Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/06/2008Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission March 6, 2008 Special Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page 1 of 11 file: / /Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn030620081tm 07/15/2008 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Peotter, Cole, Hawkins, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren - Commissioner Cole was excused. STAFF PRESENT: David Lepo, Planning Director ron Harp, Assistant City Attorney ony Brine, Transportation/Development Services Manager Patrick Alford, Senior Planner Jim Campbell, Senior Planner Melinda Gondrez, Assistant Planner Ginger Varin, Administrative Assistant PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on February 29, 2008 HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of February 21, 2008. ITEM NO. 1 Motion was made by Commissioner Toerge and seconded by Commissioner Continued to McDaniel to continue this item to the next meeting of March 20, 2008. 03/20/2008 Ayes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, Toerge, McDaniel and Hillgren Noes: None Excused: Cole SUBJECT: Peter Ferrarini Residence (PA2007 -214) ITEM NO. 2 201 Crystal Avenue PA2007 -214 request to approve a variance to permit a new single - family dwelling to exceed Continued to he maximum permitted floor area limitation. Additionally, the request is foe a 04/17/2008 modification permit to allow the encroachment of the new single - family dwelling into the required setbacks as follows: 14 -feet 8- inches into the 20 -foot front yard setback adjacent to Park Avenue; 1 -foot into the 3 -foot side yard setback for portion of the garage on the northeast side along Crystal Ave; 7 -feet into the 10 foot rear yard setback, and 4 feet into the reversed corner, 6 -foot setback for the rear 20 feet of the northeasterly corner along Crystal Avenue. Ms. Gondrez gave an overview of the staff report. During her presentation, shel file: / /Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn030620081tm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 a correction to Table 3 on Page 11. Eaton asked about the setbacks and compatibility on Gondrez answered that there is no consistent setback they vary from 2 feet 6 inches to 10 feet. Her research ications had been approved at 4 feet. along Park i revealed that iissioner McDaniel noted, as a past resident, that most of the lots lar and small. This is a lifestyle issue, not a square footage issue. ;ks given away effect the lifestyle of the whole community. Most of areas are 1,300 square feet or less and we need to be careful. It ie risibility to protect the island lifestyle and be aware of how others :d by our actions. istant City Attorney Harp asked if Commissioner McDaniel has an interest property adjacent to the project site. iissioner McDaniel noted he moved away about four years ago and did from the subject property for about twelve years and knows the prop He does not know the present owner. id Smith, architect for the subject property, noted setbacks along Park Bn kept in mind in the design phase of the project. The Park Avenue se the proposed project is reasonable and the living square footage is care feet. The 360 square foot two -car garage proposed for the project ay from the living space. Dmmissioner McDaniel noted that each of these lots on the Island are unit id have special characteristics and are all individual. We need to look at ; ake sense out of this individual lot so that it doesn't take away from the lifes your neighbors. Quoting what other people got on your application does ake a lot of sense; what makes sense is, what does this lot need to make asonable place to live and not take away from others? I do not see a need roof fireplace. Smith answered that his client has agreed to eliminate the fireplace on and second floor to assure that there is no projection towards the side y would be anything other than the standard 3 -foot side setback in the area. McDaniel asked if the roof fireplace will be a fire pit? Smith answered it might be a fire pit, but not a fireplace with chimney. issioner McDaniel noted his concern of the doorway that faces Cr s, as it protrudes. Referencing the plans, he asked for clarification. that he has talked to a few of the neighbors. Smith answered the entry door is an in- swinging door. Eaton asked about the arched facade next to the deck. Ir. Smith answered the arched facade was originally on two sides of the deck ive a sense of privacy and enclosure for the chimney . We have made the of remove the arched facade and continue the 42 -inch deck rail around t Page 2 of 11 file:HY: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn03O62008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 Page 3 of 11 westerly side, so there will be no peaked element on that side as was originally Toerge asked if there were plans depicting the proposed changes. Smith presented a floor plan with the omission of the fireplace and the II on the westerly side. Additionally, he has a site plan showing the of the fireplace as well. He wants to make all the changes on the vations prior to submission. :r Ferrarini, the owner, noted he does not want to create any, )propriate or adversarial to the neighbors on the Island. He has worked neighbors in back as well as the one across the street. imissioner Toerge, noting the fireplace has been eliminated totally, asked is something that you want to do? r. Ferrarini answered that the neighbor has questioned the arched facade e westerly wall and so we have removed the fireplace. We want to expedite )proval without impacting the neighbors. comment was opened. Person, representing the Stuhlmullers on Park Avenue, noted he had sent to the Commission of their concerns. He has been in contact with tt itect and due to unresolved issues, asks that this item be continued. ( em is the front yard setback and referenced an exhibit of photos he N n. He explained the various views depicted. He then noted that Finding Fo J not be made and that it would materially affect adversely the health iy of persons residing in the neighborhood. We hope to continue workir the applicant to resolve these issues. A continued item to April 3rd would t nable to his clients and the applicant's representative. Hillgren asked what the issues are to be worked out. Person answered that his clients are concerned with the front yard se starting of where the second floor begins and a tunneling effect of his missioner Hillgren asked if the new building is going to be set back the existing home. Person answered yes. At Commission inquiry, he stated his clients' acks. He noted that it is about a two -foot difference between his e and the proposed project. rman Hawkins asked for, and received, an explanation of the had been introduced. Gondrez noted that on the plans that had been submitted there is a setback on the adjacent property. Eaton asked what is of the most concern, the first floor or setback? Person answered that he has received conflicting information from his file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn03O62008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 is hoping that in the meantime all can come to some conclusion. mmissioner Eaton noted his concern of the overall setback pattern on that Park Avenue. issioner McDaniel noted there is an impact on light and air. A little less feet or pushing a wall back could be responsive to everyone's concerns. i was made to continue this item to April 17, 2008. blic comment was closed. ;sioner Toerge noted variances are significant and change the rules. granted similar variances; there should be drawings depicting the concerned about components impacting adjacent neighbors; and tural solution to mitigate these concerns. He seconded the Motion tc this to April 17, 2008. Eaton noted there should be more setback in the front. ssioner Hillgren noted this is a corner lot with special obligation be pulled back as much as possible. 5sioner McDaniel noted his agreement of pulling the setback in. that the Commission appears interested in seeing a bigger set red along Park Avenue and asked that this be included in the motion. mmissioner Toerge answered he would not second that part of the motion is not prepared to make that direction as he does not know what it would do home or to other homes. There does not seem to be other neighbors >osition, we have this one only and they have expressed a concern with t back and a primary concern with the parapet and the chimney. ;missioner McDaniel noted he would leave his motion as originally seconded. yes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren Noes: None Excused: I Cole Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (PA2007 -073) One Hoag Drive ntinued hearing from January 31, and February 7, 2008, for a request tc Ilocate up to 225,000 gross square feet of permitted buildable area from the ver Campus to the Upper Campus through the approval of the proposec neral Plan and Planned Community Development Plan Amendments :)licant also requests approval of amendments to development regulation; stained within the existing Planned Community Development Plan, also knowr the Hoag Master Plan or the PC Text. The changes principally relate to the ;cation and limit of permitted building area between the Upper and Lowei mpus, noise regulations, landscaping requirements and sign standards. Lastly Acant requests an amendment of the existing Development Agreement tc ect the changes to the Master Plan as summarized above and to provide titional public benefits principally in the form of providing funds foi >rovements and community projects to public facilities such as streets, parks ter quality and public safety facilities. PA2007 -073 Continued to 03/20/2008 Page 4 of 11 file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn03062008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 nan Hawkins noted he has met with the applicant and viewed the and the sound wall material. Jim Campbell gave an overview of the staff report. He noted and distrib aral emails recently received from the public. There have been discuss i the applicant that have resulted in changes to the Planned Community are noted in the staff report. iissioner Toerge asked which noise attenuation works better, the wall or and the drywall improvements? ad Mestre of Mestre Greve and Associates, noise consultant answered that tl and wall will give more noise reduction and provides for a 6.8 decibels at tl uthern residence. The most achieved through building upgrades is about a 4 decibel reduction on the interior noise. immissioner Eaton asked if the proposed noise levels that the applicant king for could be met if the noise wall is not built. He then asked about the ur the common courtyard between the 260 buildings on Cagney Lane affected noise that would possibly need upgrades and expressed his concern of t dl location. Greve answered no, the noise levels depend on the noise wall. The ng into the common courtyard on the northerly building would need upgr southerly units would not need upgrades. nissioner McDaniel asked about the 'green' sound wall. Staff answered has not been decided yet. man Hawkins asked about the suggested Hoag changes to Section V. K ial circulation and suggested changing the words 'be scheduled' to 'occur. answered that such a change could be made. A discussion ensued abou happens when a truck shows up outside of the permitted loading /unloadinf and the provision that would allow emergency supplies to be accepter fe the posted hours. airman Hawkins questioned what would constitute "critical supplies, servi materials" that would be deemed necessary for the continued operation of spital and requested input from Hoag. Hawkins asked whether vehicles on City streets are subject to nr limits and Mr. Campbell noted that vehicles are not subject to nr regulations. Additionally, noise ordinance limits are applied noise sources and Chairman Hawkins commented that the propo is not dissimilar to how the City regulates other properties. discussion of the grease trap cleaning operations ensued where it was i at it is an exempt property maintenance activity and the proposed amend Duld limit the activity to specific hours on Saturdays. Chairman Hawkins i s desire to craft the PC text to encourage the operator of the truck to min ling during that operation as well as his idea that even refrigerated trucks limit on their idling rather than being exempt. Newman of Government Solutions representing Hoag Hospital noted: ree with staff language on page 6 regarding vehicle idling adding that Page 5 of 11 file : //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared\Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn03O62008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 tion trucks containing pharmaceuticals and blood products need to to idle. re are three 'green' screens - the sound wall (color to be determined), sere Pacific Coast Highway (combination of wall and landscaping), and or Iscape /glass wall combination screen. Landscape maintenance of the sou along West Hoag Road facing Villa Balboa shall be done by Hoag. Commission request, she placed into exhibit a list that she read from notir lgested minor changes to the PC text in Section A.1.a.(1), Section 2.1(1 ction L., first paragraph, Section M., first sentence, Section C., secor - agraph and Section D., first paragraph. e then noted the meeting on site with local residents explaining the story ight of the proposed sound wall and general information that had ,tributed. Additionally, following this meeting she will be preparing a pE information that is based upon what is presented and agreed to at this rr distribution to the Villa Balboa residents. is Privett of Bonterra Consulting, consultant to the City for the EIR, noted sound wall issue, if brought into the project, will need review if this compo ild have any affects on the environment. It would be a brief analysis Id be included in the next staff report and would document any chat and which have been already evaluated. y Brooks of Hoag Hospital presented and explained an exhibit depicting 1 I placement that will be built in three sections, 17 feet tall, 23 feet tall and t 5 inches that will run along Hoag West Road. The wall will be plac iroximately 30 inches back from property line and measured from the finish Face at the Hoag side; discussed a survey map of the site showing locatioi explained another exhibit of a sketch section of the site dimensions of 1 sting tree heights and proposed replacement trees in relation to the face b and the residences. The existing tree massing stands above the propos ghts of the walls. Sound attenuation windows are proposed above the heil he sound wall and are to be installed in twelve units at 260 Cagney that fa loading dock. Raben of Raben Urban Landscape Architects, consultant for Hoag, added t sting is proposed to screen or soften facilities located on the Lower Camp existing trees, shrubs, etc. that are altered during construction will aced by like kind. Fichus trees grow very quickly and will fill in whe !ded. There will be root barriers in place along the inside face of the curb p them in the landscape area. If the trees are watered properly and there a lot of surface moisture, the roots can be controlled as they will grow down moisture. In areas where there may be a potential problem with the roo riers can be installed. Campbell suggested, and it was agreed, to include a type of deep Ong system in the landscape requirements to avoid problems with by homes. Additionally, it was suggested that the exhibit showing lion of the proposed wall within the PC text better clarify the location of based upon the more detailed survey presented at the hearing. Brooks agreed to work with staff regarding exhibits depicting property ing lines as well as location of utilities and placement of the wall. Greve, at Commission inquiry, stated the wall does not run the entire Page 6 of 11 file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared\Planning Commission \PC Minutes \mn03O62008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 the access road. He added that the wall is primarily to protect loading d< ise. The advantage of extending the wall further to the north would be Puce the noise to the first -floor level for trucks and cars that continue to L as Road. ike Murphy with Highway and Industrial Noise Solutions, manufacturinc presentative for Sound Fighters System, explained and presented a sample o piece of wall to be used. He explained the contents, make up, water runoff >ise ratings, sustainability and potential colors of the sound wall. comment was opened. Paydavousi, resident of Cagney Lane, noted his concern about a potent ng of rules by Hoag if the sound wall is built. They have called Hoag to know about the noise and trucks showing up before 7 a.m. or work beii outside of the posted times; once the wall is built how do we control tutee that the wall is not used as an excuse and the residents have arse. He added the concern of additional parking needs if a third tower is How will these be controlled over time? ;s Ribaudo, resident of Cagney Lane, asked about the study by the Air Qu iagement District. A new law came into effect in mid - February that will Y impact on what the emissions will be on the new engines. Will this act be reviewed? othy Holmes, resident of Cagney Lane, noted her concerns of noise and gested solution of a high wall as it will not enhance her views at all. ad for nothing higher than 6 to 8 feet tall wall with foliage covering it. Ribaudo, resident of Cagney Lane, asked about the gate operation hours. semary Steinbrecker, local resident, noted a wall may interfere with the gro some of the landscaping in place now. She added that there has been Pntion of additional noise that will be generated by the addition of anol ier. She stated that there is no defined placement of this new addition N it would impact the neighbors for light, air and noise. This project, as ✓v, is too general and questioned the land that has been taken off the tax i the Lower Campus. snise Schuler, resident of Cagney Lane, noted her appreciation of everyo id their work done on this project. She noted her concern about the noise ;r unit and the request by the applicant that the noise level be increased. H ould that impact her current situation? There seemed to be an increase >ise during last summertime especially by her unit. Also, there is a breeze tl )mes from the ocean through a corridor by her unit and she is concerned abc high wall and material to be used impacting that breeze. Thumher, Co- Chairman of the Villa Balboa Hoag Liaison Committee ar rids of Sunset Park, noted concerns about the noise standards related ;hanical noise on the cogen plant. The reference in the PC text refers to , on rooftop equipment. The enclosure around the cooling towers does n a roof; however, the sound rule should still apply. The cooling towers rise top of that enclosure and where the fans are located would be at the roof enclosure had a roof. It seems that the issue is the noise from mechanic ipment affecting local residents. Referring to a photograph, he noted tt tion of the fans. Noise measured at the property line last year was over E bels, which is before the addition of a fourth cooling tower. Noise levels no Page 7 of 11 file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes \mn03O62008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 considerably higher that is audible to the local residents. The area near >erty line is undeveloped and is to become part of the Sunset View, Sur )e Park complex. Mitigation measures should be imposed because the C >e Ordinance does not protect parkland. Runyen, Co- Chairman of the Villa Balboa Hoag Liaison Committee, no am of the placement of the wall and how the current vegetation will ,romised by this tall wall. The residents are trying to decide if the wall )ws is the better choice. He then noted his concern of the noise stand ption within the loading dock area during daytime hours. thryn Casey of Jackson, DeMarco, Tidus, Peckenpaugh, firm that represei Villa Balboa Association, noted their concern of the inconsistency of 1 ormation provided over the course of this process. Of particular note ormation on the location of the wall and the existing vegetation. The public a cision makers need to have specific information and full disclosure on whr : wall is going to be due to the impact on the residents, enforceme rintenance and noise mitigation issues. She then reiterated their concern tl noise standard be applicable to the towers and any rooftop mechani uipment. Her final concern was on the mitigation measure of the sounds fri loading dock. CEOA requires full mitigation measures as possible. flee Newman stated that the 260 building is elevated about twenty feet the people who are on the first floor are above the sound wall. Therefc will not be walking out their door facing a sound wall. She then entered i rd a petition by one of the residents who had collected signatures of of lents favoring the wall. Brooks discussed a graphic that displayed the distance of 16' 9" from the fac the units to the wall plus another 5' to the face of curb with the wall placed c . property line. He noted it is their intent to bring the wall as close in, utilitie rmitting, to the face of curb as possible. Discussion continued on the height a existing landscaping, proposed replacement trees and the height of the wall. ,ton Trigg noted the graphic discussed is the worst case scenario and is anything that is contrary the wall will move closer to the street. Raben, in answer to Commission inquiry, noted that the plant material a edge in question is growing partially in shade most of the time. We w ace any plants that were disturbed or removed as a result of installing the trees that would grow in that low light level condition. missioner McDaniel noted that the residents can plant and maintain anyth want on their side of the wall. He then asked about how the wall and pl rial will affect the light and air. Raben answered the breeze moves with the sun generally and there is fiber of conditions that affect the movement. The wall may or may not affe air movement as it depends from which direction the air flows. The pla Brial selection is based on the conditions that will exist once the wall is built. nmissioner Eaton asked if Hoag should need to plant trees on the Villa Balb )erty to screen the wall, should the PC text be revised to allow for that area part of the Villa Balboa Landscape Zone? It would not be subject to tl iision given the current language. Would Hoag maintain that landscaping ? Ms. Newman, noted they would add a provision that any landscapi ited on Villa Balboa property as a result of the project would be maintained Page 8 of 11 file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared\Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn03062008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 years. response to earlier testimony, Mr. Campbell noted that the Plan nmunity text contains a provision that would continue to limit the use of May between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. and should Hoag desire to extend & rs, an amendment to the PC text would be required and public heari dd be required. regards to the comment about the air quality analysis and the Comm( licating a new air quality rule, the analysis prepared for the EIR was do sed upon the rules in effect at the time the analysis was prepared and it c ce into account 3 additional engines that the cogeneration facility is designed commodate. Hoag would have to comply with the SCAQMD rules in effect time Hoag seeks permits from them. Mr. Harp indicated that the this issue t part of the project. Chairman Hawkins noted that we were simply attempti address a comment. Campbell noted that an analysis of the effects of the proposed noise Id be available for the next meeting. response to a comment about rising noise levels, Mr. Campbell noted that )ise study prepared for the EIR accounts for increases in noise and that oposed noise levels are achievable with the overall mitigation program ur msideration. In response to one of the speaker's comments noting concern the sound wall were built, Hoag might become less diligent in managing t :tivities to curb noise; it is hoped that Hoag would not become less dilig avid Lepo noted that it should be clearly understood that over time with igoing expansion of Hoag, there will be more vehicles on West Hoag Drive ore noise could result. Mr. Hawkins noted that the PC text includes provisi minimize idling. rman Hawkins noted that staff provided additional clarification within the stafl rt of the noise standard applicable to the cogeneration facility cooling tower: he asked if staff had a response to Mr. Thumer's alternate interpretation. Mr ipbell answered no, and Aaron Harp noted that the City Attorney's office .urs with planning staffs interpretation. comment was closed. was made by Commissioner Toerge and seconded by to continue this matter to March 20, 2008. McDaniel requested resolutions for the next meeting action. comment was opened. its O'Neil suggested that the public hearing be kept open and continue this certain and that way it would not have to be re- advertised. Commission agreed. yes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren Noes: None Excused: Cole OBJECT: Fury Rok and Rol Sushi Lounge (PA2005 -087) ITEM NO. 4 Page 9 of 11 file: //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn030620081tm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 Page 10 of 11 4221 Dolphin Striker Way (PA2005 -087) of Use Permit No. 3162 and Use Permit No. 2005 -018. 1 Received and filed City Attorney Harp removed himself from and did not advise on Lepo noted that staff retained a Hearing Officer to hear this revoca on. The direction for a new security plan to be submitted by the permit hol reviewed by the Police Department for implementation by the follom :kend was done. Mr. Allen is the Hearing Officer and the hearing was be! March 5th and another hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 18th Bed to by all parties due to the amount of legal briefs that need to rented. The Police Department approved the security plan and affirmed Bence this past weekend. Staff is complying with the direction given at meeting. The final presentation made to the Planning Commission will ietime in April. continued on the motion made on February 21, 2008. Hawkins noted his concern about hearing this item as and that the Commission received a copy of the ste this evening. Lepo noted the Hearing Officer is aware of their concern. tirman Hawkins noted he would contact Mr. Burns about the ability to me transcript and some procedure to establish a fixed date to come back to Motion was made by Commissioner Peotter and seconded by Commissione McDaniel to receive and file. yes: Eaton, Peotter, Hawkins, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren Noes: None Excused: Cole BUSINESS a. City Council Follow -up - none. b. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Econo Development Committee - Chairman Hawkins reported that subcommittee had been established to review the organizatic documents. C. Report from the Planning Commission's representative to the Gen Plan /Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee - Commissic Eaton reported noted there was a discussion on how to detern restaurant classifications and approval processes. d. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like Staff to report on at subsequent meeting - Commissioner McDaniel asked about the Sant', Ana River Project Committee and staff liaison and asked for a follow -up. Commissioner Toerge asked about the AERIE project. Mr. Lepo note( that the Mitigated Negative Declaration has to be re -done as it was note( that the slips were not part of the project but were referred to by th( file : //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn03062008.htm 07/15/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 03/06/2008 applicant at the Planning Commission meeting. They had not been included a; part of the Negative Declaration nor analyzed in the staff report. Commissioner Toerge asked about the Panini project. Mr. Lepo noted i will be coming back to the Planning Commission. e. Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a agenda for action and staff report - Commissioner Peotter noted he like to bring back Commission business on how we operate the me such as verbatim minutes and/or should we use speaker cards. Project status - see Item d. BRADLEY HILLGREN, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 of 11 RNMENT file: //Y: \Users \PLMShared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes \mn03062008.htm 07/15/2008