Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01_02-27-2018_ZA_MinutesNEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach Corona del Mar Conference Room (Bay E -1st Floor) Tuesday, February 27, 2018 REGULAR MEETING 3:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER — The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. Staff Present: Patrick J. Alford, Zoning Administrator Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner Chelsea Crager, Assistant Planner Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner Liane Schuller, Contract Planner David Lee, Planning Technician II. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ITEM NO. 1 Minutes of February 15, 2018 Action: Approved 02/27/2018 IV. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO.2 Roberts Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-081 (PA2017-187) Site Address: 1549 Ocean Boulevard Council District 1 Chelsea Crager, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the project was a coastal development permit to allow a 342 -square -foot addition and remodel to an existing residence in the R-1 zoning district. The project included a 77 -square -foot second floor addition, 265 -square -foot third floor addition, and roof deck. The project site has a slope of 5 percent and the proposed height of the project was 29 feet. The project is more than 200 feet from coastal waters and does not impact public access or views. Applicant Dave Eslinger of SeaPointe Construction, on behalf of Kevin Roberts, 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 stated that his comments applied to all coastal development permits on the agenda. He questioned how many sections of the Local Coastal Program were applicable to the project. He stated that the facts in support of findings addressing height of the proposed project were vague. He questioned how many public access and recreation policies were applicable to the project. He stated that the presence of residential lots near the coast inhibits coastal access. He questioned intent of a condition of approval stating that the approval expires unless exercised within 24 months. The Zoning Administrator asked Mr. Mosher if there were any particular standards of the Local Coastal Program that he felt the project was inconsistent with. Mr. Mosher stated he did not know how many applicable standards there were. The Zoning Administrator asked if there were any standards that he thinks Page 1 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 are applicable that the project is inconsistent with. Mr. Mosher stated that he had not given that enough thought to answer correctly. There were no other public comments. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. The Zoning Administrator instructed staff to respond to the public comments and questions without engaging in hypothetical situations regarding exercising of the permit. Specific issues will be addressed at that time. Assistant Planner Crager stated that the application complies with all applicable standards of the Local Coastal Program as stated in the facts in support of findings. The permit will be considered exercised when the applicant is in the process of obtaining a building permit. The Zoning Administrator asked staff if some coastal development permits may require additional requirements post issuance of the permit. Assistant Planner Crager confirmed. The Zoning Administrator asked if there is ongoing review in some cases beyond the coastal development permit. Assistant Planner Crager confirmed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 3 Wong Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-098 (PA2017-229) Site Address: 1316 West Bay Avenue Council District 1 Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the request is for a coastal development permit for the demolition of an existing single-family dwelling and the construction of a new 3 -story, single-family dwelling and two -car garage. The project includes the reinforcement of the existing concrete bulkhead and a cantilevered concrete deck. The project meets all of the required development standards. The development fronts the Newport Bay and is protected by an existing concrete bulkhead. A bulkhead conditions report was prepared and concluded that the bulkhead is in good condition; and with the reinforced bulkhead cantilevered deck, and raised curb to 10 feet NAVD88; the project will not be adversely impacted by potential coastal hazards including sea level rise over the life of the development. The cantilevered deck meets all of the design requirements found in Title 21 and Title 17 in Municipal Code. The project does impact coastal views or roads. Ms. Whelan added the following corrections to the draft resolution: In Finding. A. 4. The Municipal Code reference should be 21.30.C.050.G.5. and in the following sentence insert five feet beyond bulkhead. In Conditions of Approval No. 6 strike the language and insert the following language: 'The cantilevered deck shall comply with the design conditions of Municipal Code Sections 21.30 C.050.G.5. and 17.35.020 C. In Condition of Approval No. 7 add after building permit "and harbor permit'. Applicant John Morgan, Architect stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions including the changes and confirmed understanding of the Code requirements of the cantilevered deck. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke and stated that the discussion regarding the impact on coastal views with the evaluation based on the appearance of project and the public viewpoint at Veterans Park should also include the views from the street ends around the harbor. There were no other public comments. Staff explained that the public viewpoint at Veterans Park is called for in the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan to be protected as an identified public coastal view. The Zoning Administrator added that the analysis is that the project does not impede this coastal view with meeting all of the required development standards including height, floor area, and setbacks. Action: Approved Page 2 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 ITEM NO.4 Wortsman Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-013 (PA2018-035) Site Address: 309 33rd Street Council District 1 David Lee, Planning Technician, provided a brief project description stating that the requested coastal development permit was to allow for the remodel and addition of a new roof deck and stair enclosure to an existing duplex. Mr. Lee stated that the height will increase from the existing 20 feet 1 inch to 28 feet, measured above existing grade, which is an increase of 38 percent. Mr. Lee clarified that although the residence is nonconforming due to parking, no additional floor area is proposed and the development conforms to other standards of the Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, including height, setbacks, and floor area. The existing duplex is consistent with the Two -Unit Residential zoning. Mr. Lee also stated that since the development is approximately 215 feet away from the nearest bulkhead, a water quality management plan and construction pollution prevention plan were not required. Finally, Mr. Lee stated that the project is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline, and that it would not affect public recreation, access, or views. The Zoning Administrator clarified that the proposed increase in height is above the existing structure, not above the height limit. Mr. Lee stated that the proposed overall height is under the maximum height limit, and that because the height increase is exceeding ten percent, it does not qualify for an exemption for a coastal development permit. Applicant Bryan Price, on behalf of the Wortsman family, 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. 5 Patterson Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-085 (PA2017-199) Site Address: 312 35th Street Council District # Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the application is a coastal development permit to allow a single-family residence to be demolished and a new three-story duplex with attached garage and covered carports. The development complies with the development standards identified in the zoning code and Implementation Plan (IP). This site is an inland lot and not located between the first public road and the sea or shoreline. The property is located in the categorical exclusion area, but the proposed floor area requires a coastal development permit. The project is located in the appeal area so it is not eligible for a waiver. Water quality is addressed through an approved water quality management plan. Lastly, the finished floor of the proposed dwelling is 9.0 feet NAVD88, which is compliant with the standard. The Applicant Bill Caskey was not present at the hearing, but Ms. Westmoreland stated that Mr. Caskey and the owner had previously indicated acceptance of the conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, asked what is the ratio for buildable area and floor area for this project. There were no other public comments. Ms. Westmoreland responded to Mr. Mosher, stating that the floor area will be approximately two times the buildable area, which is allowed by the zoning code and IP. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment the public hearing was closed. Page 3 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 Action: Approved ITEM NO. 6 Agape Art Collective Minor Use Permit No. UP2017-031 (PA2017-232) Site Address: 365 Old Newport Boulevard Council District 2 Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the application is for a minor use permit to allow the operation of a tattoo business in conjunction with an artist's studio. The artist studio is permitted by right within the Office General zoning designation, whereas the tattoo operation is considered personal services, restricted pursuant to the zoning code and requires this minor use permit. The proposed studio is located within the northernmost building at 365 Old Newport Boulevard in one of two second floor tenant spaces. No construction is proposed. The existing site is considered non -conforming due to a lack of parking; however, per the zoning code a new use may occupy the space so long as the demand does not exceed 1 space per 250 square feet of floor area. The same standard would apply if a new retail or service use were to occupy one of the tenant spaces. Ms. Westmoreland stated that the proposed operation would be from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. daily with appointments concentrated in the evening hours to help alleviate parking concerns. There would be a maximum of three tattoo artists proposed as part of the project and they would be required to obtain applicable County health department approvals. The proposed use would operate similar to other service uses such as beauty parlors and barbers, which are permitted service uses in this zone. Ms. Westmoreland discussed a few notable conditions. She stated that no outdoor seating is allowed, including the balcony. No one under the age of 18 is permitted in the studio and there will be no appointments or walk-ins after 9 p.m. Ms. Westmoreland discussed the public comments, which were mainly related to parking, use type, and security. Many of the security concerns discussed would be within the purview of the owner, versus the individual tenant, such as site lighting, improvements, etc. There are several conditions in place to prevent loitering outside of the business. Parking is non -conforming so any use within this space would be required to meet the 1 space per 250 square feet maximum rate, whether it is retail, take-out service limited, or a tattoo shop. As stated as a fact in support of Finding C, staff noted that this would be the only tattoo service within this area of the City; therefore, there would not be an overconcentration of this use type within the area. There are currently 3 tattoo businesses on the Peninsula and one in west Newport. Lastly, no residential owners have provided comments on this project. Today she also received 7 additional public comments in support of the project, from neighbors of the Applicant's Costa Mesa location and customers of this location. Ms. Westmoreland recommended approval of this minor use permit. The Zoning Administrator asked Ms. Westmoreland if this application had been reviewed by the Police Department. Ms. Westmoreland responded that the application was not reviewed by the Police Department, but that it was reviewed by Code Enforcement and conditioned to address concerns. Zoning Administrator stated that there were concerns with lengthy stays by the subject clientele. He previously had asked staff to speak with the City traffic engineers to see if this would have any effect on the parking supply in the area. Ms. Westmoreland responded that she spoke with Public Works and their general comment was that they do not look at that level of detail on a private development site, and they do not regulate how many minutes someone can be there, but they would assume a lower turnover in parking would be associated with having a longer stay and lower demand. In terms of having reserved spaces or tow away areas, if someone at the site were to have an official reserved space that was actually enforceable for towing or police action, they would need to meet with the Police Department to make sure that it complies with their standards. Page 4 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 The Zoning Administrator stated that the definition of personal services restricted under 20.70 lists other examples of restricted uses such as day spas, healing arts, and tanning salons. He asked Ms. Westmoreland, based on her knowledge of the project site and surrounding area, if there is a high concentration of these uses in the area. Ms. Westmoreland responded that there is not an overconcentration of tattoo services based on a google street map view and visits to the site. She stated that she did not observe any other uses that fall under this definition such as a day spa, and was not aware of other such uses in the building or immediate vicinity. Applicant Jake Mello stated that he is a long time resident of Newport, and that he has an existing shop in Costa Mesa. The public comment letters were from his current neighbors that had nice things to say. He stated that he is ready to move on into a private studio. He stated that he wants to do it the right way and obtain this permit. He stated that his tattoo appointments would be rare, and that this is not a typical tattoo shop. The main use of the space is for use as an artist's studio where he can work on various mediums. He has clientele such as players on the Anaheim Angels and musicians. He stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. He also clarified that he included a proposal for up to three stations, but expects that he will likely only utilize two. He wanted the flexibility for the space. He stated that he has conditions for parking in his lease. The Zoning Administrator stated that the minor use permit, if authorized, would run with the land. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The Zoning Administrator stated that he is concerned about ambiguity in the zoning code regarding personal services, restricted land uses. It is unusual to have this information in a definition section, and he is not sure if it provides guidance or regulation on these uses. He read the definition of the Personal Services, Restricted land use. He stated that it does not provide any real guidance beyond that, and staff mentioned overconcentration; this speaks to dispersal not necessarily over concentration of these uses. He stated that he did some research as well and although there does not appear to be a concentration of these uses, there seem to be a number of these restricted uses in this corridor. He would like to send the project to the Planning Commission so we can receive additional guidance on this larger issue of dispersal of uses since there is ambiguity. Zoning Administrator asked the Applicant if there would be an undue hardship if we are able to place it on the next available planning commission hearing. The Applicant stated that his lease is starting on March 1 s', but that it is a conditional lease. If he does not get the space, then the lease is no longer relevant and they have his deposit. Zoning Administrator noted that placing the project on the next Planning Commission agenda may be a quicker process, as the project would be subject to a two-week appeal period if approved today. Ms. Westmoreland noted that the next hearing is around March 22nd, and that the applicant would still be subject to a two-week appeal period. The applicant said that he could not speak on behalf of the owner of the property. As far as the surrounding area, he stated he was not aware of any similar service uses in the area and that there are restaurants and an interior design studio, and similar uses. The Zoning Administrator stated that he is going to refer this item to the Planning Commission to allow for additional guidance on the information contained in the definition. He stated that this is his action, and he hopes this will not be a great inconvenience to the applicant. Action: Referred to Planning Commission Page 5 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 ITEM NO.7 Cefalia Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-074 (PA2017-178) Site Address: 2123 East Balboa Boulevard Council District 1 Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval a coastal development permit (CDP) to allow the demolition of an existing single-family residence and the construction of a new 3,830 square foot, 2 -story home and attached 3 -car garage. He clarified that the staff report and resolution incorrectly stated that the proposed residence would be three stories. Mr. Murillo also explained that the proposed residence would comply with all applicable development standards including height, setbacks, floor area limits, and that no deviations are requested. Due to the proximity to the harbor, a Water Quality Management Plan was prepared and approved for this project. Lastly, Mr. Murillo explained that approval of the CDP will not affect the public's ability to access, use or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. Applicant Walt Bushman, on behalf of the Jim Cefalia, 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 requested clarification of the property owner's affiliation with other developments in the City. Property Owner, Jim Cefalia, responded with clarification. There were no other public comments. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 8 Bengston Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017.024 (PA2017.058) Site Address: 111 8th Street Council District 1 Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval a coastal development permit (CDP) to allow the demolition of an existing single-family residence and attached garage and the construction of a new three-story, 3,380 square foot single-family residence with an attached garage. The project also includes hardscape, drainage, and landscaping. Mr. Murillo explained that the proposed residence complies with all applicable development standards including height, setbacks, and floor area limits. Lastly, Mr. Murillo explained that approval of the CDP will not affect the public's ability to access, use or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. Ana Sachse, on behalf of the property owner Chris Bengtson, stated that she 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. 9 Altieri Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-065 (PA2017-154) Site Address: 6310 West Ocean Front Council District 1 Liane Schuller, Contract Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval to demolish an existing duplex and construct a new 2,475 -square -foot single-family residence and attached two -car garage. The site is in the R-2 Zoning District, which allows single- and two -unit residential development. The development under review with this application includes only those Page 6 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 improvements proposed within the confines of the private property. Prior owners of the property were granted a revocable encroachment permit by the Public Works Department to maintain low patio walls and a flat patio within a defined area between the private property and the public beach access. Any construction activity within the approved encroachment area will require a separate review and approval. The proposed residence is consistent with all applicable zoning code standards, including parking, height, setbacks and floor area. The proposed development also complies with the standards and approval requirements of the City's Local Coastal Program. The property is currently developed with a residential duplex, which will be removed and replaced with a new single-family residence. The existing development does not currently provide nor does it inhibit public coastal access, and the proposed development does not change that condition. The site is located between the nearest public road and the shoreline, at the corner of Ocean Front and Cedar Street. Lateral coastal access is provided by the public beach in front of the project site. Vertical access to the public beach is provided at street -ends throughout the neighborhood, including Cedar Street. The site is not located near any public coastal viewpoints or coastal view roads identified by the Local Coastal Plan. For this reason, and because the design complies with applicable height and setback standards, approval of the CDP will not affect the public's ability to access, use or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities Architect Ron Ritner, on behalf of property owners Paul and Carol Altieri, stated that they had reviewed the draft resolution and agree with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Tevis Hill, requested clarification about work proposed within the encroachment area. Staff confirmed that no work is being authorized within the encroachment area at this time and the low walls would remain. There were no other public comments Action: Approved ITEM NO. 10 Guida Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-102 (PA2017-239) Site Address: 501 Via Lido Soud Council District 1 Liane Schuller, Contract Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 6,786 -square -foot single- family residence. The site is located in the R-1 Zone, and the proposed development is consistent with all applicable zoning code standards. The site contains a private seawall/bulkhead along the waterway which will be reinforced and repaired. The proposed development complies with the City's Local Coastal Program. Lateral coastal access is provided by adjacent small public beach areas with access from the water. Vertical access is provided by several street -ends on the island, including Via Koron immediately adjacent to the project site Applicant Caitlin Smith of Brandon Architects, on behalf of property owners John and Julie Guida, stated that they had reviewed the draft resolution and agree with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. The owners of property at 111 Via Koron, John and Jane Della Grotta, spoke regarding the impact of various neighborhood construction projects on their property and on the nearby beach. There were no other public comments. In response to the Zoning Administrator's inquiry, staff confirmed that additional conditions of approval would be added to the Resolution to require project construction fencing and to clearly state that all construction activity, materials and equipment would be kept on site and away from the sandy beach area. Action: Approved Page 7 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 02/27/2018 ITEM NO. 11 Todd Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-105 (PA2017-247) Site Address: 41 Beacon Bay Council District 5 Liane Schuller, Contract Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 4,596 -square -foot single- family residence with attached three -car garage. The project site is located in R-2 Zoning District and proposed development complies with applicable zoning code standards, including parking, height, setbacks and floor area. The property is located approximately 385 feet from the public beach and vertical coastal access is provided at several street -ends within the neighborhood. The nearest vertical access point to the public beach is located directly south of the site, at the Shelter Cove street -end. Due to the distance of the proposed development from identified public viewpoints and the project's compliance with height and setbacks, the project will not impact the public's ability to access, use or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. Architect Jeff Benson, on behalf of the property owner Michael Todd, stated that they had reviewed the draft resolution and agree with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, questioned the relevance of the staff report reference to a mapped public viewpoint located some distance from the project site. In response, staff clarified that coastal view impacts had been evaluated at the site, and the identified public viewpoint was referenced only to point out the distance of the site to the nearest mapped viewpoint. There were no other public comments. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved E. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS 10 rim F. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 4:37 p.m. The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on February 22, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. in the Chambers binder and 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, 2018, at 1:42 p.m. Patrick J. Alford, Zoning Administrator Page 8 of 8