Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/04/1999CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 Regular Meeting - 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Fuller, Ashley, Selich, Gifford, Kranzley; Hoglund, and Tucker - all present Sharon Z. Wood - Assistant City Manager Patricia L. Temple - Planning Director Robin Clauson - Assistant City Attorney Richard Hoffstadt- Development Engineer Eugenia Garcia - Associate Planner Niki Kallikounis- Planning Secretary • Chairman Selich, on behalf of the Commission and himself, welcomed the new Commissioners, Messrs. Hoglund and Tucker to the Planning Commission. Minutes of February 18, 1999: Motion was made by Commissioner Fuller and voted on, to approve as written the February 18th Planning Commission Minutes. Ayes: Fuller, Ashley, Selich, Kronzley Noes: None Absent: Abstain: Hoglund, Tucker Public Comments None Posting of the Agenda: The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, February 26, 1999 Minutes Approved Public Comments Posting of the Agenda City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 SUBJECT: Davidsson Residence (D & L Engineering, applicant) 3000 and 3002 Breakers Drive • Amendment No. 882 • Resubdivision No.1059 (Continued from February 18, 1999) Amendment to revise Districting Map No. 18 to establish a 5 foot front yard setback on Breakers Drive in conjunction with the resubdivision of two parcels of land for the purpose of reorienting the front of the lots to Breakers Drive. An exception to the Subdivision code is also requested because the interior parcel is less than the required 50 foot lot width and 5,000 sq. ft. total area for interior lots, and the corner parcel is less than the required 60 foot lot width and 6,000 sq. ft. total area for corner lots. • Mrs. Garcia stated that there were two main issues regarding the proposed project, compliance with subdivision requirements and setbacks. She noted that there are three critical findings that must be made to approve an exception to the subdivision code, Approval of the project will allow both properties to operate independently of each with separate access for each property. The proposed amendment will establish 5 -foot front yard setback on Breakers Drive, which is consistent • with development along Breakers. Mrs. Garcia also noted that staff has also received two letters from the Breakers Drive Community Associations regarding potential parking problems in the area. Mrs. Garcia explained that part of the demolition of the front building, which is at 3000 Breakers Drive, includes a car port that is currently occupied with storage materials. She stated it has come to staff's attention that perhaps the parking is a problem because the garages may not be used for parking vehicles. Mrs. Garcia stated that staff will have Code Enforcement follow -up on that and make sure the garages are accessible for parking to allay any problems in the area. Mrs. Garcia provided the Commission with photographs of the carport and storage area at 3000 Breakers. Mrs. Garcia pointed out that the second floor above is the area to be demolished so that the 3002 property can gain access to their garage. • Commissioner Fuller referred to the staff report, and asked for clarification of the lot sizes provided. Mrs. Garcia confirmed that 2689 square feet is the correct number. Commissioner Fuller said if that change were made there then they would also make the change under Resubdivision No. 1059, page 9, Item 3, second bullet point. Mrs. Garcia agreed. Commissioner Fuller referred to page 6, the 4th line from the bottom, under Amendment No. 882, it says, "...the exception of both rear yards, which • are 2 feet and 5 feet, instead of 10 feet...," he asked if that is referring to INDEX Item No. 1 Amendment No. 882 Resubdivision No. 1059 Approved City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 the setbacks. Mrs. Garcia responded yes. Commissioner Fuller asked if it should be 3 feet? Mrs. Garcia clarified that the rear yard setback will be required to be 10 feet, and that existing buildings are currently set back respectively. Commissioner Fuller asked if they are deleting some parking area? Mrs. Garcia stated she is not sure whether the carport is currently being used, but both 2- family dwellings have 2 enclosed parking spaces, which is the minimum required by code. Commissioner Fuller asked if, after demolition, this would still comply? Mrs. Garcia responded yes. Commissioner Ashley asked if the two communications received from the Board of Directors of the Breakers Community Association were signed? Mrs. Garcia responded that they were received unsigned. Commissioner Ashley asked if we know that the letters are authentic and sent by the Breakers Association? Mrs. Garcia noted she received a call from Mr. Jack Larson who said he represented the Board of Directors, and he also came in to look at the plans. Assistant City Attorney Clausen stated because there is not a signed letter, the letter can be considered with the weight it carries. • Chairman Selich referred to the photograph of the property and asked if there would be sufficient room in front of the garage for two off - street parking spaces? Mrs. Garcia noted for clarification, in front of the 3002 Breakers Drive property, which is the interior lot, there is approximately 23 to 24 feet in the front of the garage. Chairman Selich noted, of all existing parking spaces, whether they are being used or not, that this would be losing one parking space, the carport, and asked if that is correct. Mrs. Garcia responded that is correct. Public Comment opened. Luc Jeudy, 418 Santa Ana Avenue, Newport Beach, applicant, requested the approval of his request. Chairman Selich asked Mr. Jeudy if he is in agreement with the conditions of approval. Mr. Jeudy stated he is in agreement with the findings. Commissioner Fuller asked Mr. Jeudy how long he anticipates the improvements will stay there and what plans does he have beyond this project? Mr. Jeudy said a demolishing permit has been applied for and will be started as soon as they have the permit. Commissioner Fuller asked, going beyond that, what are Mr. Jeudy's plans to demolish both buildings ?, Mr. Jeudy stated that those buildings will remain and be improved, depending on the owner's desires. Commissioner Fuller suggested that if Mr. Jeudy were to demolish both buildings, that he could straighten the lot line in the center • and have two lots with more frontage of the ocean. Mr. Jeudy said he INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 • 40 was of the owner is to preserve the two structures after the partial demolition is done, and use the structures as they exist today Charlotte Stevens stated she lives behind the property, and the property in the front is for sale. She is concerned because of the height factor in case they decide to scrape one or two of these buildings. Ms. Stevens stated she does not have any problem with what they are doing now. She wanted to know to whom she could talk to and find out how high they can go in front of her. Ms. Stevens said she has a 4 -story structure, and the property in front of her is a 2 -story structure. She said when she bought the property she was told they could not go higher than 7 -feet and tonight she is hearing other things. Ms. Stevens asked if this is a matter she should be concerned about? Ms. Temple explained that the property Ms. Stevens lives in was built with the benefit of a variance, and is higher than the height limit allows. Ms. Temple stated the two properties under consideration are subject to the height restrictions of the 24 -foot height limit, which allows for an average roof height of 24 -feet above the existing grade, and a maximum ridge height of a pitched roof at 29 -feet. Ms. Temple suggested that Ms. Stevens could make an appointment with staff to review how we determine compliance with the height limit. Ms. Temple noted, in absence of a variance, any structure would have to comply with that. Public Comment closed. Commissioner Gifford made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 1492 recommending to the City Council approval of the Amendment No. 882 and Resubdivision No. 1059 with the Findings and Conditions shown in the staff report. Commissioner Kranzley asked if the motion would include the changes in the staff report? Commissioner Gifford responded it would include the change in the numerical multiplication on page 4, third line down from 2529 square feet to 2689 square feet. The change would also include the numerical figure in Resubdivision 1059, on page 9, item 3, second bullet point. Ayes: Fuller, Tucker, Ashley Selich, Gifford, Kranzley, and Hoglund Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None SUBJECT: Discussion of Planning Commission approach and participation in upcoming General Plan Amendments (Requested by Chairman Selich). Chairman Selich noted that the City Council, a week ago Monday, INDEX Item No. 2 Discussion Discussion continued to March 18, 1999 City of Newport Beach . Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 supported the Planning Commission's recommendation on taking a comprehensive planning approach to Newport Center. He said they did not go with the Planning Commission's recommendation on Cannery Village and voted to initiate that amendment as submitted and not have a review of the Cannery Village plan. Chairman Selich noted that various groups such as the Economic Development Committee, EQAC, SPON and a number of other groups have made appeals to the City Council to take a more comprehensive approach to look at the General Plan. The Council has made the decision to have a community visioning process and then focus on the Airport Area, Newport Center, and the Local Coastal Plan. Chairman Selich explained that the Commission receives a lot of projects very late in the planning process, particularly on the General Plan Amendments. He stated all the work is done and the Commission virtually has no involvement in the general planning process until the final stages when it comes to the Commission for hearing. Then the Commission gets it 4 or 5 days before the hearing, and by the time it gets to them, a lot of things are set in place and they have very little flexibility to make changes. • Chairman Selich noted that in particular in regards to Newport Center, there is an opportunity for the Planning Commission to step up and change how things are done on General Plans. Chairman Selich was concerned if the City Council really understood what the Planning Commission's recommendation was, so he talked to the Mayor and a couple of the Council Members and concluded that they were thinking along the same lines as the Planning Commission in taking their vote. Chairman Selich stated he would like to have a discussion this evening to see how the rest of the Commission feels about taking a different approach on how the General Plan Amendments are done. He stated he would like to focus on Newport Center first because he feels it is an opportunity to take Newport Center and pull it together as a unit. It is a contained area of the City that has the size and scope that they can deal with in a reasonable time frame and approach from a very comprehensive planning point of view. Chairman Selich stated that it seems like every time The Irvine Company wants to do something at Newport Center or Fashion Island, there has been a negative approach to it. This is an opportunity from a planning standpoint to get away from the Land Use Element that we have where we have such specific criteria. It has gotten to the point that in the last cycle of General Plan Amendments a gentleman comes before the Commission and requests an amendment to add 200 square feet to his lobby. That is not a General Plan. One of the staff members has pointed out to Chairman Selich that, in some ways, the Land Use Element is more restrictive than the Zoning Code • because there is so little flexibility in the way that it is laid out. INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 There might be an opportunity to use the Newport Center as a test case to make the Land Use Element more general, and it would be something that over time could be applied to other areas of the City. Also, there is an opportunity to develop a long -range plan for Newport Center. The Irvine Company has presented their submittal on the built -out of Newport Center, but Chairman Selich does not think it is really true. The first factor is that The Irvine Company does not own and control all of the property in Newport Center; there is another amendment submitted by the Pacific Mutual tower that wants to go up. This is an opportunity for the Planning Commission to look at developing some type of long range concept. Chairman Selich noted that looking at The Irvine Company's proposal, depending on economic conditions, is a 5 to 10 year build out, not a 20 -year, long range plan for Newport Center. Chairman Selich noted that Newport Center has been characterized as Newport Beach's downtown, and this is also an opportunity to define what that means. These are some issues that need to be addressed in looking at Newport Center. There is the issue of Newport Beach Country Club. There has been talk of redeveloping the property with residential, or some resort development in conjunction with some residential on their property. There • are parking issues that should be looked at in Newport Center. Although there is plenty of parking in Newport Center, there are distribution issues, particularly in the theater and medical towers areas. There are other areas of Newport Center that have excess parking. Chairman Selich noted that he thought The Irvine Company representative was not forthright at the last meeting when the discussion came up on the open space area regarding the circular palm trees in the entrance of Newport Center as to whether they wanted to encroach into those areas or not. Chairman Selich stated he personally thinks the palm trees are a valuable amenity to the community and would not like to see them go. He stated this is an issue that needs to be addressed. Chairman Selich stated they hear the Council discussing the senior housing/ open space issue on the parcel next to the library. He said this is an opportunity to see whether there should be more residential in Newport Center or not. Also to take a look at the design standards in Newport Center. Newport Center was designed by Pererra back in the 60;s and was designed to be a regional shopping office area at the intersection of two freeways that were never built. Although the design has been changed and modified over the years, it has not been done in an comprehensive overall manner. One of that the things that look odd and out of place is entry from San Miguel from Avocado. Because it was to be freeway, there is a little circle of trees, and these design elements exist throughout Newport Center. Another semi - circle was created with those • elements on MacArthur so that it always looks discordant to drive in and see 6 INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 that. Although it might be a small thing, it is a part of the design of the whole center. Pedestrian circulation has not been completely thought out as things have changed over the years. Chairman . Selich noted that he does not understand the philosophy set -up early on for building heights and view corridors and does not understand how they fit into the scheme of things. Chairman Selich noted there is a circulation problem with the short link of San Miguel between MacArthur and Avocado. There are terrible stacking problems there now particularly with the opening of Corona del Mar Plaza. Chairman Selich stated that he heard a suggestion that he never gave serious thought to until recently, and that is, at some point in time, Avocado and MacArthur were to become one -way couplets. He thinks that idea should be revisited because this would be the ideal time would be now because a transition area would be needed to do it. A transition area still exists at the corner of San Joaquin and MacArthur. Chairman Selich said this is an opportunity to get the land use regulations in proper hierarchy where there would be a generalized General Plan Land Use Element. The types of things that are being put into the Land Use Element • could be appropriately addressed through a specific Planned Community. In response to a Commission question, Planning Director Temple indicated that Newport Center is a combination of conventional zoning and a number of Planned Communities. Chairman Selich stated that a big part of this type of consideration would be how to do the process, so that the Planning Commission could have a say how the plan evolves. He suggested one of the things that could be done is to have study sessions, somewhat early on in the process, so that the Commission could make earlier input. There might be scoping sessions where they would have an opportunity to express what they would like to see in Newport Center and develop some alternatives that people can evaluate. They need to find a way to get property owners involved, and get early community input. Chairman Selich noted that although he focused on Newport Center there are a lot of projects coming up such as the Airport Area. The Economic Development Committee has made a strong recommendation to the City Council that money be funded for a plan in the Airport Area with the next two budget cycles. This recommendation seems to be getting some positive reception from individual Council Members. There is the Local Coastal Plan, which the staff will be doing. The Banning Ranch property being annexed by the City, which is one that should have been planned by the City. There are 50 acres in Newport Beach, and there is a process going on that the Commission is not involved in. There are persons making presentations to different community groups, they are dealing with the County and with our • staff to a degree and yet the Commission has no involvement with what is 7 INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 going on. Commissioner Selich asked Mrs. Wood when Banning Ranch comes in, will the City be able to apply the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and mitigate the traffic of the total project on the streets of Newport Beach and not just on their 50 acres. Mrs. Wood said yes, but Chairman Selich wonders if the Commission is not there early in dealing with this, what will happen when the project comes to the Commission. There will be 50 acres that we will be dealing with officially and the rest will be unofficially since it is outside the City. Chairman Selich stated he feels it would be appropriate for the Commission to be involved in the Banning Ranch project. Commissioner Fuller stated he agrees that the Commission gets items too late. He stated he liked the concept of a study session. Commissioner Fuller feels it would be worthwhile to get involved. He stated one of the issues that they all deal with is the TPO, which is not a General Plan Amendment, but thinks there are items even beyond the General Plan Amendment that he would like a briefing on. Commissioner Fuller stated with the possibility of the Newport Coast, in addition to the Newport Dunes, the Banning Ranch, Newport Center and the Airport Area, there are, some big items that the Commission should be involved in. • Commissioner Selich noted, in his discussions with the Mayor, the Mayor was supportive of the Commission getting involved and filling in this void because the Council wants to do this type of comprehensive planning but does not have the time to do so. Chairman Selich stated that the Mayor suggested the Commission have a joint study session with the Council on the 22nd of March. Commissioner Gifford stated she is very supportive of the general philosophy of having a longer lead -time for the. Commission to become familiarized with the evolution of a project. She stated it is easier to be in tune with something and have input as they go along, so that the evolution of it keeps pace with everybody's thinking. As a specific mechanism that is consistent with that approach, Commissioner Gifford supports study sessions. Commissioner Fuller asked Ms. Temple if there is any precedent for Planning Commissioners having study sessions? Ms. Temple stated the Planning Commission in Newport Beach has held study sessions on a very occasional basis, and usually to have a pre- briefing of a larger project that was coming close to public hearing. Those would generally occur one or two meetings before the regularly scheduled public hearing. Ms. Temple stated that, here in Orange County, she is aware of two agencies that hold regular study sessions, although there could be many more, and they are the Cities of Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa. Mrs. Wood noted in her former city . Claremont, they typically did with both the Planning Commission and the 8 INDEX City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 Architectural Commission. Chairman Selich referred to the Open Space Element that was reviewed about a year ago. He stated that was a project that was in process a long time. The staff worked with the Parks Department and Parks Commission. Chairman Selich stated that is a major element to the General Plan and yet the Commission's attitude when they got it was it is okay with the Parks Commission and so they did not get into it too much Commissioner Gifford stated that one of the comments the Chairman made draws distinction between historical use of study sessions, the idea of having a study session to look at a large project coming up, but taking an integrated approach to planning. Commissioner Gifford said, based on a number of things that are in process and how they relate to the General Plan, she thinks it would be good for the Commission to enter a period of regularly scheduled study sessions. Commissioner Gifford suggested they could be immediately before the Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Kranzley supports the Chairman's suggestions. He stated, historically the Commissioners have met with the developers of the projects on a one -to -one basis over the course of time. Commissioner Kranzley feels it is important that they have the study sessions. • Commissioner Ashley stated that he liked what the Chairman was saying. He noted that, from the point of view of The Irvine Company, they should have no objection on their part. Commissioner Ashley noted they have a lot of very experienced, qualified executives and managers in the company, but they are not above making mistakes. He said there is one thing a developer never really wants to see happen and that is to go to a great expense of preparing a plan, bring it in to the Planning Commission or City Council, and suddenly discover that it is being denied or portions are coming under attach. As a result only portions might be approved and that might throw out the entire plan concept that the company had developed. Commissioner Ashley stated he felt they would look with some favor upon the Commission getting involved with them to make sure that whatever would come from them would conform to whatever policies or implementation measures that would be appropriate. Chairman Selich stated that he is not sure he agrees that The Irvine Company being in complete agreement with this approach because Newport Center, outside of the TPO, is the biggest lightening rod in town when it comes to getting people's emotions up from the planning and development standpoint. The Irvine Company would probably prefer to just go ahead with their amendments as proposed, just dealing with their four or five proposals rather than dealing with the big picture standpoint. Commissioner Ashley noted that with a proposal of 450,000 square feet of • office space in Block 500, it is also proposing to add 1,820 more parking stalls, INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 and there are only two streets that provide entrance to Block 500 parking. He stated there is 180,000 square feet of office space plus some additional floor area in the wings of the buildings attached to the existing twin towers. There is not more than 240,000 square feet total in Block 500. If they are going to be adding 450,000 more square feet they will be more than double the existing amount. Commissioner Ashley stated that he thinks that will exceed the capability of those streets to really be able to accommodate the amount of traffic that will be coming in at peak time. Commissioner Kranzley stated this would be a good opportunity for the Commission to get public input early in the process and they can have an understanding of what the public is thinking before it comes to the hearing. Chairman Selich felt this was also an opportunity to approach it the way planning should be approached, from a policy level on down to the specifics of how many square feet are being put on various parcels and do it in a rational manner. The Commission could set forth a vision or concept of what the community wants Newport Center to be. Commissioner Tucker asked, if the workshops are held, what is conveyed to the applicant? Are the Commissioners encouraging certain things before • they have a full public input? Commissioner Tucker stated, as a developer, likes to hear where his issues are before spending a lot of money, heading in a direction that is not right. He said one of the things the Commissioners need to clarify for themselves before proceeding with the study session mechanism, exactly what the grounds rules are going to be, what they are going to say, and what they will feel free to encourage. Commissioner Tucker stated he would be concerned about prejudging the process at an early stage. • Chairman Selich agreed that the Commissioners have to be careful about that. Chairman Selich also noted that the people who come to the study sessions will have to understand that the Commission is not making decisions at that time but it is an interchange of ideas and things are not being prejudged. Commissioner Fuller feels this will be a great opportunity to keep the Commission informed. He referred to the Bonita Village annexation and noted how there was a lot of material to go through in a short time. Whereas, if the Commission had been in on it from the beginning, the information benefit is worth the time. Chairman Selich suggested the staff put together an outline for a process and bring it back on the 18th to review at the end of the agenda. Chairman Selich suggested that, in addition, to put together an outline of how to approach Newport Center. 10 INDEX City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 Commissioner Ashley stated he is in agreement with the Chairman and what everyone else has been saying. He suggested that the Commission should probably invite Hyatt to meet with them to learn what their intentions may be with respect to expansion or redevelopment of that hotel. Commissioner Ashley also suggested inviting the Newport Dunes. Commissioner Gifford suggested as part of what the staff is going to prepare in terms of an outline for the Newport Center, regardless of what the total plan is, that the Commission get a look at how the Center is regulated today, so they can get a sense of what the lay of the land is. Commissioner Hoglund asked at what point in the process that the developer initiates contact with staff or vice versa. Commissioner Selich explained that staff has a mechanism in the Development Review Committee, which was set up at the direction of the Economic Development Committee. The Development Review Committee is an opportunity for project proponents to discuss their idea on a project very early. All City departments participate and then the project proponent can decide if it is something that they either want to continue or not. The developer then files his application, the environmental process starts, and by the time it gets to the Planning Commission, everything has been mitigated in one form or another and the Commission has not had an • opportunityto get or give any input. After discussion, the Planning Commission generally agreed to explore the possibility of holding regular study sessions, for the purpose of early information sharing, public input and involvement in early planning on both City initiated planning programs (such as the TPO changes) and major development projects (such as the Newport Dunes Hotel). Staff was directed to develop an outline and general set of operational guidelines for the conduct of study sessions, prepare an approach to the consideration of the Newport Center General Plan Amendments, and to provide information on the existing regulatory framework of Newport Center. a.) City Council Follow -up - Oral report by the Assistant City Manager regarding City Council actions related to planning - Mrs. Wood reported the City Council sustained the Planning Commission's recommendation on the initiation of General Plan Amendments, with the exception that the Cannery Village request was allowed to move forward separate from a consideration of the Cannery Village General and Specific Plans; • INDEX Additional Business City of Newport Beach • Planning Commission Minutes March 4, 1999 and the City Council appointed the two new Planning Commissioners, Larry Tucker and Mark Hoglund. b.) Oral report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - Chairman Selich reported that the EDC made its recommendation on the changes to the TPO at its last meeting. In making its recommendation on the changesto the TPO, the EDC also recommended that the level of service standard for the Airport Area should be raised to "E," that the vote to override Ordinance requirements be changed from 4 /5ths to 5 /7ths, that the intersection averaging approach be eliminated in favor of the exempt intersection procedure, that it supports the exempt intersection concept, and that the threshold to require a traffic study be raised from 300 to 500 daily trips. c.) Matters which a Planning Commissionerwould like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - Commissioner Ashley requested that a presentation by Taylor Woodrow Homes on the Banning Ranch project be made to the Planning Commission. d.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future . agenda for action and staff report - None. i e.) Requests for excused absences - Commission Fuller requested to excused from the meeting of March 18th, and Commissioner Tucker requested to be excused from the meeting April 8+h. * *r ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. RICHARD FULLER, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION IF, INDEX Adjournment