Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/06/1989COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. p p PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7 :30 P.M. 4 pp�q��y DATE: July 6, 1989 �y OX CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL I I I I I I I I FINDEX Present * * Commissioner Debay was excused from the Planning Commission Absent * meeting. EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, City Attorney William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Rich Edmonston, City Traffic Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Election of Officers n * Motion was made and voted on to continue the Election of * * * * * * Officers to the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission meeting Cont'd to Absent ` * to provide incoming Planning Commissioners an opportunity 7 -20 -89 to participate in the election of officers. MOTION CARRIED. Minutes of June 22. 1989: Minutes of 6 -22 -89 James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that the motion to set Amendment No. 679 for public hearing be corrected to Commissioner Edwards. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve the amended June Ayes * * * * * * 22, 1989, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Absent Public Comments: Public Comments No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non - agenda items. COMMISSIONERS Ah July 6, 1989 CITY OF. NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the Agenda James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, June 30, 1989, in front of City Hall. Request for Continuances: Request fo: Continuant( James. Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant, Hoag Memorial Hospital, located at 301 Newport Boulevard, has requested that Item No. 2, Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended), be continued to the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. He further stated that staff recommends that Item No. 7, EPAC Financial, regarding property located at 3619 Ocean Boulevard, be continued to the August 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 2 to the A s * * * * * * July 20, 1989, Planning Commission meeting and to continue t * Item No. 7, to the August 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Resubdivision No. 897 (Public Hearina) Item No.l Request to resubdivide four lots and portions of two other 8897 lots into two parcels of land for commercial and residential purposes on property located in the SP -6 Approved District. LOCATION: Lots 25 and 28 and portions of Lots 29 and 30, Block 23, Newport Beach, located at 111 -117 23rd Street, on the northwesterly side of 23rd Street, between West Balboa Boulevard and West Ocean Front, in the Cannery Village/MacFadden Square Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -6 APPLICANT: Piero Serra, Newport Beach ,. OWNER: Meridian Medical, Newport Beach -2- COMMISSIONERS - y�G y�y9i 9.p 9y �k July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES R CALL INDEX ENGINEER: PacWest Civil Engineering, Inc., Huntington Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. James Skaug, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Skaug concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Resubdivision No. Ayes * * * * * * 897, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Absent * MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 2. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 3. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 4. That public improvements may be required of A developer per Section 19.08.120 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of building permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works and Planning Departments. The Parcel Map shall be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by • Ordinance and the Public Works Department. -3- COMMISSIONERS CALL 0 • July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3. That the parking meters located in the public sidewalk shall be relocated in accordance with Public Works standards. 4. That the existing gas service shall be relocated out of the required 10 foot rear yard alley setback. 5. That the existing stairs of the fourplex on Parcel No. 2 shall be removed so as not to extend over the proposed interior parcel line. 6. That the existing fourplex shall be modified so as to conform with fire protection requirements as established by the Building Department. 7. That a minimum .4 inch highup be provided between the center line of the alley and a point 5 feet into the rear yard setback. The maximum ramp slope within the 10 foot alley setback shall be 28. All work within the public right -of -way shall be completed under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. 8. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 9. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 10. That deteriorated sidewalk be reconstructed along the 23rd Street frontage under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. 11. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 12. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. -4- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended) (Continued Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the expansion of the existing Hoag Hospital facility on property located in the A -P -H District. The proposed amendment includes: a request to establish an employee child care facility to be located in prefabricated modular buildings adjacent to Newport Boulevard; the construction of an addition to the administrative offices, some of which will be located in prefabricated modular buildings; and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Record of Survey 15 -30, located at 301 Newport Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard. ZONE: A -P -H APPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant has requested that this item be continued to the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Use Permit No. Ayes * * * * * * 1421 (Amended) to the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission Absent * meeting. MOTION CARRIED. A. General Plan Amendment 89 -1E (Public Hearing) Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Element so as to allow automobile and general storage in areas designated for Retail and Service Commercial and to specify these allowed uses in the specific area description for Agate Avenue, Balboa Island; and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach �111111� -5- MINUTES INDEX Item No.2 TIP 1621A Cont'd to 7 -20 -89 T1-am Nn_ I GPA 89 -1E LCP A #16 A 680 UP3353 CRDP No.15 R895 Denied COMMISSIONERS ZmG�. �09pi y� yy � 9y?�yCCO�o July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX B. Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan so as to allow automobile and general storage in areas designated for Retail and Service Commercial and to specify these allowed uses in the specific area description for Agate Avenue, Balboa Island. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND C. Amendment No. 680 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the C -1 District regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to allow automobile and general storage where consistent with the General Plan, subject to the approval of a use permit in each case. AND • Use Permit No. 3353 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of automobile and general storage with three second floor residential units on property located in the C -1 District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a second floor access deck to encroach 4 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback. AND Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 15 (Discussion) Request to approve a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the implementation of State law relative to low and moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone in conjunction with the construction of a combined commercial /residential development on property located in the C -1 District. AND • -6- COMMISSIONERS G�y�o� y9CC��yO� July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX Resubdivision No. 895 (Public Hearing) Request to combine three parcels of land into a single building site for commercial /residential development on property located in the C -1 District. LOCATION: Lots 12, 13 and 14, Block 7, Section 1, Balboa Island, located at 119 -123 Agate Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Agate Avenue between Park Avenue and South Bay Front on Balboa Island. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: D. M. Stone OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Winburn referred to correspondence that the Planning Commission received from the applicant, Mr. Stone, dated July 5, 1989, the Balboa Island Improvement • Association dated June 29, 1989, the Little Balboa Island Property Owners Association dated February 22, 1989, a petition signed by 37 residents in support of the application, and a sign -up sheet consisting of 15 Balboa Island residents interested in leasing the garage /storage space in the proposed building. Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager, stated that the proposed project has a potential impact on the viability of the area that has been zoned for commercial use. He explained that the project is not retail, and staff is primarily concerned that the use would adversely affect the viability of the commercial area. Mr. Lenard recommended that two parking spaces be required for the commercial space, and the stairway from the ground floor to the second floor be moved to create an adequate 20 foot aisle width for the access driveway from the alley. Mr. Lenard suggested that the project be redesigned to provide two double garages and one tandem garage inasmuch as it would lessen the possibility of the individual garages being leased separate from the residential units. He recommended that said garages front on the alley. Mr. Lenard stated that the proposed 0.62 Floor Area Ratio would not be allowed under the Floor Area Ratio Ordinance • that was reviewed by the Planning Commission and recommended to the City Council. He recommended that if -7- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX the Planning Commission approves the project, Condition No. 12 should be modified to state "That the general and automobile storage component of the project be reduced in floor area so as to not exceed 0.50 FAR or a total of 3,825 square feet." Mr. Lenard explained that said requirement would reduce the commercial size of the project by approximately 900 square feet. Commissioner Edwards addressed staff's response to the noise level as checked in the Negative Declaration. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, explained that it was determined that there may be an increase in noise levels during the construction phase. Commissioner Pers6n addressed the request to amend the General Plan and to permit the commercial use in one small block inasmuch as said request could set a precedent for "spot zoning ". Mr. Burnham explained that the project would not be considered "spot zoning ". He commented that a service would be provided to the local residents inasmuch as Balboa Island has a parking problem and there is limited • storage facilities for vehicles and personal belongings. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Burnham replied that a General Plan Amendment would be required to permit storage facilities in C -1 Districts throughout the City, subject to a use permit. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. David Stone, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. MY. Stone addressed the severe parking problem on Balboa Island, and how the proposed project could serve the community needs by providing additional storage. He commented that local residents have expressed an interest in leasing the storage facilities, and he referred to the foregoing petition and letters in support of the project. Mr. Stone stated that the vehicular access would be from the alley, and the curb cut located on Agate Avenue would be eliminated. He addressed the project's design, and the amount of interest shown by area merchants to display merchandise in the first floor windows. He indicated that an on -site resident manager will maintain the storage facility and the property will be provided with a good security system. Mr. Stone stated that he concurred with revised Conditions No. 2 and No. 3 as prepared by staff on parking inasmuch as said conditions would allow flexibility of providing garages in convenient • locations of the re- designed project. In reference to amended Condition No. 12 with respect to a reduced floor -8- COMMISSIONERS ZmNO ,o° d - Z s July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX area ratio, Mr. Stone requested that the project be built in accordance with the design as proposed. In response to questions posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Stone replied that he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", with the exception of Conditions No. 2, No. 3, and No. 12. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Stone explained that an on -site resident manager will reside in one of the three units on the second floor; that the storage units would be rented on a monthly or yearly basis; that the manager would administer 5 window displays, 14 garages and 15 storage spaces; and he said that he would not be adverse to limiting reasonable hours of access to the storage facility. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn with respect to automobile storage, Mr. Stone explained that 6 garages would be designed for the on -site residents and the remaining garages will be available to the general public with the intent to lease to residents on Balboa Island. . Mr. Stone explained that automobiles that are not used frequently could be stored in the garages. Mr. Stone, the Planning Commission, and Mr. Hewicker discussed the City's concerns with respect to the floating garage spaces; that the required residential parking spaces would not be used solely by the residents of the development; and if an enforcement officer would be able to properly identify the owner of an automobile. Mr. Stone stated that he would agree to a condition that all of the ground floor garages be used for vehicles and not miscellaneous storage. Mr. Stone added that doors will be installed with eye -level windows so as to address staff's concerns regarding inspections. He further stated that he would agree to rent the available garages to only Balboa Island residents. Commissioner Pers6n indicated his concern with respect to enforcing the condition. Commissioner Edwards and Mr. Hewicker expressed concerns with respect to sub - leasing the garage parking spaces. Mr. Hewicker addressed the problems that staff could encounter to enforce conditions governing the use of floating garage parking spaces. Discussion ensued between Mr. Stone, Commissioner Merrill, and Mr. Hewicker with respect to designating specific parking spaces for the residential units and for commercial use. Mr. Stone agreed to cooperate with staff by assigning -9- COMMISSIONERS y °G c^ yoy9�'vy 9y'3�. - yy90 y << Qp o July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX designated parking spaces for the residential units and commercial use at the time of occupancy. Pearl Meyers Darling, 120 Pearl Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission and also on behalf of her mother, June Meyers, 125 Agate Avenue. She stated their support of the proposed project; however, she expressed concern that three feet would separate the development from her mother's adjacent property. She explained that three feet would be an inadequate access area to their rental units. Mr. William Darling, 120 Pearl Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission to state his support of the project. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the proposed project would not come close to solving the parking problem on Balboa Island. He stated that he is a proponent of mixed residential and commercial uses; however, he would not Son consider a mini - storage facility to be appropriate for the * area. Motion was made to deny General Plan Amendment 89- l(E), Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16, Amendment No. 680, Use Permit No. 3353, Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 15, and Resubdivision No. 895, on the basis that it is not good planning to allow a storage facility in the middle of a mixed use residential - commercial area and that it would set a precedent for the City. Commissioner Winburn stated that she would support the motion on the basis that the project could be precedent setting in other commercial areas throughout the City, and she had concerns regarding automobile storage. Commissioner Di Sano reluctantly suppolted the motion. He pointed out that the local Associations and the residents support the project, and he approved of the area's upgrading. However, he. stated that he had concerns that congestion from the ferry and the project would impact the area. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the innovative project was a good attempt to address the parking and storage problems on Balboa Island. He pointed out that the applicant had residential support, and none of the residents opposed the project. -10- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES -52 ROTCALL INDEX Commissioner Edwards did not support the motion on the basis that three residential units would not create greater problems on Balboa Island. Mr. Burnham submitted findings for denial based on the discussion during the public hearing. He stated that no findings for denial would be necessary for General Plan Amendment 89 -1(E) and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16. Amendment No. 680 would not require findings but the Zoning Code requires findings in the event of disapproval by the Planning Commission. He explained that the principal basis for the decision is that the Planning Commission and the City Council designated the subject area as mixed use commercial- residential area with the hope that the designation would establish a viable commercial community that could serve the needs of Balboa Island residents and this particular project would not be consistent with that requirement. An additional finding would be that the project could lead to certain enforcement problems. Mr. Burnham stated that use permits and resubdivisions have to be consistent with the General Plan.before they can be approved and in the absence of the General Plan Amendment, the resubdivision and the use permit must be denied because they are inconsistent with the General Plan. Motion was voted on to deny Environmental Document, General Plan Amendment 89 -1(E), Local Coastal Program Amendment No. Ayes * * * * 16, Amendment No. 680, Use Permit No. 3353, Coastal Noes * * Residential Development Permit No. 15, and Resubdivision Absent * No. 895, subject to the following findings. MOTION CARRIED. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -1(E), LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16, AMENDMENT NO. 680: 1. That the principal basis for the decision is that the Planning Commission and the City Council designated the subject area as mixed use commercial- residential area with the hope that the designation would establish a viable commercial community that could serve the needs of Balboa Island residents and this particular project would not be consistent with that requirement. • 2. That the project could lead to certain enforcement problems. -11- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH USE PERMIT N0, 3353: 1. That the use permit is inconsistent, with the General Plan. 2. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3353 will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals,.comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. 11VIVI 1. That the resubdivision is inconsistent with the General Plan. • Use Permit No. 3355 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a dry cleaning facility in the Albertson's Shopping Center on property located in the C -1 -H District. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1, of Parcel Map 163 -23 (Resubdivision No. 673), located at 3027 East Coast Highway, on the southwesterly corner of East Coast Highway and Iris Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: Stephanie Margaretis, E1 Toro OWNER: Newport Balboa Savings, Corona del Mar The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Manny Margaretis, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Margaretis concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. -12- MINUTES INDEX TtPm Nn-4 UP 3355 Approved COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL INDEX Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. Ayes * * * * * * 3355, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit Absent * "A ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: . 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and with the Local Coastal Program and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3355 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. 0 111 11111 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That any boilers shall be isolated in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 3. That the use of chemicals shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. 4. There shall be no outside storage of materials, supplies or other paraphernalia likely to be objectionable to the adjacent property owners or residents. 5. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be screened from view and shall be sound attenuated to be no greater than existing sound levels at the property lines. 6. That prior to the on -site cleaning and laundering, a licensed engineer practicing in acoustics, retained by the City at the applicant's expense shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the noise impact of the project does not exceed existing sound levels at the property lines. -13- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES 1 ROX -CALL 1 I J i l l I ( INDEX • 0 7. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from adjoining properties. 8. That the proposed dry cleaning operation shall be installed and operated in conformance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 9. That the dry cleaning facility shall not be open for business prior to 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. daily. 10. That all employees shall park on site. 11. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the on -site cleaning or laundering use. 12. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. se Permit No. 3356 (Public Hearing) I Item No.S Request to permit the establishment of a take -out UP3356 restaurant with on -sale beer and wine and incidental seating specializing in pizza on property located in the Cont'd to C -1 District. The proposal also includes a request to 8 -10 -89 . waive the required off - street parking spaces. LOCATION: Lots 15 and 16, Block 6, Balboa Tract, located at 107 Palm Street, on the northwesterly corner of Palm Street and East Ocean Front, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Lourdes Gulmatico, Huntington Beach OWNER: James G. West, Costa Mesa Commissioner Persdn and James Hewicker, Planning Director, addressed what effect Amendment No. 679, "Specialty Food Use" Ordinance would have on the subject application. Commissioner Persdn commented that the application would require a use permit and would not be affected by the action of the Ordinance as the request has been proposed. -14- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Carlo Mione, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Mione explained that if the "Specialty Food Use" Ordinance would be adopted that the subject request would be modified to the Ordinance's requirements. Based on Mr. Hewicker's testimony that no final action would be taken on the Ordinance for at least six weeks, Mr. Mione requested that the Planning Commission take action on the subject use permit. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, -Mr. Mione concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Mione explained that the roll -up door to the establishment is to allow the door to be open during business hours. I ( I There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. • Commissioner Winburn addressed "Specialty Food Use" Ordinance (Amendment No. 679) and Amendment No. 675 to establish floor area ratios. Motion was made to continue Motion Use Permit No. 3356 to the Planning Commission meeting of August 10, 1989, subject to Planning Commission action of Amendment No. 679 on August 10, 1989, inasmuch as she could not make the necessary finding to approve the application. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Winburn, Robert Burnham, City Attorney, and Commissioner Edwards with respect to the effect that Amendment No. 679 "Specialty Food Use" Ordinance and Amendment No. 675, to establish floor area ratio, would have on the subject use permit. Mr. Mione requested that the Planning Commission take action on the application inasmuch as the applicants are paying rent on the property, and improvements have started on the building. In response to concerns expressed by Mr. Mione, Chairman Pomeroy explained that the Planning Commission must make a finding that the proposal is not an intensification of the existing, nonconforming retail structure to be consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. He stated that the subject application with a reduction in the amount of seating would satisfy the requirements of the • 11111111 "Specialty Food Use" Ordinance if the Ordinance would be adopted by the Planning Commission and the City Council. -15- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLTcALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX 11 Ayes Absent • • Commissioner Pers6n cautioned the applicant not to proceed with any further building improvements until final action has been taken. Mr. Mione reluctantly agreed to continue the use permit inasmuch as the take -out restaurant would experience a substantial loss of revenue during the tourist season. *I *I *I *I *I *I Motion was voted on to continue Use Permit No. 3356 to the August 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. The Planning Commission recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:57 p.m. Variance No. 1152 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a single family dwelling which will exceed 1.5 times the buildable area of the site, will provide less than the required open space and exceeds the 24 foot basic height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District, on property located in the R -2 District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow: a 10 foot building encroachment, a 14 foot chimney encroachment, and a 14 foot 6 inch second floor deck encroachment, all within the required 20 foot front yard setback adjacent to First Avenue; and a 7 foot building encroachment into the required 10 foot rear yard setback. LOCATION: Portions of Lots 2 and 4, Block 429, Corona del Mar, located at 2310 First Avenue, on the northeasterly side of First Avenue, between Acacia Avenue and Begonia Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANTS: Arthur Lesser and Robert Feiss, Los Angeles OWNERS: Same as applicants -16- Item No.6 V1152 Approved COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROCC"CALL I I I I I I[ I I INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Robert Burnham, City Attorney, replied that the proposed project would have a ,Floor Area Ratio of 2.305 times buildable area. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy with respect to the two car carport, William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, explained that one garage space is included in the buildable area calculations. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Arthur Lesser, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Leeser concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Lesser requested that the Planning Commission not discriminate against the development because it would be an improvement to the neighborhood. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Merrill indicated his concerns with respect to the substandard size lot. Commissioner Merrill referred to the proposed plan depicting a 50 percent encroachment into the front yard setback, 60 percent encroachment into the rear yard setback, and he pointed out further encroachments into the setback areas. Commissioner Merrill commented that the completed project would ruin the street scene, and should be scaled down in size. Commissioner Winburn and Commissioner Merrill discussed the encroachments, and the three foot wall built to the sidewalk. Commissioner Merrill suggested that the fireplace and balcony encroachments be reduced in the front yard setback area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, James Hewicker, Planning Director, replied that the subdivision was created many years ago. He stated that if structures that created the three substandard lots would be built to the floor area ratio of the Zoning Code on the substandard lots the structures would result in very small dwelling units. Mr. Hewicker stated that a total of at least 30 similar substandard lots are located throughout the older portions of the City. or I I I I *I I I I Motion was made to deny Variance No. 1145 subject to the findings in Exhibit "C ". -17- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLE-CALL I J I J i l l I I INDEX Substitute motion was made to approve Variance No. 1145, Substitute subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion * Chairman Pomeroy stated that the applicant submitted revised plans depicting a reduction in height and floor area ratio as requested by the Commission at the May 18, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Pomeroy explained that the subject application is similar to previous modifications that have been approved to allow nonconformance or continued encroachments into setbacks. Commissioner Merrill explained that he does not consider the modification of a garage to a carport a reduction in floor area inasmuch as it does not reduce the bulk and size of the dwelling unit. Commissioner Merrill expressed his concern that the fireplace and the balcony encroach too far into the front yard setback area. Substitute motion was amended to add a condition stating Amended * that the fireplace and second floor balcony encroachments each be reduced two feet less in the front yard setback area. • Commissioner Winburn supported the substitute motion. Ayes * * * * * Substitute motion was voted on to approve Variance No. 1152 No * subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", Absent * including the addition of Condition No. 11 requesting that the fireplace and second floor balcony encroachments each be reduced two feet less into the front yard setback area. FINDINGS: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land and building referred to in this application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings and /or uses in the same District inasmuch as the subject property is comprised of the rear portions of two previous subdivided lots and that the resulting reorientation of the property has resulted in overly restrictive setbacks which excessively limit the amount of allowable gross structural area on the site. In a similar manner, the required setbacks have prohibited the applicant from providing the required volume of open space, inasmuch as a large portion of the proposed open space is located • 11111111 within the required 20 foot front and 10 foot rear yard setbacks. -18- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT. BEACH MINUTES M ROLTCALL I I I Jill I I INDEX • • 2. That the granting of the variance to the buildable area and open space requirement is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as the proposed project as conditioned is of comparable size and bulk to other buildings in the surrounding neighborhood and that the resulting open space, based on the proposed setbacks and containing one or more dimensions less than six feet, results in a greater amount of open space than is required on a typical lot within the neighborhood. 3. That the granting of a variance to the buildable area and open space requirements will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be materially detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the subject property and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare 'or injurious to property improvements in the neighborhood. 4. That the proposed encroachments into the required front and rear yard setbacks will not under the circumstances of the case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 5. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 6. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building, and use proposed in this application, which circumstances and conditions do not generally apply to land, building, and /or uses on the other lots in the area which justify the approval of a greater height for the subject building. -19- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES M ROL-C CALL ( I INDEX 7. That the subject property, in conjunction with the approval of this variance, maintains sufficient buildable area so as to permit the construction of a sufficiently large home within the required basic height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. 8. That the approval of the proposed variance to exceed the basic height limit will, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That the development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved revised plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the approval of building permits. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That all vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley. 5. That a sidewalk be constructed along the First Avenue frontage and that the existing deteriorated curb and gutter be reconstructed along the First Avenue frontage. Work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. That site distance be provided at the intersection of the alley and First Avenue that complies with Std. 110 -L. 7. That no construction or landscaping higher than 6 inches shall be permitted in the 5 foot side yard setback adjacent to the alley. -20- COMMISSIONERS CALL July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 8. That the gross structural area of the proposed project, including one carport parking space, shall not exceed 1,867± square feet. 9. That this variance shall expire unless exercised within 24 months of the date of approval as specified in Section 20.82.090A of.the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. That the fireplace and second floor balcony encroachments each shall be reduced two feet less into the front yard setback area. Variance No. 1155 (Public Hearing) I I I 11 Request to permit the construction of a single family dwelling which exceeds the maximum allowable height in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District on property located in the R -1 District. The height of the proposed dwelling will not exceed the height of the top of curb on Ocean Boulevard. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed dwelling to encroach 10 feet into the required 10 foot front yard setback adjacent to Ocean Boulevard. LOCATION: Lot 15, Tract No. 1257, located at 3619 Ocean Boulevard, on the southerly side of Ocean Boulevard between Orchid Avenue and Poinsettia Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANT: EPAC Financial, Inc., Costa Mesa OWNER: Thomas Linden, Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that staff has requested that this item be continued to the August 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting, to allow staff additional time to review the subject application. Motion Motion was made and voted on to continue Variance No. 1155 0 * * * * * to the August 10, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. t * MOTION CARRIED. -21- MINUTES INDEX Item No.7 V1155 Cont'd to R -in -R9 COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Variance No. 1156 (Public Hearing) Request to permit alterations to a nonconforming residential structure that exceeds the allowable floor area of 1.5 times the buildable area on property located in the R -1.5 District. The proposed development will convert a nonconforming triplex into a duplex, but will also create additional floor area to the building. LOCATION: Lot 19, Block 6, Section 1, Balboa Island, located at 205 Pearl Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Pearl Avenue, between Park Avenue and North Bay Front, on Balboa Island. ZONE: R -1.5 APPLICANTS: Ira and Riki Kucheck, Balboa Island Mr. Doug Ahlstrom, designer, appeared before the Planning Commission to address Chairman Pomeroy's suggestions regarding the stairway. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the nonconforming property Motion Ayes with 3 dwelling units on the property will be converted t into 2 dwelling units, which will be in conformance with the General Plan. Motion was made to approve Variance No. 1156 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Pers6n explained that the 100 square foot -22- MINUTES INDEX Item No.8 V1156 Approved OWNERS: Same as applicants . The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mrs. Riki Kucheck, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. She concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mrs. Kucheck distributed copies of a petition supporting the application. Mrs. Kucheck explained that the intent of the conversion is to accommodate the applicants and Mrs. Kucheck's parents. Mrs. Kucheck, Commissioner Winburn, Chairman Pomeroy, and James Hewicker, Planning Director, discussed the additional 136 square feet and the feasibility of reducing said square footage in the storage area or stairway in the existing structure. Mr. Doug Ahlstrom, designer, appeared before the Planning Commission to address Chairman Pomeroy's suggestions regarding the stairway. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the nonconforming property Motion Ayes with 3 dwelling units on the property will be converted t into 2 dwelling units, which will be in conformance with the General Plan. Motion was made to approve Variance No. 1156 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Pers6n explained that the 100 square foot -22- MINUTES INDEX Item No.8 V1156 Approved COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX reduction is a minimal request inasmuch as the project eliminates one residential unit generating less of an impact to the area. Commissioner Di Sano concurred with the motion. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Robert Burnham, City Attorney, stated that the Zoning Code prohibits the property owner from converting the structure back to three units. William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, referred to Condition No. 4 in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" which permits only two dwelling units on the property if the application is approved. Motion was voted on to approve Variance No. 1156 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building, and use proposed in this application, which circumstances and conditions do not generally apply to land, building, and /or uses in the same district inasmuch as the new construction is necessary in order to combine the two upper units into one dwelling unit. Furthermore the addition does not add to the bulk of the residential development as viewed from Pearl Avenue or from the alley. 2. That the granting of a variance to further exceed the permitted gross floor area is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as the owner will voluntarily eliminate the third dwelling unit and thereby bring the building into conformance with the density requirements of the Municipal Code. 3. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use, property, and building will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements I I I I I I I I in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 23- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX 4. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. 5. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations. 2. That the gross floor area of the structure shall not exceed 3,258± sq.ft. (1.83 x buildable area). 3. That a building permit shall be obtained for the expansion after a Coastal Permit is approved. 4. That only two dwelling units shall be permitted on • the property. 5. That one garage space shall be provided for each dwelling unit. 6. That this variance shall expire unless exercised within 24 months of the date of approval as specified in Section 20.82.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Amendment No. 681 (Public Hearing) Item No.9 Request to consider possible revisions to Chapter 20.78 of A681 the Newport Beach Municipal Code related to Granny Units; and the acceptance of an environmental document. (R1192) INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Approved James Hewicker, Planning Director, referred to the letter distributed to the Planning Commission from Sara Marvin - Abraham dated July 5, 1989, requesting that the minimum lot size be revised to 5,428 square feet instead of 5,500 square feet, as suggested. Mrs. Marvin - Abraham explained • that a 613 square foot apartment over the garage has been added to their home so that Mr. and Mrs. Abrahams' mothers may reside with them occasionally. -24- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES MROLE-CALLIJ I Jill I INDEX • In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Hewicker replied that approximately 300 lots would be affected by the revision to the Granny Unit Ordinance. Discussion ensued regarding the square footage of sub- divided lots throughout the City, specifically on the Balboa Peninsula and old Corona del Mar. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, explained that the 5,500 square foot minimum lot size for a Granny Unit was selected to eliminate the possibility of Granny Units being developed in Old Corona del Mar. Mr. Hewicker explained that a 1 -1/2 lot size in Old Corona del Mar would typically be 5,310 square feet. Mr. Burnham stated that there was no primary reason why the 5,500 square foot lot size was recommended. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Burnham stated that there was notification of the subject public hearing in the newspaper. He explained that there was not a re- zoning of a parcel that would require notification to property owners. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Ron Hagerthy, 303 Narcissus Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hagerthy stated his concern with respect to the authenticity of the Verification of Occupancy that is provided in the Municipal Code - i.e.: that the property owner shall submit to the Planning Department the occupants names and birth dates once a year. He stated that a second concern would be that the legal owner of the granny unit may occupy the primary residence or the granny unit, and if the property owner occupies the granny unit there would be the possibility that the primary residence could become a rental unit. Mr. Hagerthy commented that the granny unit could also be occupied by a person under 60 years of age. Chairman Pomeroy and Mr. Hagerthy discussed the transfer of deed from the property owner to an immediate member of the family and the tax implications. Mr. Hagerthy stated that he had a concern that the development standards to be applied at the time of occupancy would put an unnecessary burden on Code Enforcement and not the Planning Commission, inasmuch as the right of the person making the application should be viewed at the time of application and not under a promise that the applicant would comply at a later date. -25- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES E ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX • • In response to Commissioner Pers6n's statement that he did not recall that the Planning Commission requested that the Granny Unit Ordinance be amended to allow the property owner to live in either the primary residence or the granny unit, Commissioner Edwards and Mr. Laycock replied that Carol Korade, former Assistant City Attorney, requested the revision on behalf of a City Councilman during the May 18, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Hewicker, and Mr. Burnham discussed the restrictions governing the number of occupants residing in a dwelling based on the Uniform Building Code regulations. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n's reference to Section 20.78.025 G, "The primary residence or the rg anny unit shall be continuously occupied.." Mr. Burnham replied that said section could be revised to state "The primary residence shall be continuously occupied by the legal owner of the property." He explained that the original concept was that the primary residence would be occupied by the property owner who is bringing an elderly immediate member of the family to reside on the property. Mr. Burnham referred to a previously approved granny unit application wherein the property owner deeded one -half of her property to her son which qualified her son as the primary owner of the property and the mother qualified as an occupant of the granny unit. Mr. Burnham commented that staff would revise said section to satisfy the Planning Commission's concern before the Ordinance is considered by the City Council., Mr. Burnham referred to Mr. Hagerthy's concern with respect to the development standards being satisfied at the time of occupancy. Mr. Burnham explained that the development standards remain throughout the duration of the granny unit; however, the purpose of the revision was on the basis that the primary unit and the granny unit may not exist at the time of the Planning Commission's approval. Mr. Hagerthy reappeared before the Planning Commission to address his concerns with respect to the eligibility of the occupant of the granny unit and the abuse of rental units in Old Corona del Mar. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. -26- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTEST M ROLTCALL I I I J i l l I I INDEX Motion • • Commissioner Pers6n reviewed the concept of the Granny Unit Ordinance which would be that the property owner would reside in the primary unit and the granny unit would be occupied by a person 60 years of age or older. Motion was made to recommend Amendment No. 681 to City Council with the following revisions to Section 20.78.025: C. Minimum Lot Size. A minimum lot size of 5.450 square feet shall be required in order to establish a granny unit pursuant to this Chapter. G. Owner Occupancy Required. The primary residence shall be continuously occupied by the legal owner of the property. Mr. Burnham stated that he does not disagree with the concept of a property owner deeding a portion or all of the property to an immediate member of the family as long as the senior citizen occupies the granny unit, and a legal owner of the property occupies the primary residence. He explained that the scenario assures that there is a relationship between the two parties. Mr. Burnham recognized the Planning Commission's concern to avoid the scenario where the senior resident is the property owner, residing in the granny unit, and renting the primary residence. Commissioner Pers6n concurred with Mr. Burnham's foregoing testimony. Mr. Burnham commented that the Ordinance be revised so as not to trigger reassessment. In response to Commissioner Edwards' request for clarification, Mr. Burnham explained that the property owner could reside in the primary unit and rent out the granny unit to a person 60 years of age or older. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Commissioner Pers6n explained that Section 20.78.025, Development Standards, shall remain as stated: "The following standards shall be met prior to the occupancy of the granny unit pursuant to this Chapter: ", "shall" is mandatory. Commissioner Di Sano supported the motion; however, he stated that he does not want to see the minimum lot size for a granny unit increased in increments that would destroy the granny unit concept that was initiated by the City. _27_ COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUT M R O L L CALL J J J J i l l I I INDEX Motion was voted on to recommend Amendment No. 681 (Resolution No. 1192) to the City Council, subject to the findings for approval in Exhibit "A ", including the ayes * * * * * * foregoing revisions to Section 20.78.025, Subsections C and Absent * G, as follows. MOTION CARRIED. C. Minimum Lot Size. A minimum lot size of 5,450 square feet shall be required in order to establish a granny unit pursuant to this Chapter. G. Owner Occupancy Required. The primary residence shall be continuously occupied by at least one person having an ownership interest in the property. Findings: 1. That the proposed increase in required lot size from 5,000 sq.ft. to 5,450 sq.ft. in order to establish a granny unit on a residential lot, is minor in nature, and will have only a minimal impact on the • availability of low and moderate income housing in the City. 2. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan. 3. That the proposed amendment will provide more flexibility of a property owner to occupy the primary residence or a granny unit on a residential lot. t Amendment No. 684 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Newport Place Planned Community A684 District Regulations so as to allow restaurant uses on — General Commercial Site 1, subject to the approval of a use (x1193) permit in each case. LOCATION: Lot 2, Tract No. 7694, located at 3601 Approved Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street North in the Newport Place Planned Community. • I I I I I I I APPLICANT P -C Champion Development Company, Long Beach -P8- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTE = ROLE CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX Motion ot 0 *1 * OWNER: Same as applicant James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Site Plan does not have the required parking requirements; however, he explained that the parking requirements will be reviewed when use permits are submitted to the Planning Commission for approval. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. John Champion, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Champion stated that he is aware that use permits are required for each restaurant facility located at the subject site. The public hearing was closed at this time. * Motion was made to recommend Amendment No. 684 (Resolution No. 1193) to the City Council, subject to the findings in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Di Sano checked that the * applicant was aware that use permits are required for * restaurants at the subject location. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the provision of food service uses in General Commercial Site 1 will reduce the need for employees to leave the area for lunch, thereby reducing automobile traffic. 2. That food service uses commercial and office Planned Community. will be supportive of the uses in the Newport Place 3. That individual restaurants will be subject to the securing of a use permit, thereby insuring that potentially adverse effects of a particular restaurant will be addressed. DISCUSSION ITEM: Di Report from the Planning Director regarding Use Permit No. 1510 (Amended) of Newport Harbor Adolescent Hospital UP 1510 located at 1501 16th Street, Newport Beach. The Planning Director explained to the Planning Commission the proposed development. It was determined that no further action would be required inasmuch as the proposed -29- COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH changes were minor in nature. Motion * Motion was made and voted on that the proposed Ayes * * * * * * modifications would not warrant an amendment to Use Permit Absent * No. 1510 (Amended). MOTION CARRIED. • ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Motion was made and voted on to excuse Commissioner Edwards from the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 9:50 p.m. GARY I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING ANNINGCOMMISSION -30- MINUT INDEX Additional Business Edwards