HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_Myers Property Alternative Setback Determination_PA2017-184CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
February 8, 2018
C'9CF00.N% Agenda Item No. 3
SUBJECT: Myers Property Alternative Setback Determination (PA2017-184)
SITE LOCATION: 358 Dahlia Place
Staff Approval No. SA2017-009
APPLICANT: Andrew Goetz, Architect
OWNER: The Myers Family Trust
PLANNER: Gregg Ramirez, Principal Planner
949-644-3219, gramirez@newportbeachca.gov
DISCUSSION
This item was continued from the January 18, 2018 meeting to February 8, 2018 by the
Planning Commission at the request of staff. Staff now requests that this item be removed
from calendar to allow further review of the proposal and, procedural and permitting
requirements.
Public Comments
Since the January 18, 2018 meeting, staff has received eight comment letters from the
public. That correspondence is included as Attachment PCI.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that the Planning Commission remove this item from the calendar.
Prepared by:
�3.
Gregg mirez
Principal Planner
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Public Comments
Submitted by:
Jim Campbell
Deputy Community Development Director
1
9
Attachment No. PC 1
Public Comments
3
V�
QP
�.
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez. Greoa
Subject:
Fwd: 358 Dahlia Place Corona del Mar
Date:
Friday, ]anuary 19, 2018 9:22:53 AM
For your staff report when this item goes back to PC.
Brittany
Begin forwarded message:
From: <beagymnastemac.com>
Date: January 18, 2018 at 9:57:44 PM PST
To:<nlanningcommissioners(&.newnortbeachca.gov>
Subject: 358 Dahlia Place Corona del Mar
I am writing in support of the changed/reduced setbacks that have been proposed
on the property. Corona del Mar is not a cookie cutter community where every
lot is the same size and shape, on the same terrain, and all built en masse during a
short time period. There are lots of all sorts of size parcels and houses built at
varying times over the last century. The City is correct to look at each
circumstance on a case by case basis and actually look to see what sort of impact,
if any, will be made to the community. On this unique lot, it is appropriate to
grant the builder to utilize more of the land because it does not block anyone's
view or come closer to anyone's house. Allowing the additional building area
will hardly create a "big box" house, but it WILL allow the builder to sell the
property for a higher price because he has built a larger house. That results in
higher property taxes for the City and higher property values for the neighbors.
This is a unique circumstance that is a win-win for everyone. It's a shame that
some people have such a knee-jerk negative reaction to something being built that
will ENHANCE the community that they can't open their mind to the facts of the
case and they just want to start another letter -writing campaign.
Respectfully submitted,
Paula Tribble
5
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez. Greoa
Subject:
Fwd: 358 Dahlia. CDM
Date:
Saturday, 3anuary 20, 2018 1:40:36 PM
For your staff report when this item goes back to PC.
Begin forwarded message
From: Rich LaPorte <61 gro email crnr>
Date: January 20, 2018 at 1:07:19 PM PST
To:<nlanningcommissioners&newnortbeachca.gov>
Subject: 358 Dahlia. CDM
"Skinner misleading posts"
Here are some real FACTS AND HISTORY about the zoning request
unbiased and true.
Lots in our City were subdivided long ago, not just in CDM, but
down the Peninsula, Balboa Island and other areas. Thru history
many long and skinny lots were broken up, turned around, merged,
and modified.
Building setbacks are applied as blanket over ENTIRE AREAS.
Setbacks are not micro -managed to EVERY LOCATION OR
PROPERTY ORIENTIATION. !
Lots, or portions of lots that are 30' wide or 40' etc. CAN have
a 20' setback on the long direction. This condition would limit
a house to LESS THAN 10 FEET WIDE. !! thus a worthless
piece of land.
M
Before the 2010 City code update, planners and commissioners would
HAVE TO go thru the variance process, to allow a proportional
development. This is expensive and time consuming, especially in
light of the net result was MOSTLY looking at the lot size and
applying a proportional analysts. THERE WAS NO SPECIAL PRIVILAGE.
THE CITY LEADERS, CITIZEN COMMITTIEES , PLANNERS reviewed
the process and VOTED, BY A MAJORITY that the setback issue and
allowable development can be better managed by a director review.
It is ignorant to assume 1 size fits all (building setbacks), and anytime
a unique location , or non typical property is evaluated, hoards of
protestors are warranted.
CLAIMING SPECIAL PRIVIALGE, IS A NOT TRUE
THE WHICH HUNT MENTALITY NEEDS TO STOP
Rich LaPorte, Realtor®
Founder
60 One Property Group
Tel: 949.903.9314
Fax: 949-264-1198
101 Eel ni WMTM I M.�
011 1-
DRE#01465403
7
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez, Greoa
Subject:
Fwd: 358 Dahlia
Date:
Sunday, January 21, 2018 5:33:31 PM
For your staff report when this item goes back to PC.
Brittany
Begin forwarded message:
From: Susan Skinner <susanskinner949&gmail.com>
Date: January 21, 2018 at 5:24:06 PM PST
To:<nlanningcommissioners(&.newnortbeachca.gov>
Subject: 358 Dahlia
Dear Planning Commissioners,
Thank you for continuing the hearing for 358 Dahlia on Thursday night. I don't
know if that was to allow you more time to hear the Koll project or to have more
time to consider this project, but I hope the latter is the case.
I'd like to share with you that I took the time to go back to the origins of
20.30.110C, which was part of the complete revamp of the code in 2010. There
was a study session with the city council on Oct 13, 2009 in which this was
discussed and a powerpoint was presented. (Ironically, my parent's home was
used as the example of a lot that would fall under this code.) The video and
powerpoint are here: httn://newnewportbeach.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?
publish id=a8c5Ic4f-72b6-11e5-8170404da2064c47. This was item #3 in the
study session and there is a hyperlink to the powerpoint in the adjacent agenda.
There was not any discussion that I heard about the reduction of setbacks as part
of this, but this is how code 20.30.110C seems to have been applied recently.
Certainly, in the case of 358 Dahlia, in which no apparent changes in setback
location (front/back, etc) have been even asked for, it seems inappropriately
applied.
The application for a larger house for 3200 Ocean Blvd has started as an
alternative setback request, although I am aware of this only through the
developer sharing his application with me and no info through the city, so that
may have changed. Information about these applications are NOT available until
the staff report is posted a few days prior to the meeting, per Mr. Ramirez when I
asked him for data in advance of the staff report.
So you know, before I passed out flyers in CdM, I reached out to 3 staff members
via Email and phone to let them know that I would be passing out flyers in a few
days and asking why this wasn't a variance request. I did not get a reply. I did
ask the Planning Director about this on Thursday night and had a very cordial
conversation. He indicated that there had been discussion as to whether this
I
needed to be a variance or not, but that this is how it had been done in the past
I appreciated that honesty and do recognize that this is how similar requests were
processed in the past and that it might have been seen as a routine request that
didn't generate substantial consideration for anything but an alternative setback
request. However, having now had this called to your attention, I how you will
agree that this request is most appropriate for a variance rather than an alternative
setback request and require this of the applicant going forward.
I would point out, as I did in my first letter, that if only some properties can be
processed as an alternative setback request and receive increase in buildable area
and others are in standard locations and cannot, you are creating an unequal
privilege for some homeowners and I would expect that would create an
unnecessary legal liability for the city.
Finally, we come to the issue of trust. Seimone and Jim and I have had some
conversations about trust and how development issues at the city are handled. I
would propose to you that the best trust building tool the city can have is crystal
clear rules that are transparently applied equally to everyone. From my
perspective, that does not currently exist. That becomes much, much more
important when we consider the upcoming General Plan update.
Those of you who lived in Newport Beach in 2014 will remember Measure Y, the
last General Plan update that went down in flames at the polls because it asked
voters if they would like to remove traffic and density when it actually added
substantial new developments to the city. The 2006 General Plan update (in
which the 2200 'floating' dwelling units, some of which will be used for Koll,
were added) barely passed (by 53%) without any substantial opposition. The lack
of opposition was because it was not recognized at the time what the GP was
actually doing. That error will not occur again.
I currently have very little trust that the next General Plan will have transparency
and accountability and issues like 358 Dahlia, 2607 Ocean Blvd and even Mr.
Torres' inaccurate legal advice all contribute to an increasing suspicion rather than
improving trust. It is going to be a huge challenge in this environment to pass the
next General Plan and the only way that I see that happening is if that trust is re-
established prior to the GP vote.
All of that last bit is a bit off topic for 358 Dahlia, of course, but I would
appreciate having your consideration for a variance (or have someone give me a
meaningful answer as to why a variance is not necessary in this situation.)
I appreciate your consideration,
Susan Skinner
0
From: Ramirez. Brittany
To: Ramirez, Greoc
Subject: FW: NO to Big Box Houses
Date: Monday, January 22, 20188:21:25 AM
Attachments: imaae002 ona
For use in your staff report when this item goes back to PC.
Thank you,
BRITTANY RAMIREZ
Community Development Department
Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director
bramirez(g)newoortbeachca. aov
949-644-3232
From: mwroosev [mailto:mwroosev@uci.edul
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 4:36 PM
To: Planning Commissioners<PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: susanskinner949@gmail.com
Subject: NO to Big Box Houses
I would like to support Susan Skinner in her efforts to stop destroying everything that is
special about Corona del Mar village.
I have lived here for thirty years, and it saddens me to see these enormous homes fill the
entire lots that they are built on. Some of them are not even occupied.
They do not represent the village, which has been one of the attractions of living and
visiting here. They are destroying it. I walk the area daily, and I listen to the comments of
other walkers, and they are not complimentary.
I was not able to attend the meeting, but I do hope that those folks who make decisions
on the size of future homes will take into consideration the wishes of those of us who
manage very well, in smaller attractive homes that do represent what Corona del Mar
means to this community.
Thank you.
Mary Roosevelt
U Virus -free. www.avast.com
10
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez, Greoa
Subject:
FW: 358 Dahlia PI
Date:
Monday, ]anuary 22, 2018 2:22:58 PM
Attachments:
imaae001 ono
For use in your staff report when this item returns to PC.
Thankyou,
BRITTANY RAMIREZ
Community Development Department
Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director
bramirezOnewnortbeachca. aov
949-644-3232
From: Ross Armstrong [mailto:rossstjohnarmstrong@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 2:17 PM
To: Planning Commissioners<PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Andrew Goetz <goetzarch@earthlink.net>
Subject: 358 Dahlia PI
Dear Sir,
I wanted to add my thoughts, as well as personal note, regarding the proposed development of
358 Dahlia Place.
As a licensed Real Estate Agent in Newport Beach, I have been helping the Myers Family
since 2015.
Over the last two and a half years, through no fault of their own, they have been harassed by
developers and had to fight litigation to remove a Lis Pendens placed on the property by one
of these unscrupulous outfits. Mr Goetz was brought in to help the Myers produce a top
quality design to enhance the site. This will not be a Big Box Mansion but a well designed
new home that will improve the overall appearance and property values for all the surrounding
neighbors.
The property is, as some other residents have pointed out, in extremely bad condition and
desperately needs attention in the shape of a new structure. The site is unique both in respect
of access and proximity to other homes (especially as this lot backs onto Bayside).
The Myers are elderly and in poor health and the negative campaign created by Susan Skinner
has delivered extreme discomfort, anxiety and stress for these wonderful people.
I strongly urge the City to grant this alternative setback approval so the Myers can move on
and they can experience the same benefits that other CdM homeowners have enjoyed through
similar development requests.
Best,
Ross
11
Ross St.John Armstrong
Berkshire Hathaway California Properties
Newport Beach CA
BRE# 01909131
I•' 11111 1
VA ZT711109WAMM1 I mum N 11. •1• Item11
12
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez, Greoa
Subject:
FW: 358 Dahlia Place
Date:
Tuesday, January 23, 2018 11:28:34 AM
For use in your staff report when this item returns to PC.
Thank you,
BRITTANY RAMIREZ
Community Development Department
Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director
bramirez@newportbeachca.gov
949-644-3232
-----Original Message -----
From.: Troy Wu [mailto:troy3yu(c gmailxom]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 8:56 PM
To: Planning Commissioners <PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: susanskinner949@gmail.com
Subject: Re: 358 Dahlia Place
> On Jan 22, 2018, at 8:42 PM, Troy Wu. <troywu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear CDM planning commisioner,
> My name is Troy Wu and I am the homeowner at 419 Begonia Avenue. I was recently notified that project plans
at 358 Dahlia call for a reduction in setback which will in turn allow for a home to be built facing my property
instead of a green cliff in Bayside impacting my privacy. I am opposed to granting this exception and would like to
discuss further. I can be reached via email at troywu@gmail.com or 2137123895.
> Troy Wu, MD
13
From:
Ramirez. Brittany
To:
Ramirez, Gregg
Subject:
FW: Setback variances
Date:
Friday, ]anuary 26, 2018 7:44:48 AM
Attachments:
imaoe001 on -
Hi Gregg,
I'm not certain this is regarding Dahlia specifically, as it is a general message about
setbacks, but wanted to forward it on for your interpretation.
Thank you,
BRITTANY RAMIREZ
Community Development Department
Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director
bramirezn newoortbeachca. oov
949-644-3232
From: Lisa Walker [mailtc:lisaflys@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 7:41 PM
To: Planning Commissioners<PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Setback variances
Dear Newport/CDM Planning Commissioner,
I am writing to express my, concerns over the exceptions & variances to setbacks being
approved in CDM.
It has come to my attention that the following section fo the code which was written to allow
for reorientation has been being misapplied to allow for reductions in setbacks.
The code section is:
"Alternative Setback Area Location. In cases where the orientation of an
existing lot and the application of the setback area are not consistent with the
character or general orientation of other lots in the vicinity, the Director may
redefine the location of the front, side, and rear setback areas to be consistent
with surrounding properties. The reorientation of setback areas is not
applicable to the Bluff Overlay District."
Note that this code section does NOT allow reducing setbacks from the edge of
the property, but just reorienting them. Requests for narrower setbacks should
occur with a variance request, which requires a much higher standard to be
met, but the city has been using this section of code to grant properties the
right to adjust setbacks and build larger homes. The city should consistently
follow its own zoning rules.
Thanks,
Lisa Walker
616 1/2 Begonia Ave
14
Corona Del Mar
Mobile 949.275.1830
Thanks,
Lisa
15
From: Ramirez. Brittany
To: Ramirez, Greoa
Subject: FW: Zoning Rules for Setback of property 358 Dahlia
Date: Friday, ]anuary 26, 2018 11:51:09 AM
For use in your staff report when this item returns to PC.
BRITTANY RAMIREZ
Community Development Department
Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director
bramirez@newportbeachca.gov
949-644-3232
-----Original Message -----
From: Danielle Miller[mailto:daniellekmiller3kicloud.com]
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 11:34 AM
To: Planning Commissioners <PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Zoning Rules for Setback of property 358 Dahlia
Hello,
My name is Danielle Miller. I am a home owner in Corona Del Mar. I have owned various homes in CDM over the
last 18 years. I am reaching out about oposing granting exceptions to our zoning rules to reduce setbacks. The
zoning rule for required setback distance protects the beauty and long term value of our community. Giving
exception to this the rule for 358 Dahlia Place will negatively impact the beauty and value of our community. I
hope my input is helpful in keeping the zoning rule in place.
Thank you!
10