HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/22/1980COMMISSIONERS Regular Planning Commission Meeting MINUTES
K Place: City Council Chambers
0 Time: 7:30 P.M.
o W w a Date: May 22, 1980
� y R M � City of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL INDEX
Present x x Commissioners Haidinger and Cokasiwere absent.
Absent
* * *
40
Motion
Ayes
Absent
Motion
Ayes
Absent
40
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS:
James D. Hewicker, Planning Director
Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney
* * *
STAFF MEMBERS:
William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrato
Donald Webb, Assistant City Engin er
Glenna Sutton, Secretary
* * *
Minutes Written By: Glenna Sutto
* * *
*I *I] was made to approve the minutes of the
jxjMotion
regular Planning Commission meeting of May 8,
1980, as revised.
* * *
Motion was made to continue Agend4 Item No. 2,
XK x a Traffic Phasing Plan for the re .aining develop-
* ment of the Corporate Plaza Planned Community,
to the regular Planning Commission meeting of
June 19, 1980, per the Staff's rejuest, to allow
sufficient time to review the tra fic information
submitted by the Irvine Company.
Request
to create three
parcels of land
for com-
Item #1
mercial.
development, the
acceptance of
an offsite
parking
agreement for a
portion oil the
required
RESUB-
parking
spaces for the Bank
of Ne�port
complex,
D=ION
and the
acceptance of an
Environmental
Document.
N . 65
CONTIN-
UED TO
19,
137
-1-
o m
MINUTES
May 22, 1980 j
of Newport Beach
LOCATION: Lot 148, Tract No.11218, located
at 745 Dover Drive, on the west-
erly side of Dover Drive, souther-
ly of 16th Street.;
ZONE: A -P -H
APPLICANT: Bank of Newport, Newport Beach
OWNER: Lawrence K. Harvey et al, Corona
del Mar
In response to a question posed by' Commissioner
Allen, William Laycock, Current Plianning Admin-
istrator, replied that at the time the bank was
constructed, the building site itself was on the
lower pad with a bluff up to the �pper pad which
is the Raleigh '.Hills Convalescent !Hospital site.
. He added that, in fact, the property line between
the two building sites was actually at the bottom
of the bluff and it was not discovered until this
resubdivision came into being that a portion of
the required parking spaces for the Bank of New -
port is located on the adjoining hospital proper-
ty.
u
The Public Hearing continued regarfding this item
and Paul'Ruffing, Architect, appeared before the
Planning Commission and in respon e'to a question
posed by James Hewicker, Planningi.Director, he
replied that the bank has for somd time been rent-
ing portions of the two buildings ';that are on Par-
cel No. 1 and that they have a need for a long-
term lease, rather than just rentijng space in the
building. He explained that in orider to do this,
it was necessary for them to submilt a parcel map..
He added that they would also liked to expand their
parking. He further explained thalt the topography
map identified the edge of the asdhalt paving
which was encroaching into the adjacent property,
and they included in their lease negotiations
enough land to acquire to correctthe mistake and
possibly increase the driveway width, which would
allow for additional parking adjagent to the bank.
-2-
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
O Q 5 000 ak
Off X y City of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL ! INDEX
In response to a question posed by� Commissioner
Allen, Mr. Ruffing replied that tlijjere are no
immediate plans to change any use!now on the site.
0
0
Commissioner Balalis expressed hil concern re-
garding the existing drive -up teller facility and
the traffic problem it causes.
Mr Ruffing stated that they applied for a resub=
division because the bank is leasing land that is
being subdivided from a larger parcel and that
other than that the bank itself hays no need for
the subdivision and the parcel mad other than to
identify the land that they are lasing according
to the ordinances and the code.
Commissioner Beek stated his concorn regarding
creating a long sliver.shaped parcel: He suggest
ed that there: 1) be a .lot line adjustment so
that this land be included as part of the Bank of
Newport's parcel or; 2) pay theRaleigh Hills
Convalescent Hospital for an offsite parking
agreement.
John Riehards, 'Representative, apl} eared before
the Planning' Commission and expla ned that under
the State Subdivision Map Act for any sale, lease
or financing, one is required eit er to conduct
a subdivision or:a survey. He st ted that when
they conducted the survey on the ield, they
learned that part of their parkin was on the
Raleigh Hills site. He added the they want to
lease that parking. He further eplained regard-
ing the ground lease around the o'�her two build-
ings, that the State law requires a parcel map
and.that a lot line adjustment would not be al-
lowed, because it would be creating an additional
parcel.
In response to a question posed b� Mr. Hewicker,
Mr. Richards stated that they arelnot contemplat-
ing any.sale of land at this time!and that they
are only interested in a lease. j
-3-
COMMISSIONERS
= May 22, 1980
w W I City of Newport Beach
7
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
0
9
In response to a question posed b
Balalis, Mr. Hewicker replied tha
Hills agrees to provide at no cos
the parking spaces are located, t
port would need to have a resubdi
if the ground is going to be leas
map is required.
Commissioner
if Raleigh
the area where
e Bank of New -
ision; however,
d, a parcel
Mr. Richards added that when one leases the
ground, one also leases the building.
In response to a question posed b! Commissioner
Beek, Robert Burnham, Assistant C ty Attorney,
replied that the Subdivision Map ct talks about
a division of land and a ground lease and that
they are referring to a lease of he entire fee-
simple interest; that is, that th owner is leas-
ing all his interest in that prop rty to someone
:else without a reservation.
Mr. Burnham further .informed the Planning Commis -
sion that this particular proposed resubdivision
is contrary to the intent of the Map Act, which i
to avoid the creation of substandard and odd -
shaped parcels and an offsite parting agreement
in this case would be a good alte ► native, creatin
a parcel shaped such as this one.j
Mr. Hewicker informed the Pl.annin Commission that
parcels such as this have been cr ated many times
and these parcels are used for ei her landscaping
or parking purposes and there are notations on the
parcel maps which indicate that these parcels are
not individual building sites.
Mr. Ruffing explained that they have a note on
their parcel map which indicates that Parcel No.
2 would be used for ingress, egre$s, parking and
landscaping only.
Mr. Ruffing also commented regarding Condition No.
3, expressing his feeling that reouiring construc-
-4-
COMMISSIONERS
7mv
'5 4�1 JC f/1
May 22, 1980
of NeWDort Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I 1 1 1 111 1, I INDEX
n
U
tion of improvements such.as this
them, when all they. are requestin
be allowed to create three legal
not undergoing any construction.
that there is existing a driveway
gutter that have been used for ye
a 60' asphalt sidewalk. He reque
ning Commission that they conside
ditional phrase be added to this
these improvements. be required on
of the application for a building
mit or construction.
Donald Webb, Assistant City Engin
acceptance of this.
is a burden on
is that they
ites and are
He explained
a curb and a
rs, as well as
ted of the Plan.
that an ad-
ondition that
y at the time
permit, use per•
r, stated his
Commissioner Thomas stated his preference for an
offsite parking agreement with Raleigh Hills.
Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding tha
the parcel of land under discussion is strictly
for the exclusive use of the Banklof Newport.
Mr. Hewicker explained to the Pla
that i:n situations such as this,
have the property line at the top
that in this particular case, the
drawn midway between the top and
slope. He added that it has been
Grading Engineer and that he sees
the property line going midway up
explained further that this provi
Newport with the ability to lease
as to obtain control of their par
a portion of the slope facing the
tion where it will be maintained
opposed to Raleigh.Hills Convales
which.is on the top head and cann
and probably would not be concern
dition of the slope.
ning Commission
hey attempt to
of'a bluff, but
property line i
he toe of the
reviewed by the
no problem with
the slope. He
es the Bank of
the property, s
ing, and it put
bank in a posi-
y said bank, as
ent Hospital,
t see the slope
d as to the con
Mr. Webb further informed the Pla�ning Commission
that if Raleigh'Hills were to ever sell this par-
cel to the bank, a map would nece$sarily have to
-5-
�x
w
3 0
?� m°—'
7 fA JC N
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
MINUTES
1 ROLL CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I INDEX
be filed to create the:parcel, thereby providing
a mechanism for them to sell at some time in the
future.
i
Commissioner Al:len.expressed her feeling that th
;are condoning a very serious traffic hazard.
Commissioner Beek stated his preference that this
application include a condition that the teller
facility be removed in the next year or two.
i
Commissioner Allen stated her preference that
they have a development plan that includes the
removal of the teller facility, a d she requested
that some kind of preliminary tim table be provid
ed as to its removal.
Motion x Motion was made to continue this item to the re-
s x x K x x gular Planning Commission meetingof June 19,
1980, to allow additional time for the applicant
to review alternate possibilities',
Request to consider a Traffic Pha'ing Plan for th
remaining development of the Corp rate Plaza Plan
ned Community, and the acceptance of an Environ-
mental Document.
LOCATION: Property bounded by East Coast
Highway, Newport Center Drive,
Farallon Drive and Avocado Avenue
in Newport Center.1
ZONE: P -C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company 6 Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as Applicant
i
Motion x Motion was made that this item beicontinued to th
Ayes x x x regular Planning Commission meeting of June 19,
ent * * 1980, as per the Staff's recommendation, pending
additional review of the traffic information sub-
mitted by the Irvine Company. i
-6-
Item #2
TRAFFIC
PH SING
PLAN
CONTIN-
UED TO
JUNE 19,
1980
COMMISSIONERS 1
0_
w
�ao 03
J N x N
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
MINUTES
■ ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX 1
E
Request to:consider an amendment �o Chapter 20 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains
to required parking for residential uses, and the
acceptance of an Environmental Document.
INITIATED BY: City of Newport Be4ch
l
i
Commissioners Beek.and Balalis agreed that the
Item #3
AMEND -
MENT NO.
535
APPROVED
center parking aisle would be thelmost likely one
to be used for access and that th tandem parking
space would more than likely be b.ocked off „ as
it is at the rear of the dwelling'unit.
James Hewicker, Planning Director stated t.hat
at one time, the Modifications Committee was ap-
proving zero side yard setbacks on garages for
one side of the lot and there were quite a number
of them that were approved on Bal�oa Island. He
added that there were complaints .egarding this
practice by the Modifications Committee and the
Modifications Committee was directed to stop ap-
proving those requests. He addedthat there was
a concern about: 1) the appearan a of two ad -.
joining garages when:they both ob erved a zero
side yard and they came together,.and; 2) there
are many structures in the City that are legal,
but non- conformin.g,.and they may $e used as habi-
table space, as opposed to a garage space, and
they may have windows in that hab table:space and
if there is a garage close to the':lot line, the
light, air and ventilation to theladjoining strut-
tures is bei.ng cut off. He conclided that the
proposed 26" side yard would not reate these
problems.
The Public Hearing continued rega ding this item
and Ronald Malouf, 1857 Port Charles, Vice Presi-
dent of the Corona del Mar Civic hlssociation, ap-
St
COMMISSIONERS
m
$x man
7 N CD N 7
•
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
of Newport Beach
peared before the Planning Commis ion and posed
a question, to which Commissioner Balalis replied
that a duplex will contain three arking spaces.
Mr. Malouf then commented that th Corona del
Mar Civic. Association preferred to maintain three
parking spaces per duplex in an R2 District,
rather than four parking spaces.
Gail Venji- Smith, Balboa Island I�provement As -.
sociation, appeared before the P1 nning Commis-
sion and expressed her feeling tht the revised
amendment is very well- written, v ry concise and
easy to read. She suggested that'the subject of
the zero side yard setback be reconsidered at
some future date.
Bill Hardesty, 115 Pearl Avenue, $ppeared bofore
the Planning Commission to state his concurrence
with the amendment. He stated his support of the
zero side yard setback.
Harvey Pease, Balboa Island, appeared before the
Planning Commission and requested'•,that they defer
its action so that the media willlhave a chance
to give increased emphasis to what is contemplat-
ed.
Commissioner Balalis explained thbt this item has
been heard and reviewed for the list year.
Douglas Brown, Balboa Island, app
Planning Commission and inquired
of parking spaces required for a
Commissioner Balalis replied that
time the requirement is for four
as required by the Coastal Commis
plained that the action taken by
mission at this time will not cha
such time as the Planning Commiss
proposal to the Coastal Commissio
its concurrence.
ared before the
s to the number
uplex, to which
at the present
arking spaces
ion. He ex-
he Planning Com
ge that until
on presents its
and asks for
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
my
9 �n WW(�pp
j N d 0 y 7
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
i
I
of Newport Beach
Commissioner Beek commented on be alf of the Lido
Isle Community Association, stati g that their
board adopted a motion regarding heir Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions that hey do not per-
mit carports. He added that Lido Isle has many
30' wide lots which do not have vehicular access
at both ends, so that if three Parking spaces for
a single- family home of more than 2,000 sq. ft.
were required, they would necessa ily have to hav
the front door and all three garage doors across
the 30' at the front of the lot. jHe concluded
that Lido Isle would like to be eempted from thi
requirement.
Commissioner Beek suggested that Section 20.10.04
PARKING A (2) be revised to read,; "Not less than
three parking spaces for any structure containing
2,000 sq. ft. or more, exclusive �f areas devoted
to parking and open space, unless the structure
contains less than 3,000 sq. ft. 6f floor area an
• is on an interior lot in an R -1 District 35' or
less in width, which does not havo vehicular ac-
cess at both ends."
Commissioner Allen posed a question, to which Mr..
Hewicker replied that currently tOo garage spaces
are.required for a single- family dwelling on Bal-
boa Island.
Commissioner McLaughlin expressediher reluctance
to adding to or changing the amen�ment without
an opportunity to give it more thought.
Mr. Hardesty again appeared befor the Planning
Commission to comment that Lido I le doesn't have
the public attendance that Balboa;Island does, and
they have a lot of street to straja lots. He ex-
pressed his feeling that a two ca, garage at a
single family residence on Lido Isle would be ac-
ceptable and that, aesthetically,IIthe three park-
ing spaces across the back in Lidd Isle is out of
character to the area.
0
In
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
X CD 0
J =i 0 x pl 7
May 22, 1980
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
■ ROLL CALL I I 1 1 I I I I ! I INDEX I
In response to a question posed b Commissioner
Allen, Mrs Venji- Smith appeared efore the Plan-
ning Commission and stated her pr ference that a
single - family dwelling be require to provide
three parking spaces on Balboa Is.and.
Commissioner Allen:'stated her and rstanding that
the West Newport Improvement Association had a
concern with providing uniform itylin the parking
requirements between a single - family construction
and a duplex construction.
I
In response to another question ptsed by Commis -
sioner.Allen, Robert Burnham, Assistant City At-
torney, replied that Lido Isle cam.not be exclu-
sively exempted from the requirements.
Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding
that any dwelling unit built in a District other
than the R -1 District.requires that the applicant
. go before the Coastal Commission o obtain a per -
mit to build a single family dwelling unit and a
requirement is placed on the applicant to record
a deed restriction that this dwelling unit will
be a single family dwelling unit.!
Mr. Hardesty again appeared before the Planning
Commission and expressed his feeling that the
builder would attempt to provide the third park-
ing space for his potential buyer,
Pat Ickenhoff, Peninsula Point Homeowners Asso-
ciation, appeared before the Plani ing Commission
and stated her opposition to allo ing a dwelling
unit of less than 3,000 sq. ft. with only two
parking spaces. She added that their oceanfront
homes do not have access, except rom the alley.
Motion Motion was made that the Planning Commission ap-
prove Amendment No. 535 as writte in the Staff
Report., and recommend that the Ci y Council adopt
same.
0
-10-
COMMISSIONERS
May 22, 1980
�d m
O a) a
N � N s I City of Newport Beach
Mr. Hewicker suggested changing t
space" to.the term, "parking spat
20.87.190, and deleting the word
further suggested amending Sectio
to incorporate the.aforementioned
delete the "garage space" definit
MINUTES
e term, " garage
" in Section
eevepe4 ". He
20.87.260
changes and.'
on.
Motion x Amendment to the Motion was made irhat Section
20.10.040 PARKING A. (2) be revisld to read,
"Not less than three parking spaces for any struc-
ture containing 2,000 sq. ft. or more, exclusive
of areas devoted to parking and oten space, unless
the structure contains less than $,000 sq. ft. of
floor area and is on an interior of in an R -1
District 35' or less in width which does not have
vehicular access at both ends." j
Commissioner McLaughlin stated.thit she could not
support the Amendment to the Motion, as she would
need an opportunity to give it adlitional thought.
• Commissioner Allen stated her relulctance to ap-
proving the Amendment to the'Motign because of
her fear that the City Council would defeat the
entire ordinance geared to duplexis because of
the Planning Commission's possibl misunderstand -
ings regarding single family dwellings.
•
Commissioner Allen posed a question, to.which
William Laycock, Current. PlanningiAdninistrator,
replied that the R -1 Districts otiher than the
Peninsula, West Newport and Old Corona del Mar
require only two parking spaces, regardless of
the size of the dwelling.
Commissioner Allen then posed another question,
inquiring if leaving the R -1 Districts as they
are.and exempting the R -1 lots from this ordin-
ance would solve the Lido Isle pr blem and stan-
dardize the parking requirements n West Newport,
the Peninsula and Balboa Island. ,
-11-
INDEX
-4
m o�i ra
VI
5' N
41 7C
j MINUTES
May 22, 1980
i
City of Newoort Beach
In.response to a question posed b� Commissioner
Balalis, Mr. Hewicker replied tha Peninsula
Point has the three parking space$ requirement.
Mr. Burnham advised that there cannot be a dis-
tinction drawn with Lido Isle because it has a
specific problem, and that from a'legal stand-
point, the problem should be addr ssed in a way
other than excepting particular ctmmunities.
I
Commissioner Thomas expressed his feeling that
there will always be exceptions i an attempt to
.make uniform requirements, and th s fact should
be accepted.
I
Commissioner Allen posed a question, to which
Commissioner Beek replied that helfelt that the
Lido Isle Community Association will be unilater-
ally against the amendment as it is presently
written.
Commissioner Allen stated that'sh� would not sup-
port the amendment,.as she did not fully under-
stand it.
Ayes
x
Y
Amendment to the Motion. was then doted on, which
Noes
x
x!MOTION
FAILED.
Absent
Motion
x
Amendment to the Motion was made to change the
Ayes
xx
x
x
term, "gara.ge space" to the term,; "parking,space"
Absent
*
*
in Section 20.87.190, and to delete the word
"eeaeree ".
Motion
x
Amendment to the Motion was made jo eliminate
Ayes
XK
x
the definition of "garage space" from the defi-
Absent
*
*
nitions altogether.
In response to a'suggestion made y Commissioner
Balalis, Commissioner Beek expres ed his feeling
that there is a possibility that he formula of
two garage spaces and one carport may be adopted
widely, and that if this happens,!there will be .
0
-12-
Il RIVA
3�d
po g 0 CD R n
TO N 7 (n X W 7
May 22, 1980
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
■ ROLL CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I INDEX I
26" added to the carport and then the property
owners could record a document th t this space
will be left open, in which case he garage could
be made wider.
* * *
The Planning Commission recessed 0t 9:50 p.m.
and reconvened at 10:00 p.m.
* * *
In response to a question posed byy Commissioner
Beek, Mr. Hewicker replied that ih Baywood and
Versailles, the parking requirements are the
same: one bedroom is 1.5 spaces per dwelling
unit, two bedrooms is 1.75 spaceslper dwelling
unit and the overall parking ratio is approxi-
mately 1.8 spaces per dwelling unit.
ion Amendment to the Motion was made that there be
1.8 parking spaces per dwelling whit; but that
I 1111 a duplex shall not be required to'have more than
three parking spaces per dwellinglunit.
Commissioner Balalis expressed hid feeling that
larger projects come before the 0 annir.g Commis-
sion for various reasons, and he stated his re-
luctance to require of a triplex or a fourplex
additional parking spaces that may not be needed.
He concluded that he could not support the amend-
ment to the Motion.
Commissioner McLaughlin stated th .4t she could not
support the Amendment to the Motion without ad-
ditional time to consider it. I
Ayes K x Amendment to the Motion was then �oted on, which
Noes x x MOTION FAILED.
Absent
Commissioner Bala.lis suggested ga hering adequate
information surrounding the chang� to Section
20.10.040 PARKING A. (2) prior tojpresenting it
to the City Council.
-13-
COMMISSIONERS
�_
$0 �a
s 0
�1nWNi G
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I 1 1 III 1 I I INDEX
Motion K Amendment to the Motion was made that the park-
ing requirement be two parking spices per dwell -
ing unit.
Commissioner Balalis stated that le would not
support the Amendment to the Motion, as he
felt that this revised amendment -ill again
balance the needs of the resident , as well as
those visitors who wish to use the public
streets for parking.
Ayes K x Amendment to the Motion was 'then �oted on, which
Noes x MOTION FAILED.
Absent
Ayes XK x Motion was then voted on to approve a portion.
Noes K of Amendment No. 535 (Sections 20110.050 PARK -
Absent * * ING. A., 20.11.030 PARKING., 20.12.075 PARK-
ING., 20.13.070 PARKING., 20.14.00 PARKING.,
20.15.070 PARKING., 20.16.075 PARI,KING.,
• 20.17.075 PARKING., 20.33.030 F. PARKING -
RESIDENTIAL PORTION., and 20.83.090 EXEMPT
NONCONFORMING BUIL.D.INGS.), as written in
the Staff Report, and approve the following
revised portion of Amendment No. 35 (The
deletion of Section 20.87.190 GAR GE SPACE.,
and the amendment to Section 20.8,.260
'PARKING 'SPACE :) and recommend that the
City Council adopt same, which MOTION CAR-
RIED:
•
"29.87 - 199-- - - -6A RAGE- SPAGE:+ -The
€enrss- 2gara9e- spaee- ''- sha44- can -an
aeeess €ele- and - usable -eevep d -spaee
e € -net-Tess- than- 9- fee t -ele r
w�dthv- 4ns4de- measwreMents; by -29
€eet; -e ;ear- length;- �nsiee- easmre-
a�epts3- €ew- tqe- NaPi� €Ag -e € -a te-
�xee # }es- a € €- tke- stweet3 -sae
-14-
COMMISSIONERS
p335��m D.�
J�C f/1 7
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I III I ! I INDEX
0
0
spaee- te- b.e- ;eeated -em -the -; t -se
as- te- meet- the- regu4rements- # -th4s
Tot ;e - €er- any- aeeessory -bu44 Ong:
Any -sueh- garage- spaee= to -be- .e -4e-
eated -en- the - €rent- ene- ha4 € -e # -a
4et- sha44= have- s4de- wa4 }s; -r�e €;
and- an- eperat4wg- garage -_dear #er
aeeess- a €- awtemeb44es: - -49rd -845
4PaFt43- 1958 = -49494 ede - § -94 7:
274T I
20.87.260 PARKING SPACE.; For
residential uses, The the term,
"parki,ng space" shall mean an ac-
cessible and usable a € € - street
parking space of not less then
nineteen feet. clear Tenath.iin-
clear neigni
in the froni
space, for i
mobiles off
to be locatA
to meet the
Title.
The followii
stree
widths for parki
1so apply:
11 There shall be a clear
space; ana
e
-15-
3
O (a 5'0 � N D
N 5 y CD
May 22, 1980
In
t Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I III III I ! I INDEX I
not seoaratea Dv:anv wa
a minimum of seventeen
six inches. inside mea
et
P_
Any such parking space to be so located on
the front one -half of a lot s'hall have side
walls, a rf and an operati g garage door
or access 000f automobiles.
The location and size of parl�'ing spaces for
other uses shall be as established by Re-
solution I by the City Council.!"
Commissioner McLaughlin asked that. it be reflected
. that the Planning Commission has a; concern regard-
ing Lido Isle and that they wouldlike to.review
it further at a later date.
Request to consider a•n amendment 6 Title 20 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to
the permitted building heights of residential de-
velopment on steep lots, and the,acceptance of an
Environmental Document.
INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach
ommissioner Allen posed a question, to which
ames Hewicker, Planning Director, replied that
nder the current definition, one can physically
easure the height of a building with a tape by
ropping it down and that if the rule is used that
oves the slope horizontally 15', then there is an
maginary point in space where the height of the
uilding is measured and the onlyiway to measure
s to shoot the height with a transit.
-16-
Item #4
AMEND-
MENT NO.
545
APPROVED I
COMMISSIONERS
and
3 o M (Dpp
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL I I I I Jill 1 I INDEX
Commissioner Allen stated her and rstanding that
if a person now wants to build a ouse that ex-
ceeds the current height limit, h must hire a
surveyor. She also stated her un erstanding that
if a person wants to build a hour that would
currently be allowed under the currrent height
limit without a variance and if this ordinance
should be passed, one could still :build a house
of the same height without hiringa surveyor.
Mr. Hewicker explained that to ve ify the height
from an imaginary plane, one woulp necessarily
have to go the extra step to verify the infor-
mation; whereas, if existing topography is being
used, it is easy to visually measure the build -
ing height with a tape.
Commissioner Allen stated her und;erstanding.that
if one visually drops a .tape and ;takes the mea-
surement from the existing grade,within the cur-
rently allowed height limit, it would always be
within this height limit and it would not be
known how much below the new height limit it
was, but that it would be well bellow, and there-
fore allowable.
Mr. Hewicker replied that there a�e problems when
the height of the roof is at the 'maximum height
limit or above the maximum heightlimit.
i
Commissioner Allen stated her undlerstanding that
in this case there would need to be a variance
application, to which William Lay ock, Current
Planning Administrator, replied t at the plans
may have stated that they met the height limi-
tation, but may, in fact, exceed he height li-
mitation and necessarily need to a remodeled.
Mr. Hewicker explained that citiz ns measure.a
new building under construction a d are not know-
ledgeable as to how to measure su h, and that
measuring from imaginary lines crates problems.
-17-
0 w
5 0 �� D'
A G J 0) X (a
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
MINUTES
■ KOLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
The Public Hearing was opened reg rding this item
and William Hardesty., 115 Pearl A enue, appeared
before the Planning Commission an stated his con
currence with the Staff's recomme dation.
Commissioner Beek posed a questio
Laycock replied that if a tape is
completion of a building, the tap
down.to a point in space which re
horizontal projection of a contou
cannot be visually determined. H
feeling that the most accurate wa
the.height is with a transit:
Commissioner Beek stated his unde
this amendment were adopted and t
mit, surveyor's report and contou
presented, then it will be requir
height around the perimeter of th
be the distance above the grade s
plans, so that all that it will b
check is the height of the roof a
at that point, to show that they
plans.
, to which Mr.
dropped upon
will be droppe
resents a 15'
line, and it
expressed his
to determine
standing that i
e building per -
lines were
d that the
building shall
own on the
necessary to
ove the grade
onform to the
Mr. Hewicker explained that the height of the
building above physical grade cah be measured,
then it can be mathematically projected where
the ridge would.be above an imaginary line.
Harvey Pease, Balboa Island, appeared before. the
Planning Commission and stated that he could not
dismiss the cost to the surveyor lightly. He ex-
pressed his feeling that the burden is.on the pro
perty owner to determine the heig�t and take'.the
responsibility for any misrepresentation. He fur
ther expressed his feeling that dropping a tape
would be adequate. j
Commissioner Allen expressed her oncern that
there have been requests for vari .nces to exceed
the basic height limit on 5 steep lots within
the past four years and two of them have been
turned down after a $200 -$300 surjeyor's expense
sm
COMMISSIONERS
K
0
C
6 0 CO �D
N JCDC f/1
0
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
Of
Beach
and complete drafting of architecikural plans.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Allen, Mr. Hewicker replied that f the applica-
tion meets the previous ordinance it must meet
this one; however, the problem is verifying the
location of the height of the structure on the
site after the building is built, or during con-
struction, in the event a problem arises.
Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding tha
if an adjacent property owner complains or raises
a question, then a survey must becompleted to
prove that it does not exceed the height.
Mr. Hewicker stated that if an in ividual is tak-
ing full advantage of the amendme t,to the code,
he will not measure the height from the existing
grade, but t from a horizontal proj$ction.
Commissioner Beek stated his understanding that if
an individual wishes to take advantage of this, he
could spend an additional amount of money for a
surveyor; but that it would be optional, and if an
individual did not wish to take advantage of this,
he would not need a surveyor.
Mr. Hewicker `requested that the P
sion consider the enforceability,
forcement and the kinds of proble
Staff must deal on a day -to -day b
are individuals who measure the h
ing or adjacent new structures or
sure that construction is being d
the Code.
Commissioner Balalis expressed hi
many cases the reason for review
Commission was that a portion of
encroaching past the 24' level.
sed his feeling that the new prop
slope creates a building that is
again as. much as under the existi
-19-
anning Commis -
the ease of en-
s with which th
sis when there
ight of adjoin -
remodels to er-
ne according to
feeling that in
y the Planning
he structure was
e futher expres-
sal on a 1:1
lmost one half
q standards and
INDEX
K
o x
0
7 i fw0 7C 0) 7
May 22, 1980
itv of
Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I 1 1 1 III I I INDEX
will.create a. buil -ding that is 10' higher at the
top level and at a 2:1 slope; the building will
be 3' higher than now permitted.
Commissioner Balalis expressed hid feeling that
the small number of applications elated to this
subject did not warrant further consideration on
this matter. i
Motion
Motion was made to deny AmendmentiNo. 545.
Motion
Ayes
Noes
x
x
x
y
x
Substitute Motion was made that the Planning Com-
mission approve Amendment No. 545', using the fol-
lowing proposed wording as suggested by Commis -
Absent
*
*
sioner Beek: !
I
"20:87.205 HEIGHT OF STRUCTPRE The
height of a structure at any op int shall
•
be the vertical distance between grade
at- any -pe4Rt -and the highest part pe4mt
of the structure at that poi6t and the
reference surface�Irect neath. The
reference surf ace shall be t e ower of
these two elevations at an point:
The elevation of the lowest floor of
the structure at that Doint.i
that A roof snail be measure
average height of the roof,
part of the roof shall exten
five feet above the permitte
the.heigh.t limitation zone."
* * *
Request to consider amendments
of the Newport Beach Municipal
tain to lot line adjustments.
INITIATED BY
0
City of Newport
-20
n within
s- preytded
to the
t that no
more than
height in
Title 19 and 20 (Item #5
e as they per
ch
AMEND-
MENT NO.
546
APPROVED
0 03
N 7 N X N
MINUTES
May 22, 1980
I
of Newport Beach
Motion llllllxl Motion was made that the Planning Commission ap-
Ayes x x x x x.prove Amendment No. 546 as indicated in the Staff
Absent * * Report, and suggest that the City Council adopt
same.
* * *
Motion x Motion was made
Ayes x x x x x a letter to the
Absent * * Board recommend
jest be given a
Workshop, to be
0
* * *
to recommend tha the City write
State Water Resources Control
ing that the desiIting basin pro -
high priority atithe State Board
held on June 5, 11980.
* * *
There being no further business, 'the Planning
Commission adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Debra Allen,! Secretary
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
- 21 -
INDEX
ADDI-
TIONAL
BUSINESS
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Motion
x
Motion was made that Commissioner Balalis be ex-
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
cused from the regular Planning Commission meet -
Absent
*
*
ing of June 5, 1980.
Commissioner Haidinger had commented at the Study
Session regarding the proposed redevelopment plan
for the Newport Dunes property, stating his pre-
ference that the City of Newport ;Beach be Lead A-
gency in this project, and he expressed his feel -
ing that. the Draft Environmental 'Impact Report is
inadequate and that said .project icould be detri-
•
mental to Newport Beach.
Motion
x
Motion was made that the comments; of the Local
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
Coastal Planning Committee regarding the Dunes
Absent
*
*
11
Draft EIR be endorsed and that the City pursue
Lead Agency status. i
Motion x Motion was made
Ayes x x x x x a letter to the
Absent * * Board recommend
jest be given a
Workshop, to be
0
* * *
to recommend tha the City write
State Water Resources Control
ing that the desiIting basin pro -
high priority atithe State Board
held on June 5, 11980.
* * *
There being no further business, 'the Planning
Commission adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Debra Allen,! Secretary
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
- 21 -
INDEX
ADDI-
TIONAL
BUSINESS
COMMISSIONERS 1
9
m°X
X CD w
7 N p N
May 22, 1980
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I 1 1 ( INDEX
ADDENDUM:
At the meeting of June 19, 1980,
cussion of the minutes of the mee
1980, Commissioner Allen requeste
dum be added to the minutes of th
22, 1980 that in reviewing these
realized that it wasn't her inten
voted to approve Amendment No. 53
Parking Standards) to rescind the
the Corona del Mar Development St
regarding parking in Corona del.M
that though it was after the fact
like to include a statement in th
to the minutes to caution the Cit
unknowingly make the same mistake
two ordinances are mutually exclu
to contradict one another. She s
did not realize this when she cas
• In response to a request by Willi
rent Planning Administrator, for
fication from Commissioner Allen,
that two meetings ago the Plannin
passed a parking ordinance for Co
which was the recommendation of t
Development Standards Committee,
the requirement of two parking sp
unit in a duplex. She added that
Commission then recommended the a
parking ordinance for all resides
in the City, with the requirement
parking spaces for a duplex. She
although she realized that they w
ment No. 535 for all the resident
not occur to her that it would, i
the Corona del Mar parking standa
City Council should at least look
item, as the two contradict.
n
LJ
- 22 -
uring the dis-
ing of May 22,
that an adden-
meeting of May
inutes, she
ion when they
(Residential
work done by
ndards Committe
r. She added
that she would
record attache
Council not to
because the
ive and appear
ated that she
her vote.
m Laycock, Cur -
further clari-
she replied
Commission
ona del Mar
e Corona del Ma
hich included
ces for each
the Planning
proval of a
ial districts
of only three
concluded that.
re.passing Amen
al areas, it di
fact, rescind
-ds, which the
at as a separat