Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01_02-28-2019_ZA_MinutesNEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH CORONA DEL MAR CONFERENCE ROOM (BAY E -1ST FLOOR) THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2019 REGULAR MEETING — 3:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER — The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. Staff Present: Patrick J. Alford, Zoning Administrator Chelsea Crager, Associate Planner Makana Nova, Associate Planner Ben Zdeba, Associate Planner David Lee, Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 14, 2019 Action: Approved IV. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 Newport Beach Country Club — Tennis Review No. DA2008-001 (PA2016-196) Site Location: 1602 East Coast Highway Club Site - Annual Development Agreement Council District 5 Makana Nova, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description, noting that this is a development agreement review and that the Zoning Administrator's authority is limited to a status update regarding whether the terms of the agreement have been met and additional conditions or requirements cannot be imposed. Ms. Nova provided a brief status update. The Zoning Administrator confirmed with Ms. Nova that development had not yet occurred on the site and no public benefit received. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke and acknowledged that the Coastal Commission had previously approved a coastal development permit and expressed doubt that Coastal Commission was aware of the 10 -year development agreement. He noted that this coastal development permit had been allowed to expire. He also commented that the project development protected by the Development Agreement and the associated General Plan amendment are not acknowledged in the City's General Plan Land Use Element. In response to the Zoning Administrator's inquiry, Mr. Mosher expressed doubt that the development agreement was valid, but noted that he did not object to the applicant's good faith compliance with the terms of the development agreement. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. As the applicant's representative arrived, the Zoning Administrator reopened the public hearing. Roy Roberson of Land Strategies, LLC, on behalf of Golf -Realty Fund, O'Hill Properties, stated that he had reviewed the staff report and was available for questions. Page 1 of 6 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/28/2019 The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. The Zoning Administrator received and filed the annual development agreement review. Action: Received and Filed ITEM NO. 3 Anderson Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-117 (PA2018-252) Site Location: 6710 West Ocean Front Council District 1 Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the request is for a coastal development permit to allow the demolition of an existing single-family dwelling and the construction of a new three-story, 2,606 -square -foot, single-family residence and an attached 450 -square -foot, two -car garage. Ms. Whelan confirmed that vehicular access to the project site is currently on Orange Street and will continue under the proposed development. Staff investigated the feasibility of relocating vehicular access to the abutting alley; however, the City Traffic Engineer determined this to be infeasible because the existing development on the opposite side of the alley causes a substandard back-up area. Allowing the continued use of the curb cut on Orange Street would not result in the loss of existing on -street parking spaces, which is consistent with certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) Implementation Plan Section 21.40.070. B.1(a). Ms. Whelan added that the existing patio encroachment on the ocean front is allowed pursuant to the certified LCP and had a previously approved encroachment permit for a 10 -foot patio encroachment. However, it had come to staff's attention that the the existing patio had been increased to 15 feet without the approval of an amended encroachment permit or associated fee. Therefore, although there were no proposed imorivements to the existing patio, a condition is included to require an amendeded encroahcment permit with an associated increased annual fee and a potential coastal development permit from Coastal Commission. Applicant Caitlin Smith of Brandon Architects, on behalf of the Mr. and Mrs. Anderson, stated that she had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke and thanked staff for catching the discrepancy of the extension of the existing patio encroachment. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. The Zoning Administrator noted the importance of the revised encroachment permit and the increased associated fee, as these fees are used to mitigate the impact to public access created by the encroachment. Action: Approved ITEM NO.4 Bassaly Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-055 (PA2018-131) Site Location: 1350 East Ocean Front Council District 1 Ben Zdeba, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant requests a coastal development permit to demolish an existing single-family residence and to construct a new three-story, single- family residence with an attached three -car garage that complies with all development standards both in the Zoning Code and Implementation Plan. He stated the project site is located on the corner of F Street and East Ocean Front with the coast visible through the street end. He indicated that although the proposed structure is closer to the F Street frontage, it removes landscaping and provides additional architectural interest with increased articulation and treatment that may help to enhance any views offered through the F Street end. Page 2 of 6 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/28/2019 Applicant Karen Otis of Otis Architecture, on behalf of Bassaly, LLC, stated that they had reviewed the draft resolution and agree with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 5 Orchid St One, LLC Residential Condominiums Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2018-037 (PA2018-264) Site Location: 414 and 414'/2 Orchid Avenue Council District 6 David Lee, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the project was a tentative parcel map for two -unit condominium purposes within the R-2 Zoning District. A single-family residence was demolished and a new duplex is under construction. The project is not located in the Coastal Zone and therefore no coastal development permit is required. No waiver of Title 19 is proposed. Applicant Guy Alexander, Jr. stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke and questioned why the project did not include an assigned County Tentative Parcel Map number. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. Mr. Lee replied that Public Works Department does not require a County Tentative Parcel Map number at the time of the Zoning Administrator approval. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 6 ADG Investments, LP Residential Condominiums Tentative Parcel Map No. NP 2018- 039 (PA2018-259) Site Location: 423 and 423'/2 Poinsettia Avenue Council District 6 Chelsea Crager, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the project was a tentative parcel map for two -unit condominium purposes within the R-2 Zoning District. An existing duplex was demolished and a new duplex is under construction. The project is not located in the Coastal Zone and therefore no coastal development permit is required. No waiver of Title 19 is proposed. Applicant's representative James "Buzz" Person on behalf of ADG Investments, LP, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 7 516 Narcissus, LLC Residential Condominiums Tentative Parcel Map No. NP 2018-038 (PA2018-260) Site Location: 516 and 516 % Narcissus Avenue Council District 6 Page 3 of 6 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/28/2019 Chelsea Crager, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the project was a tentative parcel map for two -unit condominium purposes within the R-2 Zoning District. An existing duplex was demolished and a new duplex is under construction. The project is not located in the Coastal Zone and therefore no coastal development permit is required. No waiver of Title 19 is proposed. Applicant's representative James "Buzz" Person, on behalf of 516 Narcissus, LLC, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 8 Calacci Residential Demolition Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-073 (PA2018- 170) Site Location: 400 South Bay Front, Units 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Council District 5 Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the application is for a coastal development permit to demolish the existing two structures containing a total of five units. No new construction is included in this application. A staff approval was previously approved that confirmed compliance with the MELO act regarding the conversion or demolition of affordable housing in the coastal zone. Staff recommended approval of the project. The Zoning Administrator asked for clarification regarding compliance with the Mello Act and verified that proper documentation had been provided as evidence. Applicant Caitlin Smith of Brandon Architects, on behalf of the owner, stated that they had reviewed the draft resolution and agree with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 9 Ataii Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-104 (PA2018-248) Site Location: 914 East Ocean Front, Units A, B and C Council District 1 Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the application is for a coastal development permit to demolish the existing non -conforming triplex and construct a new three-story single-family residence. In 2015, the subject property provided a dedication at the rear of the property for the purpose of constructing an alley in the future. The future alley would run from A to B Street. The adjacent site has also provided a dedication, but has not demolished the encroaching structures yet. Nonetheless, the project has been designed to comply with the future alley design. During construction, personnel would be required to access the site via private property and no materials would be allowed to be stored on public property including the alley. A construction management plan is required prior to permit issuance. Staff received public comments on the project mainly regarding construction hazards, noise, and liability. Ms. Westmoreland stated that any conflicts between neighbors would be considered a civil matter. Construction noise would be regulated by the Municipal Code. The Zoning Administrator asked for clarification regarding evidence demonstrating compliance with the Mello Act. Ms. Westmoreland related that a previous staff approval that confirmed compliance with the Mello Act regarding the conversion or demolition of affordable housing in the coastal zone. Page 4of6 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/28/2019 The Zoning Administrator asked staff when the alley is eventually constructed if there would be sufficient conditions in the CDP or in the Code to confirm that the garage would be utilized as intended. Staff stated that Public Works had reviewed the design for maneuverability and found it acceptable. Applicant Rod Jeheber of R.A. Residential Design Inc., on behalf of the owner, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Kelly O'Neil, spoke and stated that she lives near the property and is concerned about access and materials storage for the site during construction since there is no access to the site. She asked about shoring for the property and insurance for grading. She asked if they can wait until September to start construction. She discussed how her views may be blocked. The Zoning Administrator reminded the applicant that the City's discretion is limited because the application is for a coastal development permit. As indicated by staff, protection of private views is not a concern during this process. There were no other public comments. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. Staff responded to the Ms. O'Neil stating that concerns pertaining to the boardwalk were analyzed as part of this project. Staff included conditions to ensure that the boardwalk is never used for access or for materials storage or staging. The applicant can provide clarity on the storage of materials and access via private property that would be outlined in the construction management plan. The applicant stated that Marco, the adjacent neighbor at 912 East Ocean Front would allow the subject applicant access during construction by demolishing the existing structure that blocks access via the alley. They would plan to do demolition and construction at the same time. He also stated that it takes at least a year to build a home, so not doing any construction in the summer would be challenging. Staff clarified that the City does not require insurance from the builder and any disputes including damage to neighboring structures would be considered a civil matter. The plans would be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure code requirements are met. Staff stated that they did not anticipate any potential impacts to public access or beach parking during the construction of the residence as compared to another standard single-family residence under construction in the area. Again, they cannot utilize public property for construction purposes. Lastly, staff stated that the project complies with setbacks and the City does not currently regulate or protect public views. This report analyzed impacts to public views. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 10 Baywood Apartments Signage Comprehensive Sign Program No. CS2018-007 and Modification Permit No. MD2018-008 (PA2018-244) Site Location: 1 Baywood Drive Council District 5 Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the application is for a comprehensive sign program and modification permit to authorize signage for the Baywood Apartments community. The area is governed by the PC -3 Harbor View Hills Planned Community. Staff described the purpose of the application. The apartment complex is larger than most apartment complexes in the City. The site is adjacent to three large frontages. Existing monument signage on MacArthur Boulevard would be removed and replaced further north with a slim leasing pole style sign. The monuments are significantly spaced and provide adequate visibility. Page 5 of 6 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/28/2019 Applicant Shawna Schaffner of CAA Planning, on behalf of the owner, stated that she had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, asked about the reasoning for the seven -foot high signs stating that they seemed excessive. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. The Zoning Administrator stated that the purpose of signage is for identification and not advertising. The applicant responded that the site contains 30 -year-old signage and the subject site is generally surrounded by tall mature trees. The City's Zoning Code, in areas where there is not a Planned Community (PC) text, allows monument signs up to 6 feet high. Therefore, the proposed monument signs would normally be able to be approved via an administrative approval of a sign program. She also stated that the PC text is over 30 years old and the new signage would allow for larger letters that are easier to read. Lastly, the applicant stated that they would be removing an existing monument sign from the corner of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road, which is one of the busier intersections in the City. Staff stated that the signs could never utilize offsite commercial messages, like a billboard, since it is prohibited by code. The applicant stated that the signs are not for the purpose of advertising. Action: Approved V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS One member of the public, Jim Mosher, noted that the California Coastal Commission publishes extension requests in their Deputy Director's Report (available to the public) and inquired if the City will be following a similar process. The Zoning Administrator indicated that he was not aware of any pending extension requests; however he will look into the extension process. VI. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 3:55 p.m. The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on February 22, 2019, at 8:00 a.m. on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on February 22, 2019, at 8:00 a.m. Patrick J. Alford Zoning Administrator Page 6 of 6