 850 San Clemente Drive [100-20161 • General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 • Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 • Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 • Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 (County Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 17970) • Development Agreement No. DA2016.001 • Traffic Study (TPO) No. 2015-004 • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002 • Use Permit No. UP2005-017 Revocation Drive • Modification Permit No. MD2004-059 Revocation Senior Planner Ramirez presented a PowerPoint presentation, highlighting the vicinity map, project overview, requested entitlements, site plan, General Plan designation and proposed General Plan Amendment, surrounding land uses, zoning, building height and scale, the High Rise Height Limit Area, Charter Section 423 (Greenlight), the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), traffic, and the development agreement. Community Development Director Brandt discussed the required review and determination by the Airport Land Use Commission. Senior Planner Ramirez discussed the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval. He stated the City had received 12 letters, 229 phone calls, and two petitions in opposition to the project; and 29 letters, three phone calls, and one petition in support of the project. Volume 63 - Page 145 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 Bill Witte, Related California Urban Housing, LLC, discussed his family's involvement in the community and background on the Museum House. He outlined the development vision, including the need for pedestrian open space and retaining ocean views. He summarized the conclusions of the EIR, including traffic, building height, and water usage. He discussed community outreach, support, and public benefits. Robert Stern, architect, presented their design philosophy, international practice, projects in Southern California, and multifamily residential buildings, including The Century in Los Angeles. He presented an image of the existing Newport Center skyline. Dan Lobitz, architect, presented the design and details of the Museum House project, including project metrics, and the site plan, including entry, garden, ground floor plan, second floor plan, typical floor unit layout, ceiling heights, views, elevations, fagade materials, high quality details, and building height comparison. Mr. Witte stated the project would be fully valet parked. He discussed affordable housing development completed by his company. Mayor Dixon opened the public hearing. Cassie Taormina expressed support for the project due to Related California's sensitivity to the community and the need for the project. Larry Tucker discussed the Planning Commission's approval of the project. He believed the opponents' complaints were not justified. Lynn Swain indicated opposition to the project due to impact to neighbors, including the increase in traffic. Thomas Nielson discussed his involvement with the Museum House, museum and arts in the community and the General Plan Amendment. Mike Kerr, Vice Chair of the Newport Beach Arts Commission, discussed the importance of the building being deeded back for cultural arts and urged Council to provide adequate funding for modifications and maintenance. Tom Tucker indicated support for the proposed high rise residential development and urged Council to approve the project. Drew Lawler discussed his publication of Newport Center News in the 1980s and believed the project was another development taking the City away from its roots. He questioned whether it was the appropriate direction. He estimated the majority of residents would oppose the project and expressed concern with water restrictions. Randy Morrison Baird indicated confidence in the Planning Commission's review, EIR, and developer and museum supporters' input on the project. Michael Lawler questioned the Measure S analysis. He believed voter approval was required, the proposed project was too dense, and the project did not belong in Newport Beach. Lynne Hamilton Lang stated she was in favor of the Museum project due to design, style, height and location. She requested Council approval of the project to allow construction of a museum in Orange County. Volume 63 - Page 146 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 Eddie Mehrfar questioned the definition of public benefit and how more pollution, traffic and pressure on utilities would benefit the residents. Howard Lang stated he was initially opposed to the project, but now supported the project due to the aesthetics, asset to the community, and funding for the art museum. Kurt English encouraged Council to support the Museum project due to the benefit of property tax revenue and developer fees. He discussed opposition to property rights and serial opposition. Dorothy Kraus, SPON Board Member and Line in the Sand PAC, urged Council to vote no on all requested discretionary approvals. She requested a show of hands by opponents and discussed the petitions opposing the project. Steve Younan indicated opposition to the project due to traffic and requested the project be put to a vote of the people. Craig Wells, President and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Orange County Museum of Arts, discussed the need to move to the arts campus in Orange County and indicated support for the project. Gordon Glass expressed concern with the height of the project and suggested a compromise of rezoning it for housing at 65 -feet. Bolton Colburn discussed the opportunity for the Orange County Museum and urged Council to approve the project. Ruth Kobayashi expressed mixed emotions due to ongoing construction, but indicated support for the project. She noted the developer had agreed to establish a neighborhood ambassador, prohibit construction traffic on Jamboree and Santa Barbara, dedicate traffic enforcement to the project, and coordinate advanced notification with the Police Department and Harbor Cove. Bruce Bartram stated the applicant's intent was to target the high end residential market and questioned who would purchase the homes. Roger Davidson discussed the type of residents that would live in the homes and the gift of the Museum to Orange County and the City. Brett Hales, business owner and tenant at Newport Center, stated the prospect of walking to work was of interest and indicated support for the project. Susan Skinner indicated opposition to the Museum House. She suggested voter approval of the project and threatened a referendum. Nancy Skinner suggested the project be put to a vote of the people and discussed the Greenlight initiative. Peter Tennyson believed the project would obstruct ocean views. He expressed support of the Museum, but not at the expense of the quality of life of Newport Beach residents. Vlad Anderson, President of Newport Beach Police Association, along with Newport Beach Fnre Association, indicated support for the project and urged Council to approve the project. Volume 63 - Page 147 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 Denise Baker, SPON Treasurer, discussed the signatories on the developer's petition, noting that many were not Newport Beach residents and some were listed twice. Louis Stavale expressed support of the proposed project and urged Council to approve it. Pat Fuscoe indicated support for the project due to change, trends and pride. Sharon Koch indicated opposition to the project due to the height, view blockage, and location. Barry Allen expressed opposition to the project due to traffic and the need for a vote. Bob Currie indicated support for the project and new museum. Phillip Greer discussed the recent City Council election and votes for candidates opposed to the Museum House. He believed the public did not want the property to be built. He questioned how much Council was willing to spend to defend the referendum and lawsuit. He urged Council to vote no on the project. Carol Conover expressed concern about the proposed parking and traffic. Robert Giem stated he met with the developer and had a favorable opinion of the project. He indicated he embraced sensible change and the idea of moving forward in a positive direction when given proper thought. He expressed support for the project. Jim Mosher discussed the Airport Land Use Commission's request for a statement from the FAA clearing the helipad. He commented on the earlier speaker's statement that 100 units had been added and that Council was determining where the units should go. He believed a Greenlight vote was necessary. Allen Beek urged the project be put to a vote of the people. Anita Mishook indicated support for the project. Joy Brenner stated she believed in progress and beautifying the City, but believed improvements needed to be done in a manner consistent with the beachside city. She expressed concern with all future units invested into one tower and suggested the project be put to a vote of the people. Joy Royalbold asked how the residents would benefit and suggested the project be voted on by the people. Paul McManigal discussed the Planning Commission's consideration and decision on the project. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Dixon closed the public hearing. Community Development Director Brandt discussed the documentation from the Airport Land Use Commission staff indicating the intent of the condition had been met, explained that a vote was not required for the requested General Plan Amendment, and addressed the transfer and conversion to residential units of 79 unbuilt hotel units at the Marriott property in Newport Center. City Attorney Harp concurred with Community Development Director Brandt. Council Member Selich thanked the public speakers. He provided an overview of his opinions on the project and need to maintain an arts and cultural center in Newport Center. He noted OCMA would sell the property whether or not the project was approved, although he would prefer the entire property be maintained as an arts and cultural facility. He rebutted comments from SPON Volume 63 - Page 148 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 and Line in the Sand regarding a high rise, height, residential use General Plan Amendment, and need to update to respond to the City's changing needs. He stated the project was consistent with the goals for the Newport Center, reiterated that 100 units were allowed in the statistical area, and noted the mitigation measures resolved traffic and construction noise issues. He explained that denial of the project would not guarantee continued cultural use and one additional high rise would not change the look and feel of Newport Center. He stated the tipping point for out of character, massive development was the first high rise and that high rise structures had always been anticipated in Newport Center. He rebutted that there were no long term environmental impacts and the short term impacts would be mitigated. He stated the project would be at the forefront of water conservation and there was no view or shadowing impacts. He commended the applicant on the quality design and site plan and use of the highest quality materials. He discussed the need for this type of housing which would help the City meet its regional housing needs assessment numbers. He stated the development agreement provided $7.1 million in development fees and an additional $2.6 million in park fees. He explained that he was a proponent of good community planning and the need to balance quality of life with financial impacts. He discussed comments received on the project and the need to determine what was best for the overall community. He stated the project was well designed, fit the character of Newport Center, had no environmental impacts, and provided significant financial benefits. He discussed preservation of arts and cultural presence in the City and believed the project would enhance the quality of life for Newport Beach residents. Motion by Council Member Selich. seconded by Council Member Peotter to adopt Resolution No. 2016-126, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Certifying Environmental Impact Report No. ER2016-002 and Approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Museum House Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015- 152). In response to Council Member Selich's questions, Community Development Director Brandt read alternative Resolution No. 2016-127 which: 1) incorporates and attaches the following in the resolution: April 7, 2016 Planning Commission meeting minutes; September 1, 2016 Planning Commission meeting minutes; October 20, 2106 Planning Commission meeting minutes; Planning Commission Resolution No. 2033; a listing of the 11 zoning districts; Charter Section 423 Tracking Table for Statistical Area L-1; Amended Land Use Element; Environmental Impact Report State Clearing House 2016-021023 which includes the Notice of Preparation, Initial Study, Environmental Analysis, Alternative Analysis, Appendices, Responses to Comments, and Revisions to the Draft EIR; and 2) modifies Resolution Section 7 to add "The City Council has reviewed the EIR and determined that no significant new information has been added to the EIR, therefore, recirculation is not required pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15088.5." Motion by Council Member Selich, seconded by Council Member Peotter, to a) adopt alternative Resolution No. 2016-127, as amended, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to Change the Land Use Designation from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100), for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive and Adopting California Environmental Quality Act Facts and Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the Museum House Project (PA2015-152); b) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-23, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 Amending the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC -19) Located at 850 and 856 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152), and pass to second reading on December 13, 2016; c) adopt Resolution No. 2016-128, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project and Revoking Use Permit No. UP2005-17 and Modification Permit No. MD 2004-059 Related to the Orange County Museum of Art Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152); d) adopt Volume 63 - Page 149 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 Resolution No. 2016-129, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 for the 100- Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015.152); e) adopt Resolution No. 2016-130, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Traffic Study No. TS2015-004 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015- 152); and f) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-24, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Multi -Family Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152), and pass to second reading on December 13, 2016. Council Member Selich stated the factual documents should be included with any petition for a referendum. Council Member Peotter concurred with Council Member Selich's comments. He discussed Greenlight as ballot box planning and pointed out that the Museum House project was in accordance with Greenlight,. He believed it was unfair to change the rules midstream. He discussed Measure Y and Irvine Company Development Agreement considered at Council's last meeting, and indicated that Measure Y did not apply to the Museum House. He stated Council was elected to represent the people, the project complied with Greenlight, and was a quality development. He urged voters to read all documents presented by SPON. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon asked if the applicant would like to rebut the public comments. Mr. Witte stated his points were being made. He indicated respect for the arguments made on both sides, but took issue with the inaccurate mailers; however, noted that reasonable people could disagree. Council Member Petros thanked the speakers. He stated the project was proposed by a premier developer and architect, and the process was conducted on the highest order. He stated he would support the project, but more so supports representative government. He discussed the Measure Y vote in which 70% of voters decided that intensified development was not for Newport Beach. He stated, as much as he liked the project, its financial benefits and no environmental impacts, his personal opinion had to be subordinate to the will of the people and would not support the project. Council Member Curry expressed disappointment with behind the scenes lobbying. He stated there were good arguments on both sides of the debate. He stated the opponents of Measure Y needed to be heard, but it was a premier development that would enable far greater museum facilities. He believed the advantages outweighed the negatives. He stated he understood the opponents would circulate a referendum petition and felt Council should just place the matter on the ballot, but did not think Council would have the votes to do it. He stated it was necessary to remove Section 7 from the resolution in order to allow the petitions to be circulated and that the attachments were nothing more than an effort to circumvent the people's right to petition the government. Council Member Duffield took issue to the statement that he was a puppet for Dave Ellis. He stated he was torn over moving the museum to Costa Mesa since his mother was a founder of the Newport Beach Art Museum. He believed it was fiscally irresponsible to vote against the project. He pointed out he believed in the Planning Commission's unanimous approval and work of the staff; therefore, he would be voting in support of the project. Mayor Dixon thanked Council Member Selich for his thoughtful comments and explanation behind the City's planning process and principles. She thanked those that submitted correspondence and the public speakers. She stated the people care about the community, although they differ in opinions on development. She reminded everyone that reasonable people could disagree but yet remain reasonable. She emphasized her role was to represent all the people of Newport Beach. She indicated support for the project due to the community benefits and contribution to the City's Volume 63 - Page 150 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 beauty and architectural excellence. She encouraged residents to view the projects on RAMSA's website. She discussed the ability to amend the General Plan and need to reflect the updated vision for the future. She addressed the Measure Y issue and stated the Museum House proposal was not a Measure Y project, rather would add 100 dwelling units. She indicated her intent to help the community understand the relationship between quality development and quality of life. She discussed the 64 parks funded with proceeds from development agreements and that private development enhanced property values. She suggested requiring an additional $4 million to fund the following community projects: $1 million for new Junior Lifeguard headquarters, $1 million for a Central Library community lecture hall, and $2 million for West Newport / Coast Highway landscaping. In response to Mayor Dixon's suggestion, Mr. Witte stated, although no developer liked to be asked to contribute more money, he endorsed funds being allocated to specific projects. Mayor Dixon suggested a friendly amendment to Council Member Selich's motion to amend Section 3, Public Benefit, Subsection 3.1, Public Benefit Fee, of the Development Agreement as follows: a) increase $71,100 public benefit fee per residential unit by $40,000 per unit, for a total of $111,100 per residential dwelling unit, or for a total of $11,110,000 for the projects 100 dwelling units; and b) add a new paragraph to the end of subsection 3.1 to read, "The public benefit fees shall be allocated as follows: • $5.1 million shall go to the facilities finance plan for future projects that have been targeted; • $2 million shall go to the donation parcel for arts and cultural purposes; • $1 million towards a new Junior lifeguard facility; • $2 million towards the West Newport Landscaping project on Coast Highway; and • $1 million towards a new lecture hall for the Central Library." Council Member Selich and Council Member Peotter accepted the amendment. Motion by Council Member Curry, seconded by Council Member Petros, to amend the motion to strikeout the requirement in Section 7 for the EIR and additional documents proposed by Council Member Selich to be attached to the ordinance. Council Member Curry believed it was fundamentally unfair, undemocratic and in violation of the oaths taken by Council to require the proposed attachments. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon stated the EIR had to be attached, but suggested the minutes could be removed to not be over burdensome to petitioners. Council Member Peotter agreed with removing the minutes, but stated the other items aid in transparency. Council Member Curry reiterated his opinion that attaching the EIR was circumventing the petition process. Council Member Curry's motion failed by the following vote: Ayes: Council Member Curry, Council Member Petros Nays: Council Member Peotter, Council Member Duffield, Council Member Selich, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon Council Member Peotter suggested an amendment to Council Member Selich's amended motion to remove the Planning Commission minutes as an attachment to Resolution No. 2016-127. Council Member Selich accepted the amendment. Volume 63 - Page 151 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 Council Member Peotter expressed concern with requiring the developer to pay an additional $4 million and that the allocations had not been discussed by Council. He stated he would prefer allowing Council the flexibility to allocate the $4 million as it sees fit. He requested the funding designations be removed. Motion by Council Member Peotter, seconded by Council Member Duffield to amend Mayor Dixon's friendly amendment to remove the specific allocations for the funds from the Development Agreement. City Attorney Harp stated the Development Agreement would have to be amended once the specific allocations were made. Council Member Peotter's motion failed by the following vote: Ayes: Council Member Duffield, Council Member Peotter, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon Nays: Council Member Curry, Council Member Petros, Council Member Selich, Mayor Dixon Council Member Selich's motion to adopt Resolution No. 2016-126 carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Peotter, Council Member Duffield, Council Member Selich, Council Member Curry, Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon City Attorney Harp clarified that Council would now be voting on Recommendations c through h including the attachments proposed by Council Member Selich in Resolution No. 2016-127, except for the Planning Commission minutes, and including an additional $4 million with the designation of funds as proposed by Mayor Dixon. Council Member Peotter indicated he could not support the motion with Mayor Dixon's amendments. Council Member Selich's amended motion on Recommendations c through h failed by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Curry, Council Member Selich, Mayor Dixon Nays: Council Member Peotter, Council Member Duffield, Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon Motion by Council Member Peotter, seconded by Council Member Selich, to a) adopt alternative Resolution No. 2016-127, as amended, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 to Change the Land Use Designation from Private Institutional (PI) to Multi -Unit Residential (RM -100), for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive and Adopting California Environmental Quality Act Facts and Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the Museum House Project (PA2015-152), including the preferred use of funds as set forth by Mayor Dixon, but allowing future City Councils the opportunity to use funds for a similar public benefit; b) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-23, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2015-001 Amending the San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC -19) Located at 850 and 856 San Clemente Drive (PA2015- 152), and pass to second reading on December 13, 2016; c) adopt Resolution No. 2016-123, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Site Development Review No. SD2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project and Revoking Use Permit No. UP2005-17 and Modification Permit No. MD 2004-059 Related to the Orange County Volume 63 - Page 152 City of Newport Beach Special Meeting November 29, 2016 VII. Museum of Art Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152); d) adopt Resolution No. 2016-129, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Tentative Tract Map No. NT2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152); e) adopt Resolution No. 2016-130, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Traffic Study No. TS2015-004 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152); and f) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2016-24, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Development Agreement No. DA2016-001 for the 100 -Unit Museum House Multi -Family Residential Project Located at 850 San Clemente Drive (PA2015-152), and pass to second reading on December 13, 2016. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Curry, Council Member Duffield, Council Member Peotter, Council Member Selich, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon Nays: Council Member Petros City Manager Kiff and Mayor Dixon thanked Community Development Department staff and Assistant City Clerk Nelson. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None — 10:40 p.m. The agenda was posted on the City's website and on the City Hall Electronic Bulletin Board located in the entrance of the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive on November 23, 2016, at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Volume 63 - Page 153