Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/10/1994ft 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: MINUTES reuluwy 10, 1774 ROLL CALL INDEX Present * * * * * * * All Commissioners were present. (Commissioner Pomeroy arrived at 7:33 p.m.) sss EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, City Attorney sss William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of January 20 1994 Minutes If 1120/ Kotion * Motion was made and voted on to approve the January 20, 1994, %yes * * * * * Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. abstain * - 3bsent sss Public Comments: Public Comments No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non- agenda items. s x x Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the Agenda James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, February 4, 1994, in front of City Hall. sxs COMUSSIONERS . L 16 11 ki iy1l toLy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH t:el.,..o... 111 100d - LVV1 LLQl� LV, 1JJT ROLL CALL INDEX Modification No. 4155 (Public Hearing) Item No.. Request to consider an appeal of the decision of the Modifications Mod 4155 Committee's approval of Modification No. 4155 which involves a Approved request to permit the construction of a 5 foot 6 inch high fence and barbecue to encroach 5 feet into the required 5 foot rear yard setback along the alley and within the required sight distance triangle at the intersection of two alleys. The Zoning Code prohibits any construction within the rear yard setback, or any construction in excess of 3 feet within the sight distance triangle. LOCATION: Portions of Lots 16 and 17, Block 15, Section 1, Balboa Island, located at 107 Collins Avenue, on the westerly side of Collins Avenue, between South Bay Front and Park Avenue, on Balboa Island. ONE: R -1.5 APPLICANT: Martineau Trust, Balboa Island OWNER: Same as applicant ames Hewicker, Planning Director, addressed the numerous letters that were distributed to the Planning Commission prior to he public hearing from adjacent property owners. James Braider, Assistant City Traffic Engineer, submitted a letter dated February 1994, stating that one traffic accident occurred in the alley in 1976, involving a vehicle colliding with a.parked car. Don Webb, City Engineer, discussed the memorandum that he istributed to the Planning Commission. He explained that it is he Public Works Department's position that the 5 foot rear yard etback and the sight distance triangle at the intersection of the o alleys be maintained completely. However, as a compromise, e recommended that Condition No. 2, Exhibit "A ", be modified follows if the Planning Commission allowed an encroachment to the rear yard setback. That construction be allowed to encroach -2- • MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ---- In Anne 1V, i»� ROLL CALL INDEX in the setback area by 3 -112 feet as shown in the attached Drawing A. No construction may occur in the sight distance triangular area of the intersection of the two alleys. The property owner shall record a covenant that indicates that the encroaching improvements in the S foot set back area will be removed at such time the property at 114 Turquoise Avenue is redeveloped with a 5 foot alley setback In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy regarding the drawing that the Public Works submitted describing . the recommended rear yard setback encroachment and the sight distance triangle, Mr. Webb explained that the cutoff that one of the residents proposed was to permit a zero foot rear yard setback adjacent to the alley, with the fence maintaining a 5 foot setback at the apex where the two alleys intersect. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. John Martineau, applicant and trustee, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that the former fence was removed when the house was renovated and the intent was to reconstruct a more attractive fence. There is no history of traffic accidents in the alley between Collins Avenue and Turquoise Avenue with the exception of an accident that involved a vehicle colliding with a parked car in 1976. He pointed out that encroachments exist in the alley, and he distributed photographs depicting the encroachments. The driveway on the subject property is situated so as to allow a turning area for the automobiles directly across the alley. He said that if the fence would be cut to a 90 degree angle to the South Bay Front alley that it would provide sight distance at the intersection of the two alleys. The majority of the neighbors are supportive of the proposed project, and they are supportive to cut off the corner of the fence as suggested. On December 21, 1993, the Modifications Committee found that preserving the sight distance triangle was not necessary to improve the sight line at the intersection of the alleys. In reference to Mr. Webb's recommended aforementioned modified Condition No. 2, Exhibit "A ", he questioned if the remaining 1 -1/2 feet would be utilized because there is currently • -3- COADUSlSIONERs MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH zee.,....,... i n i aoe ROLL CALL INDEX an adequate turning area in the alley, and further it would be difficult to implement the recommended covenant. Discussion ensued pertaining to Mr. Martineau's request concerning the cutting back of the proposed fence with a 90 degree angle at the intersection of the two alleys. Motion Motion was made to approve Modification No. 4155 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", and to modify Condition No. 2 as recommended by the Public Works Department. substitute Commissioner Pomeroy made a substitute motion to approve Motion * Modification No. 4155 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", in accordance with the recommendation of the applicant, and to modify Condition No. 2. In response to a question posed by Commissioner DiSano, Mr. Webb explained that the reason to maintain the sight distance triangle is because of the traffic along the South Bay Front alley. He expressed a concern that traffic coming out of the alley between Collins Avenue and Turquoise Avenue should provide as much sight distance as possible for traffic coming into the alley. For example, 15 feet at 5 miles an hour means that there would be approximately two seconds for a driver to react whereas 5 feet at 5 miles an hour, there may be less than one second to react. Commissioner Glover stated that after visiting the subject site that she would support the substitute motion. Commissioner Edwards requested that a plan be attached to the motion in accordance with the proposal. Commissioner Gifford supported the substitute motion based on her experience of observing an automobile parked in the alley at the subject site. She determined that there is a tendency for residents to park in the setback area and as soon as a setback is widened adjacent to an alley, the tendency would be increased. -4 L COMMSSIONERS 4P Ik1r)11► [oil llal.'1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH For,r,�n, in loos ROLL CALL INDEX She concluded that the 5 foot encroachment would be appropriate as requested by the applicant. Commissioner Ridgeway supported the substitute motion on the basis that he was not persuaded that sight distance is as important between the two alleys. Commissioner DiSano stated that he would not support the substitute motion based on the previous circulation problems on the Balboa Peninsula. Ayes * * * * * Substitute motion was voted on to approve Modification No. 4155 noes * * subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", as modified. SUBSTPrUTE MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposed construction will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or increase any detrimental effect of the existing use. 2. That the approved construction is a logical use of the property that would be precluded by strict application of the zoning requirements for this District. 3. That the approved development will not affect vehicular maneuverability within the alley. 4. That the approved development will not affect vehicular access to the residential property on the opposite side of the alley. 5. That the approved development will not affect sight distance at the intersection of the two subject alleys. 6. That the approved development will not affect sight distance at the intersection of the subject driveway and the adjoining alley. -5- rOO�'�,c10c�od�dr\ 0�4 4d�oso CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Feb ucuy iv, BM ROLL CALL INDEX 7. That the project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved, revised plot plan designated as Plan "A" in the Modification file. 2. That the fence and barbecue shall not exceed 5 feet 6 inches in height. A triangular area adjacent to the intersection of the two alleys shall be kept clear of improvements above grade. The subject area shall be ' created by a line perpendicular with the South Bay Front alley which begins at the point where the five foot rear yard setback line intersects the South Bay Front alley property line of the property. Amendment No. 792 (Public Hearinel Item No.2 Request to consider an amendment of a portion of Districting (Res (ReS 1346 Map No. 3 so as to establish a 20 foot front yard setback adjacent to the Rivo Alto Channel, for all of the properties within Blocks Approved 433 and 434, Canal Section, which currently require a 35 foot front yard setback from the water side property .line. LOCATION: Lots 1 -5, Block 433 and Lots 1 -7, Block 434, Canal Section, located at 405 -409 Clubhouse Avenue and 3311 -3413 Finley Avenue, on the northeasterly side of the Rivo Alto Channel between 35th Street and Clubhouse Avenue, in West Newport. -6- cn�`FNORM -'Zyo • MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH on 1'GVl LLGLI�' 1V, 177T [LOLL CALL IMEX APPLICANTS: Clubhouse Avenue and Finley Avenue Property Owners, Newport Beach OWNERS: Same as applicants The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Walter Talleur, Jr. 3311 Finley Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants. He said that the purpose of the 20 foot front yard setback would be to increase the buildable area of the lots. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. lotion * Motion was made and voted on to adopt Resolution No. 1346, Ayes recommending to the City Council Amendment No. 792. J MOTION CARRIED. i Y Y DISCUSSION ITEMS: Discussi Items General Plan Amendment 94 -1 GPA 94 -1 Request to initiate amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan as follows: A. Granville Condominium Site: Request to amend the Land A.Granvi Use Element and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan so as to redesignate a portion of Block 900, Newport Center from Multi - Family Residential to Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial uses and increase r the allowable square footage by 5,000 square feet. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to enable the construction of a management office for the Granville Condominiums and other office development. -7- on r z ���'o sq'l'o • MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Febru 10 1994 ds U ary , ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Hewicker stated that the applicant requesting the General Plan Amendment is the same applicant who is converting the Granville Apartments to condominium units. The 5,000 square feet is intended for office use and not necessarily for office space for the Granville Condominiums. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to initiate General Plan ayes * * Amendment No. 94 -1(A) Granville Condominium Site. MOTION floes * * CARRIED. B. Edward's Cinemas, Newport Center Site: Request to B,Edwar amend the Land Use Element so as to allow the addition of three theaters with a total of 897 seats to the Edward's Big Newport Cinemas, on property formerly occupied by • the Good Earth Restaurant. The Planning Commission and Bob Burnham, City Attorney discussed the issue of Conflict of Interest. * Motion was made and voted on to initiate General Plan Ktion Sll Ayes Amendment 94-1 (B) Edwards Cinemas, Newport Center Site. MOTION CARRIED. C. Request to amend the Circulation Element and the Local C.LCP /L Coastal Program, Land Use Plan so as to downgrade Dover Drive between Irvine Avenue and Westcliff Drive from- a Primary Road (4 -lane divided) to a Commuter Roadway (2- lane undivided); to downgrade 32nd Street between Newport Boulevard and Via Lido from a Secondary Road (4 -lane undivided) to a Commuter Roadway (2 -lane undivided); and to update various sections of the Element to reflect current policies and conditions. Motion Motion was made to initiate an amendment to the Circulation and * * the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. * * -8- ds U 4 COMMISSIONERS ��'O��o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES it ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Ridgeway and Mr. Webb discussed the right -of -way and angle parking on 32nd Street. Commissioner DiSano opposed the amendment because of his concern regarding the Circulation Element. Chairman Merrill stated that he has concern regarding the traffic on 16th Street. Motion was voted on to initiate General Plan Amendment 94 -1 (C). MOTION CARRIED. D. Central Balboa Specific Plan: Request to amend the Land D,Centr; Use Element and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Balboa Plan so as to reflect the land use changes proposed as part of the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. Mr. Hewicker reviewed the proposal to amend the Land Use Element and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. Discussion followed regarding the RUDAT Study and the proposed Central Balboa Specific Area Plan. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that he is in support of the residential land use as proposed. Commissioner Glover and Mr. Hewicker discussed the mixed use concept. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to initiate General Plan All Ayes Amendment 94 -1 (D). MOTION CARRIED. i -9- it • L MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 11) 100A ROLL CALL DMEX E. Giordano Annexation: Request to amend the General Plan E. Seawar Land Use Element and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan so as to allow for the annexation of 0.025 acres to the City of Newport Beach in an Area which will be an addendum to the Seaward 17 Annexation for property in the Corona Highlands area. lotion * Motion was made and voted on to initiate General Plan 11 Ayes Amendment 94-1 (E). MOTION CARRIED. * s Amendment No. 793 A793 Request to consider the initiation of an amendment to Title 20 of Set for the Newport Beach Municipal Code revising the Specialty Food public Service provisions so as to: increase the allowable gross floor area hearing or such uses; remove the mandatory off - street parking requirement when such uses are located on property that is nonconforming relative to the commercial off - street parking requirement; increase the number of allowable seats; remove the equirement for Modifications Committee approval of Specialty Food Services; and to establish an administrative permit procedure or Specialty Food Services. Hewicker reviewed the Economic Development Committee's scussions and concerns regarding Specialty Food Uses. The ommission discussed Mr. Hewicker's comments with respect to pecialty food regulations. ommissioner Edwards stated that he was concerned that there ay be individuals on the Economic Development Committee that ay have a special interest regarding specialty food uses, and it othered him from an ethical standpoint. lotion *Motion was made and voted on to set Amendment No. 793 for ,11 Ayes ublic hearing at the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1994. MOTION CARRIED. -10- • L CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ,c L MINUTES T. Ffiti rAT671 11VL4M� 1V, 1JJT ROLL CALL INDEX s s s Amendment No. 794 A794 Request to consider the initiation of amendments to Title 19 and Referred 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to: eliminate the to EDC mandatory Planning Commission review of Final Tract Maps; eliminate the mandatory City Council review of Tentative Tract Maps; and to allow the Modifications Committee to review and approve Tentative Parcel Maps. Mr. Hewicker referred to the addendum to the staff report, and the poll of other jurisdictions in Orange County regarding their processing of Tentative Parcel Maps, Tentative Tract Maps and Final Tract Maps. Six cities within the County have a body other than the Planning Commission or the City Council approving Tentative Parcel Maps. Tentative Parcel Maps can be rather minor in nature and insignificant; however, other such maps can be controversial. He suggested that the Modifications Committee could recommend that the Planning Commission review a project if the issue is controversial. Mr. Hewicker reviewed the time frame and the process that would be required if the Modifications Committee were the agency that the applications would go through originally. Mr. Hewicker distributed a chart to the Planning Commission describing the time frame. He stated that if the Modifications Committee acted on a non - controversial Tentative Parcel Map, the time that would be saved would be 7 days. In response to comments by Chairman Merrill regarding Tentative Tract Maps and Final Tract Maps, Mr. Hewicker stated that they e governed under the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code of the City. The Tentative Tract Maps would not be reviewed by the Modifications Committee. The changes that are being proposed or Tentative Tract Maps are for the Planning Commission to take e final action on Tentative Tract Maps unless they are called up by the City Council, or appealed to the Council, and the changes -11- 4 L MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH rou1LLQ1y 1V, I.YYY ROLL CALL INDEX proposed on Final Tract Maps is that the Final Tract Maps would only go to the City Council. Chairman Merrill stated that Tentative Parcel Maps could be difficult, and it is possible that the time element could be longer than currently. exists if the Modifications Committee were the original body. He suggested that the process not be changed. Commissioner Ridgeway discussed the Modifications Committee fee, and the additional fee if the item would be appealed to the Planning Commission. He agreed that the less controversial applications could be simplified and he would he supportive if there would be a method to limit the authority of the Modifications Committee to the typical Tentative Parcel Map. He said that the issues concerning the Tentative Parcel Map are expense, time, and should the Planning Commission give up the authority to oversee the maps. He stated that several residents have considered Certificates of Compliance for typical maps. Commissioner Pomeroy agreed that maps that are not controversial could be simplified. He addressed Section 19.12.040 (K) "Right of Review by City Council or Planning Commission" d the intent of the wording four affirmative votes. lotion -. * Motion was made to set Amendment No. 794 for public bearing, at the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1994. ommissioner Gifford suggested that the Economic Development Committee consider the information that. Mr. Hewicker provided e Planning Commission to see if it is still their opinion that this kind of a change would be warranted. Following a discussion by the Commission regarding the foregoing ,mended recommendation, the motion was amended to refer Amendment ,11 Ayes No. 794 to the Economic Development Committee for further review. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. -12- 4 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH on February 10, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Amendment No. 795 A795 Request to consider the initiation of amendments to Titles 19 and set for 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to reduce the public required appeal period for Planning Commission actions to less hearing than 21 days. In response to a question posed by Chairman Merrill, William L.aycock, Current Planning Manager, replied that a Planning Commission item could be appealed or called up by the City Council within 14 days instead of 21 days. lotion Motion was made and voted on to set Amendment No. 795 for L11 Ayes public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 1994. MOTION CARRIED. .. s Discussion of Joint Meeting with the Economic Development ofJoint Committee. of Joint EDC /PC Chairman Merrill recommended that the Economic Development Committee meet with the Planning Commission at 7:30 p.m. on February 24, 1994. lotion Motion was made and voted on to meet with the Economic kll Ayes Development Committee at 7:30 p.m., February 24, 1994. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: 8:57 p.m. Adjourn ANNE K GIFFORD, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -13- on