HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - GP 2004-010 - PA 2004-235 - Housing ElementCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 14
March 22, 2005
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Jaime Murillo, Assistant Planner
(949) 644 -3209 jmurillo(a)city.newport- beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment (GP 2004 -010)
Amendments to the Housing Element
(PA 2004 -235)
APPLICANT NAME: City of Newport Beach
ISSUE
Should the City Council adopt amendments to the Housing Element of the Newport
Beach General Plan to eliminate discrepancies and insure consistency within the text,
clarify existing policies and affordability standards, and include additional provisions to
promote the achievement of the City's housing goals?
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -010
DISCUSSION
The Housing Element was adopted in August of 2003 and conditionally certified by the
State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in September of
2003. Since then, staff has discovered several discrepancies requiring revision for
consistency and clarification, as well as the need to include additional provisions that
could further promote affordable housing construction.
The City Council initiated the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan on November 23, 2004. These amendments include:
Amendments to Housing Element
March 22, 2005
Page 2
1) Amend Housing Program 1.2.1 to change the date of the annual General Plan
report deadline to be consistent with State Law.
2) Amend Housing Program 2.1.1 to correct an erroneous reference to the
Municipal Code.
3) Expand Housing Program 2.2.1 to include provisions for the production of
housing for moderate - income households.
4) Provide consistency within the Housing Element when defining affordable
income categories.
5) Amend the affordability standards to be consistent with the standards used by
the State Department of Housing and Community Development and The Office
of the Attomey General.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments on March 3, 2005 and
voted unanimously to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the amendments
to the City Council. Additionally, in accordance with the State's Housing Element
Guidelines, the City has submitted to HCD, a 60 -day notification of intent to adopt
amendments to the Housing Element. On February 25, 2005, the City received a letter
from HCD stating that they have reviewed the proposed amendments and have
determined that the City's Housing Element will remain in compliance with State
Housing Element law.
A detailed discussion of the amendments is provided in the attached Planning
Commission staff report.
Environmental Review
The proposed action is not defined as a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves general policy and procedure making activities
not associated with a project or a physical change in the environment (Section 15378 of
the CEQA Guidelines).
Public Notice
Public notice for the March 22, 2005 hearing was printed in the Daily Pilot, in
accordance with Section 65353 of the Government Code. Additionally, this item was
included on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City's
web site.
Amendments to
Alternatives
Housing Element
March 22, 2005
Page 3
The City Council has the option to recommend changes to the proposed General Plan
Amendment or decline to adopt the General Plan Amendment.
Prepared by:
Jaiffie Murillo
Assistant Planner
Attachments:
Submitted by:
1. City Council Draft Resolution No.
2. March 3, 2005 Planning Commission Staff Report
3. Planning Commission Resolution
4. March 3, 2005 Draft Planning Commission Minutes
FAUSERSTLN \SharedTA's\PAs - 2004\PA2004- 235 \GP 2004 -010 CClpt.do
Attachment 1
Draft City Council Resolution
Lk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -010 RELATED TO HOUSING
ELEMENT AMENDMENTS. (PA 2004 -235)
WHEREAS, the Housing Element was adopted in August of 2003 and
conditionally certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD) in September of 2003. Since then, staff has discovered several discrepancies
requiring revision for consistency and clarification; and
WHEREAS, the City Council initiated amendments to the Housing Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan on November 23, 2004 by adopting a written statement of
intent; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2005, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the amendments to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Newport Beach City Council on
March 22, 2005 in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport
Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was given in
accordance with the Municipal Code and State Law. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting; and
WHEREAS, additional provisions are also proposed to be included that could
further promote affordable housing construction in the City; and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is not defined as a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves general policy and procedure
making activities not associated with a project or a physical change in the environment
(Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council hereby approves General Plan
Amendment No. 2004 -010 to revise the Housing Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan to eliminate discrepancies and insure consistency within the text, clarify existing
City of Newport Beach
City Council Resolution No. _
Page 2 of 2
policies and affordability standards, and include provisions to promote the achievement
of the City's housing goals, as shown in Exhibit A.
This resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach held on March 22, 2005, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
0
Exhibit A
Proposed Changes
I
EXHIBIT "A"
Proposed Housing Element Changes
1) Housing Program 1.2.1 located on page 69 of the Newport Beach Housing
Element is hereby amended to read as follows:
As part of its annual General Plan Review, the City shall provide
information on the status of all housing programs. The portion of the
annual report discussing Housing Programs is to be distributed to the
California Department of Housing and Community Development in
accordance with California State law in .IaRuary prior to October list of
each year via US Postal Service.
2) Housing Program 2.1.1 located on page 71 of the Newport Beach Housing
Element is hereby amended to read as follows:
Maintain rental opportunities by restricting conversions of rental units to
condominiums unless the vacancy rate in Newport Beach for rental
housing is 5% or higher for four (4) consecutive quarters, and unless the
property owner complies with condominium conversion regulations
contained in Chapter 20.7-3 20.83 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
3) Housing Program 2.2.1 located on page 72 of the Newport Beach Housing
Element is hereby amended to read as follows:
Continue to require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential
developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five -year
planning period is for an average of 20% of all new housing units to be
affordable to YeFy lew and low inGeme heuse very low -, low -, and
moderate- income households. Given considerations of proper general
planning, the California Environmental Quality Act, project development
incentives, and government financial assistance, the City shall either; a)
require the production of housing units affordable to YeFy 19w and lew-
very low -, low -, and moderate- income households,
or b) require the payment of an in -lieu fee, depending on the following
criteria for project size:
1. Projects where ten or fewer housing units are proposed shall be required
to pay the in -lieu feels).
2. Projects where the proposal is for more than ten housing units, but fewer
than fifty, shall have the option of providing the units or paying the in -lieu
feels).
761
3. Projects where more than fifty are proposed shall be required to provide
the units.
All required very low and lew inGeme very low -, low -, and moderate -
income units shall be provided on -site unless at an off -site location
approved by the City. Implementation of this program will occur in
conjunction with City approval of any residential discretionary permits or
Tentative Tract maps. To insure compliance with the 20% affordability
requirements, the City will include conditions in the approval of discretionary
permits and Tentative Tract Maps to require ongoing monitoring of those
projects.
4) The last paragraph on page 26 of the Newport Beach Housing Element is
hereby amended to read as follows:
In its 1988 Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the Southern California
Association of Governments calculated that of 4,431 lower- income
households, paid more than 30% of their income for housing. According to
SCAG estimates, 2,625 very low- income households and 1,806 low- income
households paid more than 30% of their income for housing. In 1990, 2,583
very low- income and 4,071 low- income households paid more than 30% of
their income for housing. "Low Income' households are those households
with annual incomes between 90-- 408- perseflt 50 - 80 percent of the
County median household income. "Very Low Income" households are
those households with annual incomes of 60 --80- percent 50 percent or
less of the County median household income.
5) The income affordability standards defined on pages 67 and 68 of the Newport
Beach Housing Element are hereby amended to read as follows:
For purposes of defining income groups, the Housing Element aser the
follows the regulations
fellewiag income groups
0
AT A
.. _ _ ......... .T DLVirS�1:T_t�r�l■7,11'T_ .. _ _ .- _ _ J
..•
■
Liz
..•
and Urban Development.
Low- income: 50 %-80% of the area median income, as adjusted for
Urban Development.
The following affordability standards shall apply to rental and ownership
housing:
Maximum household income shall be determined by number of
persons in a family or household. and inGeme shall he iR
GORfGFFnanee wit §50093 Table asle4ews
• Income shall be in conformance with the limits set forth in 25
C.C. R. 46932.
• An efficiency unit as if occupied by one person; a one bedroom as if
occupied by two persons; a two bedroom as if occupied by four
persons; a three bedroom as if occupied by six persons; and a four
bedroom as if occupied by eight.
• Rents for very low -, low, Fnedia„ and moderate- income households
shall be no more than 30% of the income ice §50993 Table limits
set forth in 46932. The selling price of an ownership unit shall be no
1O
more than 3 times the buyer's income. Units may be sold to buyers
with qualifying incomes for the limited sales price without regard to
the number of persons in the family.
Specific Goals, Policies, and Programs of the Year 2000 Newport
Beach Housing Plan follow.
Attachment 2
March 3, 2005 Planning Commission Staff Report
1�'
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 3
March 3, 2005
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Tamara Campbell, Senior Planner
(949) 644 -3238 tcampbellacitv.newport- beach.ca.us
Jaime Murillo, Assistant Planner
(949) 644 -3209 imu(lloP- city.newport- beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment (GP 2004 -010)
Amendments to the Housing Element
(PA 2004 -235)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution recommending approval of General Plan
Amendment No. 2004 -010 to the City Council.
DISCUSSION
The Housing Element was adopted in August of 2003 and certified by the State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in September of
2003. Since then, staff has discovered several discrepancies requiring revision
for consistency and clarification, as well as the need to include additional
provisions that could further promote affordable housing construction.
The City Council initiated the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of
the Newport Beach General Plan on November 23, 2004. These amendments
include:
1) Amend Housing Program 1.2.1 to change the date of the annual General Plan
report deadline to be consistent with State Law.
2) Amend Housing Program 2.1.1 to correct an erroneous reference to the
Municipal Code.
3) Expand Housing Program 2.2.1 to include provisions for the production of
housing for moderate - income households.
)3
Amendments to Housing Element
March 3, 2005
Page 2
4) Provide consistency within the Housing Element when defining affordable
income categories.
5) Amend the affordability standards to be consistent with the standards used by
the State Department of Housing and Community Development and The
Office of the Attorney General.
Additionally, in accordance with the State's Housing Element Guidelines, the City
has submitted to HCD, a 60 -day notification of intent to adopt amendments to the
Housing Element. The 60-day review period ended on February 25, 2005 and,
based on conversations with Housing Policy Analyst assigned to the City, the
amendments are not anticipated to effect the certified status of the Housing
Element. An update on HCD's final determination will be provided at the hearing.
Analysis
1) Housing Program 1.2.1 is intended to implement California Government Code
Section §65400 mandating annual reporting of the General Plan and the
Housing Element. The program reads as follows:
"As part of its annual General Plan Review, the City shall provide
information on the status of all housing programs. The portion of the
annual report discussing Housing Programs is to be distributed to the
Califomia Department of Housing and Community Development in
accordance with Califomia State law in January of each year via US
Postal Service.
However, California Government Code Section §65400(b)(2) actually requires
that the report, "be provided to the legislative body, the Office of Planning and
Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development on
or before October 1 of each year, not in January of each year. Based on
conversations between City staff and HCD staff, it was determined that this
inconsistency should be corrected by amending Housing Program 1.2.1. This
would ensure consistency with Government Code Section §65400 and clarify
that one General Plan report should be prepared annually and submitted prior
to October 151 of each year.
2) Housing Program 2.1.1 incorrectly refers to a particular chapter of the
Municipal Code. The program reads as follows:
"Maintain rental opportunities by restricting conversions of rental units to
condominiums unless the vacancy rate in Newport Beach for rental
housing is 5% or higher for four (4) consecutive quarters, and unless the
property owner complies with condominium conversion regulations
contained in Chapter 20.73 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code."
't
Amendments to Housing Element
March 3, 2005
Page 3
The Program inadvertently refers to a chapter of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code that no longer exists. The program should be corrected to
refer to Chapter 20.83 (Residential Condominium Projects).
3) Housing Program 2.2.1 is the statement of the City's inclusionary housing
policy. The program requires the construction of very low- and low- income
units (or the payment of an in -lieu fee) when construction of new units is
proposed. In an effort to promote achievement of the City's housing goals,
staff believes the program should be expanded to also provide for moderate
income units. The existing program reads as follows:
"Continue to require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential
developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five-year
planning period is for an average of 20% of all new housing units to be
affordable to very low- and low-income households. Given
considerations of proper general planning, the Califomia Environmental
Quality Act, project development incentives, and govemment financial
assistance, the City shall either, a) require the production of housing units
affordable to very low- and low - income households, or b) require the
payment of an in -lieu fee, depending on the following criteria for project
size:
1. Projects where ten or fewer housing units are proposed shall be
required to pay the in -lieu fee(s).
2. Projects where the proposal is for more than ten housing units, but
fewer than fifty, shall have the option of providing the units or paying the in-
lieu fee(s).
3. Projects where more than fifty are proposed shall be required to provide
the units.
All required very low- and low- income units shall be provided on -site
unless at an off -site location approved by the City. • Implementation of this
program will occur in conjunction with City approval of any residential
discretionary permits or Tentative Tract maps. To insure compliance with
the 20% affordability requirements, the City will include conditions in the
approval of discretionary permits and Tentative Tract Maps to require
ongoing monitoring of those projects."
The City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) sets forth the need
for 83 moderate - income units and yet the Housing Element does not currently
promote or provide incentives for this type of development. As such,
amending the above housing program would further the City's possibilities in
)5
Amendments to Housing Element
March 3, 2005
Page 4
accomplishing its RHNA goals in the moderate - income category. The
amendment would simply add moderate - income households within this
existing policy.
4) Within the discussion of Housing Affordability on Page 26, the Housing
Element inadvertently includes inconsistent criteria for defining affordability
income categories. The Housing Element incorrectly defines "Very Low
Income" households as those households with annual incomes between 50-
80 percent of the County median household income and "Low Income"
households as those households with annual incomes between 80 -100
percent of the County median household income. The Housing Element
should define "Very Low Income" households as those households with
annual incomes of 50 percent or less of the County median household
income and "Low Income" households as those households with annual
incomes between 50 -80 percent of the County median household income.
The amendment will revise the affordability percentages accordingly.
5) Pages 67 and 68 of the Housing Element provide the base affordability
standards for the purposes of defining income categories and their
applicability. These standards were derived from a strict interpretation of
Section 50093 of the State of California Health and Safety Code. Although
technically correct, the standards create confusion when determining
affordability requirements because both the State Attorney General and State
HCD use a simplified version for defining income categories when
determining the City's share of regional housing needs and for establishing
program affordability requirements. Staff recommends amending the
affordability standards within the Housing Element on pages 67 and 68 to
follow the regulations of Title 25 (Housing and Community Development) of
the California Code of Regulations, Sections 6910 through 6932. The income
groups are defined as follows:
Very Low - income: 50% or less of the area median income, as adjusted for
family size by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
Low - income: 50 % -80% of the area median income, as adjusted for family
size by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Moderate - income: 80 %- 120% of the area median income, as adjusted for
family size by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
Above Moderate - income: 120% + of the area median income, as adjusted
for family size by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
W
Amendments to Housing Element
March 3, 2005
Page 5
Additional clarification and minor formatting changes are also proposed to the
affordability standards applied to rental and ownership housing. All
references to Section §50093 of the State of Califomia Health and Safety
Code will also be eliminated and replaced with a reference to §6932 of the
California Code of Regulations.
Incorporation of these standards will
Housing Element consistent with the
used by both the Attorney General and
Environmental Review
eliminate confusion and make the
income categories and income limits
State HCD.
The proposed action is not defined as a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves general policy and
procedure making activities not associated with a project or a physical change in
the environment (Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines).
Public Notice
Public notice for the March 3, 2005 hearing was printed in the Daily Pilot, in
accordance with Section 65353 of the Government Code. Additionally, this item
was included on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and
on the City's web site.
Alternatives
The Planning Commission has the option to recommend changes to, or against,
the proposed General Plan Amendment.
P pared by: Tff
i L u �\
Tamara Ca bell
Senior Planner, AICP
Jaime Murillo
Assistant Planner
Submitted by:
Patricia Temple
Planning Director
FAUSERSWLN1Shared\PXs1PAs - 2004\PA2004- 235\PCrpt030605.doc
11
Attachment 3
Planning Commission Resolution
0
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-
010 RELATED TO HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS.
(PA 2004 -235)
WHEREAS, the Housing Element was adopted in August of 2003 and
conditionally certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD) in September of 2003. Since then, staff has discovered several discrepancies
requiring revision for consistency and clarification; and
WHEREAS, the City Council initiated amendments to the Housing Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan on November 23, 2004 by adopting a written statement of
intent; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Newport Beach Planning
Commission on March 3, 2005 in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport
Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting
was given in accordance with the Municipal Code and State Law. Evidence, both written
and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting;
and
WHEREAS, additional provisions are also proposed to be included that could
further promote affordable housing construction in the City; and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is not defined as a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves general policy and procedure
making activities not associated with a project or a physical change in the environment
(Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach adopt General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -010 to revise the
Housing Element to eliminate discrepancies and insure consistency within the text,
clarify existing policies and affordability standards, and include provisions to promote
the achievement of the City's housing goals, as shown in Exhibit A.
�`N
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Paae 2 of 2
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2005.
AYES: Eaton, Cole, ToerQe, Tucker,
Selich, McDaniel, Hawkins
19
Larry Tucker, Chairman
BY:
Jeffery Cole, Secretary
�D
Attachment 4
March 3, 2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Planning Commission Minutes 03/03/2005
Eaton,
None
None
City of Newport Beach
McDaniel and Hawkins
Page 4 of 17
ITEM NO.3
PA2004 -235
endments to the Housing Element of the Newport Beach General Plan to eliminat Recommended
:repancies and insure consistency within the text, clarify existing policies and for Approval
rdability standards, and include additional provisions to promote the achievement o
City's housing goals. These amendments include
• Amend Housing Program 1.2.1 to provide consistent dates for the ann
reporting of the Housing Element and General Plan.
• Amend Housing Program 2.1.1 to correct an erroneous reference to
Municipal Code.
• Expand Housing Program 2.2.1 to include provisions for the production
housing affordable to moderate income households.
• Provide consistency within the Housing Element when defining affords
income categories.
. Amend the affordability standards to be consistent with the standards used by
State Department of Housing and Community Development and Office of
Attorney General.
mmissioner Eaton noted his concern with the third provision and if that means tt
larger developers do not have to build any low income units and therefore, th
n't; secondly, does that affect the in -lieu fees eventually because it is not
pensive to build moderate or at least it does not require as much subsidy I
)derate as it does for very low and does that mean that our in -lieu fees will be goi
wn or won't accelerate as much up and therefore the City will also not be able
)vide low and very low income units. Is the combination of that going to be
ncern to HCD eventually if we are not able to meet those things that we a
pposed to be doing in the Housing Element?
ime Murillo answered that we are in the process of drafting an inclusionary Zoni
dinance, which is going to address the affordability requirements based on t
)rated basis of portions of our RHNA figures.
Is. Wood added that we are in the process of working on an in -lieu fee and have been
,orking with the City Council's Affordable Housing Task Force on that, which is
ctually where this proposal arose. We had our consultant look at two scenarios for
ie in -lieu fee, what they call the baseline scenario was the required inclusionary
ousing in -lieu fee per market rate unit if you did not have it apply to moderate income
nits to receive the assistance. With that the fee would have been about $33,000 per
iarket rate unit built. If we make the change to allow moderate income units to qualify,
ie fee reduces to nearly $25,000. There is a difference in what we would get but it still
; so much greater than what we are at today. I think the last one we negotiated wash Aa
file: //H:\Plancomm \2005 \030305.htm 03/14/2005
Planning Commission Minutes 03/03/2005 Page 5 of 17
12,000 per unit. It is still a big move in the right direction. I don't think that HCD
ver need to look at the inclusionary ordinance itself, they are reviewing the Hou
lement and the programs in that as long as we report that we have adopted the
rid are implementing it. As the staff report notes, we do have a need for mode
come units.
Eaton asked when the new proposed fee would go in?
Wood answered that the ordinance will be brought to the City Council shortly al
have this amendment to the Housing Element done because we did not want
g a fee that was inconsistent with the Element.
rperson Tucker asked if that fee ordinance will come before the Planr
mission. He then noted that for the proposals that are out there for Brookfield,
airport, and Lennar in Newport Center, those are going to have to prov
dable units on site because there are more than fifty units.
Wood answered it goes directly to the Council and affirmed the two
:)ner Toerge, referring to item 2 in the staff report, asked how the
is measured for four (4) consecutive quarters, is there a marketing su
aime Murillo answered we survey about 20 of the major rental projects in the City.
Ve have a list of their total units and every quarter we send out a survey on how man)
nits are vacant and available for rent on the first day of every three months. Basically
compile the survey to establish what the total vacancy rate survey is. We average the
wr consecutive quarters to determine what the percentage would be. This survey is
ased on anything over fifteen units.
',ommissioner Hawkins, referring to the insert of moderate income units on item
toted we have a shortfall for 83 moderate - income units currently, do we know what 1
shortfall is on the low and very low income units are? With respect to the 83 modera
ncome, what happens when that need is satisfied under this proposal.
Wood answered this proposal doesn't affect it. The Regional Housing Nee
NA) numbers are supposed to be re -done every five years. It is sometim
nded to seven years or so because the State has not funded the program for t
ional Council of Government. What the community has produced within the pc
or seven year period, I don't think really makes that much difference in what yc
round of numbers come out to be. They look at vacancy rates, total number
s, income levels and allocate on a regional basis into the Counties and then t
my allocates it. They look at employment, so it is a much more complicat
ula. It is not a matter of once you produce these 83 units you are done, the marl
d change over the five years.
Murillo noted that including the Newport Coast annexation area, there is a
for 86 very low income units; and low income units is a total of 148.
(Public comment was opened.
Public comment was closed. a3
file : //H: \Plancomm\2005 \030305.htm 03/14/2005
Planning Commission Minutes 0310312005 Page 6 of 17
otion was made by Commissioner Toerge to adopt General Plan Amendmen
P2004 -010 which is an amendment to the Housinq Element (PA2004 -235).
Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and Hawkins
Noes: None D AFT
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Rudy's Pub and Grill (PA2004 -273) ITEM NO.4
3110 Newport Boulevard I PA2004 -273
ueh, to permit additions and alterations to an existing eating and drinking Approved
blishftWnt. The applicant proposes to add a retractable roof over a portion of the
ling, an exterior patio adjacent to Newport Boulevard and second floor office
z. The dification Permit request is to permit alterations of portions of the firs
and the ne second floor office space that encroach 4 feet into the required 10
alley setback.
Ramirez noted heQhas new proposed changes to the conditions of approval.
iairperson Tucker noted ftiat in the staff report, the conditions that were propose
ire referred to as mitig 'on measures or other items that address u:
aracteristics. The Planning C missioners refer to the condition number so that
is easier for them to just flip backand see what the condition actually said in the to
the staff report. I would like to hav that resume, otherwise we are just hunting ar
cking through each one of the conditibqs and a lot of them are fairly boiler - plate.
nuing, Mr. Ramirez noted:
One that was omitted is a standard condition that requires that a Water Qu
Management Plan be approved by both the Public Works Department and
Building Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
The other two are related to the side walls conditions 2 and 43. Number 42 is
requirement as proposed that a six foot high wall be in ailed along the norther
property line between Rudy's and what is the Ho m Restaurant. Ste
proposes that this condition be removed from the draft res tion after looking
the narrow area, as it might be a problem for security and tra accumulation.
is a'dead' space there and staff believes that it should be left op n.
Condition 43 is a requirement for a three foot wall to be constructed etween
parking lot and the adjacent right -of -way. Staff believes, through world with
applicant and their landscape architect, we can provide landscaping in t t
that would create better aesthetics than a solid wall in that area. Therefore,
recommends this condition be deleted as well.
Ramirez noted that a landscape plan is required to be submitted and approved
Planning Department. He then stated that the applicant believes that there
;ommunication regarding the live entertainment and the request thereof. T
licant desires to retain his right for live entertainment. If the Commission feels tl
jest is workable, we have a draft condition of approval related to I
file : //H: \Plancomm\2005 \030305.htm 03/14/2005