Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2006Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes June 15, 2006 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page 1 of http: / /www. city .newport- beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas /2006 /nm06- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, McDaniel and Henn - Commissioner Hawkins was excused. STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Transportation and Development Services Manager Gregg Ramirez, Senior Planner Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary Elwood Tescher, City Consultant from EIP PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on June 9, 2006. CONSENT CALENDAR SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of June 1, 2006. Not available at this ITEM NO. 1 time. Minutes Continued to Motion was made by Chairperson Toerge to continue this item to June 22, 2006 06/22/2006 Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, McDaniel and Henn Noes: None Absent: Hawkins Abstain: None HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: General Plan Update ITEM NO.2 Land Use, Circulation Elements and Draft EIR11 Banning Ranch Continued to June 22, 2006 Ms. Wood noted: • The first priority was acquisition for open space, but if not, then a residential village with a maximum of 1,375 dwelling units, 75,000 square feet of commercial space and 75 hotel rooms. • A policy will be determined regarding the timing of when the residential development could occur and how long someone would have to attempt to acquire for open space. http: / /www. city .newport- beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas /2006 /nm06- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 A letter of understanding to set these terms is being worked out cooperatively with the property owners and the City staff and this letter will be presented to the City Council on June 27, 2006. Staff is asking the Commission to reaffirm those quantities as previously discussed. Staff will return with policy changes that will be consistent with the letter of understanding. comment was opened. comment was closed. Planning Commission supported the staff report numbers with no Use Policy Changes Wood noted: • Transfer of Development Rights policy - as directed by the Planning Commission. • Changes for the policies in the Airport Area and for Newport Center. • Distributed to the Commission were changes recommended by Commissioner Tucker. missioner Tucker noted that a word change to 'encouragement of to fit in preservation and improvement. ssion followed on statistical area sizes that were based on old census boundaries; flexibility and opportunity for transfers and suggested minor age changes achieving extraordinary performance of the development that > the objectives of the plan. Staff will make the suggested change on rially' degrade local traffic conditions and environmental quality. blic comment was opened. blic comment was closed. I LU 6.15 ncludes changes proposed for the Airport Policies that reflect the changes in he number of dwelling units made by the Planning Commission and City ,ouncil as well as changes and additions to policies in response to The Airport .and Use Commission. brief discussion followed on: • language to be added to LU6.15.10 to clarify placement of additive and replacement units and reference to the Comprehensive Plan Area • qualifications for replacement and additive residential units comment was opened. Page 2 of 7 http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us /PlnAgendas /2006 /mnO6- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 Newman, Principal with Government Solutions, representing Koll Center they agree with the added language. comment was closed. Commission inquiry, Ms. Wood gave an overview of the Comprehensive Plan the Koll and Conexant properties within the Airport Business Area. • Minimum site size of residential development. • Residential Village amenities. • Pedestrian connections and joint planning. • Opportunity sites. ff will evaluate the marking of the Comprehensive Plan on exhibit LU23 as II as consult with ROMA as to how the development in that area is to be idled with a comprehensive and cohesive plan and the five acre requirement all the properties. blic comment was opened. a Newman, representing Koll Company, noted that Koll and Conexant have n meeting and are trying to work out a mutual understanding. They share same concerns as expressed this evening. She then noted she would work i staff on suggested language changes. Rosenthal, representing World Premier Investments, noted the following: Their site size is under 5 acres and they are trying to make arrangements with other property owners. The client is willing to work with the City to address locational issues and recognizes requirement for a regulatory plan that addresses the entire residential village and the additional requirement that in order to be the first development there is a minimum lot size of 5 acres. They are concerned this site may remain undeveloped if this issue can not be worked out and suggested language to reduce acreage size. John Young, owner of World Premier, noted the location of his property (1 ;s) and the adjacent property merger (2.46 acres). This is a total of 4.16 . Wood, at Commission inquiry, noted that ROMA had originally ommended 10 acre minimums and was willing to allow a waiver to 5 acres the village in the southern portion on LU 23. With the cap of 2,200 units for entire airport area, that the City Council has put in place, there are not )ugh residential units to go around. Not every property owner in the airport a will be able to develop their land for residential purposes. The City would ,it to make sure the residential development occurs in a fashion that achieve: it goals to have cohesive residential villages and not a sprinkling of idential units. If there is more reduction of the minimum site size standard to :ommodate smaller projects here and there, we are not achieving what we out to do. Page 3 of 7 http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us /PlnAgendas /2006 /mn06- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 r. Young noted that in July 2005 he had presented a development plan for this ea that included mixed use of shopping and 86 unit residential that qualified at at time and presumes that the same can be done for the larger size properties. Rosenthal asked that her applicant be allowed to proceed with the :lopment of the area in accordance with the mixed use concept. immissioner McDaniel noted his concern of projects that are under the 5 acre nimum. To meet the goals for this area of the City, there are going to be me developers who will not be able to meet the criteria. Some projects will fit d some projects will not fit. followed. rperson Toerge noted he is supportive of additional staff discussion. The mission agreed stating they would like additional information in order to s a vote at a later date. is comment was opened. p Bettencourt, representing Brookfield Homes, noted that they agree with a prehensive plan or master plan for the entire area as it is a new land use for area. e Sisneros, representing Conexant, noted that they also have difficulty with 6.15.16 and are in communication with Koll Company. They are willing to k with staff to address mutual concerns and ideas. is comment was closed. Toerge noted the Goal and Policies LU 6.15 will be continued. :)mmissioner Eaton discussed the densities as represented in LU 6.15.12 and 15.13. Tescher discussed the maximum overall density and units per acre. Staff make edits as necessary. missioner Henn suggested adding automobile service to LU 6.15.9. Staff LU 6.15.17 - Development Agreements . Wood noted the recommended edits by Commissioner Tucker on page 5 the hand out. is comment was opened. is comment was closed. missioner Cole suggested combining this policy with the previous one as only apply to Koll Center and Conexant sites and to avoid confusion. Page 4 of 7 http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca.us /PhiAgendas /2006 /mnO6- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 Commission agreed. LU 6.15.18 >erson Toerge asked for any remaining comments through LU 6.15.28? from the Commission. comment was opened. is comment was closed. Center Wood noted the development agreement policy is similar to the one for the ort area. There is also a policy the Commission had requested regarding conversion of hotel rooms to residential entitlement. missioner Eaton noted his concern of the loss of revenue. Commission inquiry, Ms. Temple noted that there are approximately 200± w hotel rooms entitlement. ;ussion followed on condo units versus hotel room trip neutrality, revenue to City, development agreement requirements and policies and expansion of luage. Commission requested that more specific language be added to this is comment was opened. is comment was closed. Element ble H30 - Mr. Tescher noted that the designations in this chart are place Iders and subject to confirmation of the map and the Land Use designation ale. It is an attempt to make changes and will be revised to be consistent. s. Wood noted that the requirement for affordable housing had been changed 15 %. The number of units have been recalculated for RHNA purposes based the number of years and the assumption of SCAG's long term RHNA goals t of Newport Coast. Staff concurs with the recommended 15 %. Temple noted that the City Council were comfortable with the Henn noted his concurrence with the 15% as well. Toerge noted he agrees with the 15% as well. Tucker noted his opinion on affordability of housing and the role Page 5 of 7 http: / /www. city.newport- beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas /2006 /mnO6- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 housing developers. He concluded by stating that 15% is reasonable and the ,re should be an affordable housing implementation program that is placed in ect as well as there could be additional specific housing unit types that can be Commission inquiry, Ms. Wood noted the members of the affordable housing ;k force and the work done on negotiating the agreement with the developers Bayview and other developers that discussed their proposals. A consultant d been hired to develop an in -lieu fee for the City, which led to an ordinance. e draft ordinance is about ready to come to the Commission and the Council t needs adjustments before that time. Reference was then made to AHIP mbers compared to the draft ordinance numbers. imissioner Eaton noted his opinion of Affordable Housing Implementation is (AHIP) and his preference for more uniform standards found in the draft nance, as the individual AHIP's can be made more favorable to those Blopers currently in favor with the City than other developers, and can be red (as was the example given to the Commission) to provide far less than 15% affordable housing than the goal calls for. )mmissioner Henn noted that an ordinance could be changed at any time but structured as it is now, and that the AHIP allows for tailoring how the juirement could be met. He noted his concurrence with providing more credit more bedrooms. ner McDaniel noted that affordable housing would be for senior Wood noted that there is a need for senior affordable housing as well as a i for family affordable housing. The senior project is finished and staff has i told of the need to address family affordable housing. McDaniel noted his concurrence with the 15 %. nmissioner Tucker noted he prefers the AHIP approach as opposed to the inance. He opined that having a subsidized portion of 15% for a product :sn't seem right and more importantly doesn't seem necessary. The AHIP Broach is more flexible and allows the City to look for what is necessary ing the time period. irperson Toerge noted that he supports the AHIP as does Commissioners e and McDaniel. The Commission straw vote supports the AHIP. 1s. Wood noted the Housing Program that will be looked at should set a goal of 5 %. With the AHIP, an ordinance would not be necessary. Discussion then >Ilowed on the proposed language changes for the Housing Program 2.2.1. he change to Housing Program 3.2.1 was required of the Airport Area Land Ise Commission and changes will be reflected in the maps, etc. She discussed ie removal of West Newport Mesa from the listing as this is not a real potential )r housing. :ussion continued on adequate sites for RHNA goals, affordable housing, in fees paid by commercial developers and analyzing housing need generated Page 6 of 7 http: / /www. city .newport- beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas /2006 /mnO6- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 06/15/2006 Page 7 of 7 by creation of new jobs with commercial development; responsibility of H 6.1 policy to the City Attorney's office; and, H 3.1.3 change to drop citation of very low (which will be re- inserted). Public comment was opened. Public comment was closed. Commissioner Eaton brought up Table H12, the loss of affordable housing units and term changes and density bonuses of miscellaneous residential. Ms. Temple discussed Villa Point condominiums and Newport North affordable housing. Public comment was opened. Public comment was closed. Motion was made by Chairperson Toerge to continue this item to June 22, 2006. Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, McDaniel and Henn Noes: None Absent: Hawkins Abstain: None ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS a) City Council Follow -up - Ms. Temple noted that the Council approved the ordinance regarding certain type of light standards to exceed height limits with a use permit; Ms. Wood reported that the letters presented to the Council regarding the General Plan will be distributed to the Commission. b) Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Developmen Committee - no report. c) Report from Planning Commission's representatives to the General Plan Update Committee - Commissioner Eaton reported on the sub - committee discussion on mixed use categories and anomalies. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - none. h) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report - Commissioner Eaton asked about Our Lady Queen o Angels. Ms Temple answered she will send an email. i) Project status - none. Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Tucker noted he may have to be excused from the next meeting, but will advise. ADJOURNMENT: 8:45 p.m. JADJOURNMENT BARRY EATON, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION http: / /www.city.newport- beach. ca. us /PlnAgendas /2006 /mn06- 15- 06.htm 06/23/2008