Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/07/2008Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes August 7, 2008 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page 1 of 7 file: / /Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, Peotter, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren — all present. STAFF PRESENT: David Lepo, Planning Director Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager Aaron Harp, Assistant City Attorney Tony Brine, Principal Civil Engineer Patrick Alford, Planning Manager Kay Sims, Assistant Planner Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Secretary and Administrative Assistant PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on August 1, 2008. HEARING ITEMS UBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of July 17, 2007. ITEM NO. 1 Motion was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner McDaniel to approve the minutes as amended. Approved yes: Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, Peotter and McDaniel bstain: Toerge and Hillgren SUBJECT: North Newport Center TPO (PA2008 -126) ITEM NO. 2 PA2008 -126 Approval to develop 96,428 square feet of office space in Block 500,North Newport Center Planned Community, pursuant to Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Approved Ms. Wood gave an overview of the staff report noting: . The Planning Commission is to determine compliance with the Traffi Phasing Ordinance (TPO). All other approvals associated with thi file: / /Y: \Users \PLN\Shared \Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 project have been given. A recognized intersection that is currently operating at a level of service of unsatisfactory would be made worse with the development of this office space; however, the Development Agreement that covers the square footage requires The Irvine Company to construct an improvement of a third left -turn lane at San Joaquin Hills Road and MacArthur Boulevard. . This approval is a code requirement and the TPO has specific traffic requirements for a more detailed analysis. . Copies of the TPO were distributed and in Section 15.40.030 it states the Planning Commission shall approve the project or the City Council on review or appeal. . A revised resolution was discussed. . Staff will not issue building permit unless there is compliance with the Building Code. nissioner Hawkins noted the possibility of additional resolution cage on Page 3 and suggested adding after, "....Ordinance, and )hze all other such activities allowed under the Code," as this would to anything that requires TPO compliance. >. Wood agreed to this additional language and clarified the responsibility action by the Planning Commission and staff. ner Eaton asked if the 96,000 square feet is to be developed or consolidated. Wood answered it was understood it is to be consolidated. is comment was opened. in Miller of The Irvine Company noted they have read and understand the iff report and concur with the findings and recommendations. He noted reement with the proposed additional language in the resolution. At immission inquiry, he stated generally it is their intent to consolidate this uare footage based on design. is comment was closed. :ion was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by nmissioner McDaniel to adopt a resolution making findings required by Traffic Phasing Ordinance approving the development as presented in revised blue /red lined resolution together with the additional changes to title of the resolution to include 'and authorize all other such activities Ned under the Code.' Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, Peotter, McDaniel, Toerge and Hillgren Page 2 of 7 file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared\Planning Commission\PC Minutes \mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 Page 3 of 7 None Housing Resources LLC, Fritz Duda (PA2008 -080) ITEM NO. 3 627 W. Bay PA2008 -080 parcel map to change the orientation of two existing lots currently fronting Denied ' Street to front on West Bay Avenue. The reoriented lots would deviate im the minimum size and lot width required by the Zoning Code. The plication includes a Code Amendment to change the Districting Map to tablish a 9 -foot front yard setback for the two reoriented lots where the ming Code requires a 20 -foot front yard setback. The property is located the R -2 District. Sims, Assistant Planner, gave an overview of the staff report. Budovec of M. J. Knitter and Associates, representing the applicant, • Two houses on the lot face West Bay Avenue and it is proposed to keep the same orientation; • Received the proposed curb cut approval from Public Works and th submitted the revised proposal to Planning Department; • Informed of the Zoning Code Amendment that requires 20 feet along West Bay, which makes the site almost unbuildable; • Is here to see if they can get an adjustment. Loper of Fritz Duda Company, noted: • The attached exhibits show the proposed parcels with the existing two residences; • Asking to orient the houses the way they have been with the West Bay address; • Several instances where lots have been adjusted in the area; • The new twenty-foot setback would be inconsistent with anything else on West Bay; • Parcel 1 should be 810 square feet due to the 6 foot by 10 foot cutout where it went from a 3 to 9 foot setback; • The differences between the lot configuration from what could be done now as opposed to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policies related to alley access and curb cuts for new development; • There would be additional parking on site; • Asked for approval of the proposed project as it is consistent with past development in the area. Hawkins asked about the site configuration and parcels. Loper noted both parcels were bought with the two homes on them. were purchased from one owner. One of the homes sits across the el line and has since 1907. file: //Y: \Users \PLN\Shared\Planning Commission\PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 Page 4 of 7 ner Eaton asked about the second residence; R -2 zoni to condominiums and original assessor's map date. •. Loper answered they have not thought about the prospect of condominiums and does not know the map date. imissioner Toerge asked if it was considered taking garage access comer lot from the alley in this configuration across the back of and parcel. This would eliminate the need for curb cuts and save s. He stated he was not inclined to support the project as is tested a continuance if this was an alternative the applicant we Loper noted this is something they could look at as an alternative. :)mmissioner Hillgren noted his concern about the setbacks of the lots wards the east. r. Lepo answered those setbacks are 9 feet. r. Loper noted the setbacks across the street are 5 feet. iairman Peotter asked if the other residences noted by the applicant were me with a parcel map or re- oriented with a lot line adjustment. Sims noted there was a Covenant Agreement completed in 1995 w current home was proposed. At that time the setbacks were 9 Ling Seventh Street and 5 feet on West Bay Avenue. With the upd; ing Code, the reverse corner setback would now have a twenty- ack and the reverse corner setback of nine feet for the lot across at. She then explained the separate ownership; prior to the Subdivi Act, covenant agreements were required. - cussion continued on the requirement of a parcel map as opposed to line adjustment. Lepo noted parcel maps are required because that is the only way ate a good and legal title to properties. All of the other lots discuss e created prior to the adoption of the current General Plan. The ne% ,pted General Plan policies require new development to take access fn alley and minimize curb cuts. nan Peotter noted his concern of the need of a code amendment for setback. r. Lepo noted the main issue is the General Plan compliance. ssioner Eaton asked if there would be problems with the possibility from the alley with conversion to condominiums. Lepo answered there could be problem with the separation of tl ings on the same lot, there needs to be ten feet, or it could be done altered the building configuration. file : //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 Page 5 of 7 Jacobs, adjacent neighbor, noted his concerns of the loss of parking street and the tight measurement of the alley. If the garage is mol k, there is a sharp left turn right on the corner that would be too tic Dcially with a large vehicle. Currently, there are not two homes as )nd "residence" is a studio above a garage. R. Dilding, a board member of the Central Newport Beach Commur sociation, noted their concern about the parking as this is in the area yacht club. With a garage set back nine feet, that is a good opportur have guests park in the public sidewalk, which is a common occurrer the point. This area is a problem area and the association is vi icerned and opposes any removal of on- street parking. Budovec noted there is a 9 -foot setback to the face of the garage e is plenty of back- up space for ingress and egress to the back alley. comment was closed was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded oner McDaniel to adopt staff recommendation to deny n for Parcel Map NO. NP2008 -012 and Code Amendment mmissioner Toerge noted he supports the motion. He suggested to plicant continuing this item to review alternatives that had been preser the Commission. Hillgren and Chairman Peotter noted similar concerns Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, Peotter, McDaniel Toerge and Hillgren (None ECT: Planning Commission Minutes ITEM NO.4 ran Peotter noted there have been action minutes and asked if this Approved was agreeable to the Commissioners. ssioner Toerge noted he favors detailed minutes to allow anding and the rational and thoughts whether in support on to proposals to the Commission. He prefers to use the as it is better disclosure, more open government and it helps the when there is an appeal. He is inclined to revert back to the was made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded ioner Toerge to move that recommendation. Eaton noted we need more than bare action minutes. file: //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared \Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 Lepo suggested for future minutes that after a motion is made whe )roved or denied, if the Commissioners would help us and state your 1 the public so that we have a very clear record. Staff is emphasizing findings are everything. We can duly record those and paraph )tic comments. We are proposing to rely on the Commissioner to cli to their positions after a motion is made. Peotter noted he supports the minutes presented tonight; . They are a good balance. . Minutes do not need to be verbatim in order to represent or reflect statements by the Commissioners. I don't want to encourage every Commissioner to say their pro or con on every item they vote on, unless they are so inclined for whatever reason. . It is not conducive to forward business. Bullet point option fashion be used and if anyone needs more information they can listen to audio tape of the Commission meeting. . Most people I know do not read verbatim minutes as action are very readable and is used by almost every single Council. . He is in opposition to this motion as it is a waste of staff time Commission time to review as well as the public. . He suggested going further in the action minutes with elaboration in bullet -point menu. Toerge noted: . Does not support verbatim minutes and summarizing comments completely appropriate. . Understands the issue of staffs time but it benefits the public asked for more description and explain rational for the public. . Noted the council members will not take the time to get recording in office when the packet is delivered to their homes that include written minutes. )mmissioner McDaniel noted verbatim transcript minutes are a waste in favor for reasons stated by Commissioner Toerge. rman Peotter restated the Motion is to go back to the verbatim style tes used prior to the July rather than the action type minutes we ha The maker of the motion agreed. Eaton, Hawkins, Toerge and Hillgren Unsworth. Peotter and McDaniel Page 6 of 7 f) le : //Y:1Users\PLNIShared\Planning Commission\PC Minutes1mn080720081tm 08/22/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 08/07/2008 Page 7 of 7 file: //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared\Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008 ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS a. City Council Follow -up - Mr. Lepo noted the City Council initiated the General Plan amendment to add the Hazard component to the Safety Element, and the AERIE project has been sent back for additional work on the Mitigated Negative Declaration, specifically as regard to the view from the water to Carnation Cove, the inlet below the building is concern. Experts for proponents to the project raised the issue o geotechnical aspect indicating the drilling or chipping away from th rock formation of the cliff to build basements to the lower floors wil damage the face that could fall away. There is a decision to be mad about the Mitigated Negative Declaration or an EIR would be mor appropriate. It is scheduled to come back in September to th Council. The wine tasting for the Pavilion's was approved with revisio that only one employee has to be available at the wine tasting bar, th hours were expanded, and the vintners are not required to have th LEED's training. b. Planning Commission reports - Commissioner Hawkins reported ED Executive Committee met and received a report on the economic downturn from the Chamber of Commerce; and, Mr. Cole was no picked to serve on the Committee. Commissioner Toerge noted the next meeting for the Green Building Committee is August 13th at 9:3 a.m. c. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - none. d. Project status - none e. Requests for excused absences - none. ADJOURNMENT: 7:45 p.m. JADJOURNMENT BARRY EATON, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION file: //Y: \Users\PLN\Shared\Planning Commission \PC Minutes\mn08072008.htm 08/22/2008