HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-2023 - Planning CommissionPage 1 of 5
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 2023 REGULAR MEETING – 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Secretary Klaustermeier III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Sarah Klaustermeier, Commissioner Tristan Harris, Commissioner Lee Lowrey
ABSENT: None Staff Present: Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Senior Planner Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner David Lee, and Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS None V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JANUARY 5, 2023 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Secretary Klaustermeier and seconded by Vice Chair Rosene to approve the minutes of the January 5, 2023 meeting with Mr. Mosher’s edits.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Klaustermeier, Lowrey, and Rosene NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 RICHARDSON RESIDENCE VARIANCE (PA2021-119) Site Location: 361 Newport Glen Court Summary:
A request to construct an addition of approximately 665 square feet to an existing 3,740-square-foot
single-family residence that would encroach up to 10 feet into the required 20-foot rear setback. The proposed addition would be constructed within the footprint of an existing raised deck. The project
complies with all other development standards such as lot coverage, height, and parking, and no other deviations are requested. Recommended Action:
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 19, 2023
Page 2 of 5
1. Conduct a public hearing; and 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution PC2023-006 approving PA2021-119 for a variance to construct a residential addition.
Senior Planner Westmoreland used a presentation to review the Richardson residence variance application, project location, Newport Glen Court Community map, existing conditions and deck, proposed project architectural drawing, key findings for approval, unique driveway access, on-site turn around, lot coverage, compatibility, alternatives explored, and recommended action. In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s question, Senior Planner Westmoreland confirmed that there are no
easements in place for access. Commissioners reported no ex parte communications.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Courtney and Damien Richardson thanked staff and the Planning Commission for their efforts, provided family history and project background, noted an improved access to outdoor and indoor space, privacy, and home
value from this project, and agreed to the conditions of approval.
Jim Mosher suggested that staff remind applicants of the lobbyist registration requirements and questioned the uniqueness of the lot.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Harris thought it was a unique lot with limited opportunities.
Vice Chair Rosene thought staff was thoughtful to add rebuilding standards in the conditions of approval.
Motion made by Commissioner Harris and seconded by Vice Chair Rosene to approve the item as
recommended.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Klaustermeier, Lowrey, and Rosene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 DAY RESIDENCE (PA2020-350) Site Location: 704 East Ocean Front, Units A and B Summary: A request for a coastal development permit to demolish an existing two (2)-story duplex and construct a new three (3)-story 2,972-square-foot duplex with an attached 397-square-foot two (2)-car garage and a two (2)-car carport. Additionally, the applicant requests the following deviations from the residential development standards of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC): a. Variance: Request to encroach three (3) feet into the required 3-foot right side setback area; and b. Major Site Development Review: Request to increase the allowed height from a base height limit of 24 feet for flat roofs and 29 feet for sloping roofs to a maximum height limit of 28 feet for flat roofs and 33 feet for sloping roofs. Recommended Action:
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 19, 2023
Page 3 of 5
1. Conduct a public hearing; and
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 under Class 4 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution PC2023-007 approving PA2020-350 for a variance, major site development review, and coastal development permit to construct a duplex.
Associate Planner Lee used a presentation to review the vicinity map, project location and request, proposed project elevation renderings, variance request, setback variance photos, height increase request and photos, massing comparison sketch, transition in height photo, Arts Foundation donation, Coastal Development
Permit, public view from the boardwalk, Balboa Boulevard, and Promontory Point, and recommended action.
In response to Secretary Klaustermeier’s question, Associate Planner Lee noted that a typical lot width in the R2 zone is 30 feet with some instances that are narrower, the current lot width of 27 feet, and the three-foot variance bringing the lot to a standard R2 zone width size.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s question, Associate Planner Lee confirmed that the adjacent lots are 27 feet wide.
Commissioners reported no ex parte communications.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Bret Deptmers, applicant, used a presentation to show the aerial view from the alley further back and close up,
before and after images from southeast and southwest perspectives, renderings, photos of vagrant activity and police reports, safety concerns for the three-foot space between buildings at night, view from a side bedroom,
and a zero-lot line photo of a neighboring building. Mr. Day thanked Associate Planner Lee for his hard work and noted building the project for his family to enjoy for the next 20 years and to create a safe community. The
applicant thanked the staff for their help throughout the process, read a letter from a supportive neighbor, named an additional supportive neighbor, and agreed to the recommended conditions of approval.
In response to Secretary Klaustermeier’s question, Mr. Day reported that he did not have any conversations
with the adjacent Inn regarding a setback reduction between the two properties.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s question, Mr. Day noted that he is not aware if the property has a Short-Term Lodging (STL) permit and that his plans are for his family and friends to use the property.
In response to Commissioner Harris’ question, the applicant noted that the railing wraps around the third floor
deck in the front and the brick is a little taller and runs back.
Jim Mosher questioned how the height increase might affect the beach view for hotel guests, the uniqueness of the property for a variance request, and the project amenities included to justify the height increase. He thought the height increase itself had to provide a listed public benefit and the $30,000 donation to the City was not in that category and the reason why he was bothered by it.
Mr. Day relayed that the gate next to the hotel must always be open access and cannot be locked in order to
provide for a fire escape, there are no windows on the hotel side for views, and the third story is set back to avoid view blockage for the hotel. The applicant noted that the house is designed with the rooms on the perimeter to get light and air, all utilities
are in the center and against the wall, people break in the gates, gates are a bandage, the applicant tried to make a design to mitigate issues, the site is unique, the owner gets a view west and northwest as opposed to three views by other residents, and the project includes a mitigated design that is set back with a low scale and considers building standards and drainage.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 19, 2023
Page 4 of 5
Associate Planner Lee corrected his previous comment and stated that the side setback measurement requirement for the hotel if it were to be developed is five feet because it is abutting residential.
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill confirmed no existing STL permit in the City’s records and does not anticipate one being issued because the City is capped and noted the project amenities are acceptable if the applicant agrees. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
In response to Secretary Klaustermeier’s question, Associate Planner Lee used an image to support that staff does not think the views will be impacted on the hotel side, the hotel is three stories in the rear, and the possibility of the view from hotel rooms on the left could be peripherally impacted by the new height but not
obstructed. He indicated that while the City did not correspond with the hotel, notice of the request was provided. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Secretary Klaustermeier to approve as recommended.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Klaustermeier, and Lowrey NOES: Rosene ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None VIII. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None ITEM NO. 5 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA Deputy Community Development Director Campbell announced that the February 9 Planning Commission meeting is cancelled, the next meeting will be on February 23 with five items scheduled, and the first joint General Plan Update Steering Committee and General Plan Advisory Committee meeting took place and will likely meet monthly to work on updating the General Plan and use consultants. He indicated that updates will be provided to the Planning Commission. ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES None IX. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 7:21 p.m.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
January 19, 2023
The agenda for the January 19, 2023, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, January
12, 2023, at 05:49 p.m. in the Chambers binder, 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 Thursday, January 12,
2023, at 05:56 p.m.
Sarah Klaustermeier, Secretary
Page 5 ofS