Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/13/1979COMMISSONERS Special Adjourned Planning Commission MINUTES I ? § r g y N Meeting Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:30 P.M. Date: September City of Newport Beach 13,:1979 ROLL CALL INDEX Present Absent * x x XK x x X- OFFICIO MEMBERS V. Hogan, Community Development Director Hugh Coffin, Acting City Attorney TAFF MEMBERS ames Hewicker, Assistant Director Planning obert Lenard, Advance Planning Ad inistrator on Webb, Assistant City Engineer f�inutes Written By: Glenna Gipe • .ng r.iony Commissioner Balalis explained that as a meeting designed for fact-gathering GPA 79 -1 and GPA 79 -2 to allow from the audience and that it this meeting regard- for all testi- would not be meeting for final action. * ** Request to consider proposed amendments Land Use, Residential Growth and Recreation pen Space Elements of the General reliminary review of a screen check tudy; and to the and Plan, and the Initial GENERAL PL N AMEND - MENT 79 -1 AND GEN- RAL PLAN AMENDMENT Fequest to consider proposed amendments Circulation Element of the General acceptance of an Environmental Document. to the Plan, and the -2 CONTINUED. TO THE RE- INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach GULAR PLAN. NING COM- MISSION ichard Hogan, Community Development ited necessary corrections within Ier Paper entitled Land Use Alternatives Center, dated 9/6/79, Agenda Item ling the total area left to be dev eduction figure, the 20% reduction Director, the Koll Cen- for Koll No. 2, includ- loped, the;50% figure and th MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2O, 1979 • ffice development figure. He then xplanation regarding the commercial ix, stating that they had allowec offered an /residential the same MINUTES . September 13, 1979 Page 2 x y ity of Newport Beach ROLLCALLI 11 1 111 JINDEX mount of commercial that would be allowed in :the 0 %.reduction; that is, 382,749 to al commercial eveloped on half the site, added o that, resid- ntial at 10 dwelling units per buildable acre, rri.ving at.the buildable acre by ising half the creage.remaining and subtracting 5 %, to take are of the amount taken out for s reets, to give buildable figure of 25% less thap a net figure. ommission,er Balalis posed a question regarding he amount remaining to be built, o which Mr. ogan replied that the amount is tie 30% allowed n the property under each ownership, so that the otal would add up to 269,810 sq. t., or 255 welling units on 252 net buildabl acres under he high- density and 102 dwelling inits on the ame amount of acreage for low -den ity. he Public Hearing was opened regarding this item nd Tim Strader, Senior Vice President of the • Koll Company, agents for Aetna Life Insurance and owner of the remaining Koll Center Newport un- developed land, appeared before the Planning Com- mission and relayed the history of Koll Center �lewport, including a brief explanation of an bbutline of the Koll Center Newport project and ;ome of the different ownerships. He expressed its feeling that the amount remaining to be de- eloped in Koll Center Newport is not significant From the standpoint of the General Plan of the City of .Newport Beach and that their hotel proje.c- Can properly be handled with a Traffic Phasing �5tudy. He requested that the General Plan review �s to the remaining Koll parcels be supplemented End in its place, the Traffic Phasing Program, ra- her than the General Plan Amendment, as outlined n the City rules and regulations, be required to e completed and stated that they will ask for imilar treatment.to the Emkay property. He tated .that.the major traffic imp ovements re- tired to move traffic in that area have been uilt.and installed by the developers in the area nd he expressed his feeling that presently there re traffic problems within the City of Irvine, because no traffic improvements have been made. • He then explained that the remaining.area to be developed within Koll Center Newp rt is not con- x x September 13, 1979, MINUTES Page 3 of Newport Beach usive to residential development nd would re uire.an extension of residential ity services o the eastern -.most tip of the Cit . He expresse is feeling that using the October 1978 figures s not an appropriate application, because during he year developers were permitted to develop, 0% of the undeveloped acreage as legal use, hich has been.done, and that the, figures should e based upon existing densities t day. In con- lusion, he informed the Planning ommission that hey have never attempted to maximize the Koll enter development, and want only a low- density evelopment. He then gave the Pla ning Commis - ion opportunity to view slides illustrating the oll Center development. in response to a question posed by Commissioner Beek, Mr. Strader replied that whei the project 6riginally was presented to the Ci y, there was partnership called Kol.l Center N wport and Aetn • Fife Insurance Company was a limit !d partner in ghat partnership, and upon restruc uring 2 years ago, Aetna Life Insurance Company iow is the bested owner of the property and tie Koll Company I cts as investment manager of the roject for Aetna. in response to a question posed by Commissioner ¢okas, Pat Allen, Architect, replied that to ar- 1^ive at the 335,934 figure is the number of sq. t. within. the Koll property and the proposed otel project versus what is in the total pro - erty.of 899,367 sq. ft., arrived at by an acreag plit and density calculation. n response to a question posed by Commissioner llen, Mr. Hogan stated that they computed the otel as being the equivalent of 155,000 sq. ft. f office space and that in the P -C text, Amend - ent No. 514 did not specify hotel or office, but the P -C text also allows for part of that space. for a hotel. Mr. Strader relayed that the density numbers that were in the Staff Report and the ensity numbers ' 'that they have in their presentation relate only September 13, 1979 Page 4 6tv of Newport . Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX to commercial office use, and that the 500 room otel is exclusive of that, derived as being per - itted in that particular lot and is not part of he densities under discussion, as hotels have �efferent planning considerations. r. Hogan then relayed the figures staff is using elated to this project: 819,967 q. ft. of of- ice space, including 155,422 sq. Ft. taken out f the office space and allowed for a hotel, plus 2,000 sq. ft. restaurant space; 1),000 sq. ft. of retail space, 25,625 sq. ft. of courthouse and c1,775 sq. ft. of industrial. ommissioner Cokas stated his understanding that Koll Center has 104,000 sq. ft. less than they .ar M��i++nder.the assumption they have, to which Commis - ner Allen agreed. �rnie Wilson, Langden and Wilson.A chitects, then • explained that the density allowable in both the Emkay and Koll Center P -C texts were on the basis 6f commercial office space and that in each of hose texts there was a place for a hotel, which zias not described, and in the case of Emkay, they ad said it was going.to go where it is now built and that in the Koll Center P -C text, they are dof restricted by acreage or size but that they ust obtain a Use Permit and that what they are roposing to do on.the remaining 8.2 acres is to resent that picture to the Plann.i g Commission nd that in their.view, having written both of he P -C texts, their densities for office had othing to do with a hotel. in conclusion, he ex. lained that because of the interest in cutting own densities, the office density has been trans osed and their contention is that this has no- thing to do with the density as the ordinance is now.written and that the 225,000 sq. ft. is purel office- commercial space allowable on this site, lus the right to build a hotel under a Use Per it and that they are saying that on the same ba- is, this ordinance should take the same 24%:re- duction as the other ordinance, which is 247,000 �;q. ft. left for Koll Center, an identical ratio: • to Emkay, which underbuilt in some of their areas COMMISSIONERS w x w September 13, 1979 Page 5 of Newport Beach MINUTES nd put together their total foots e. In conclu- ioh, he questioned whether the 93,000 sq. ft. of hich they underbuilt Block "D" is in this.pic ure yet. he Planning Commission recessed a 8:30 p.m. and ecomvened at 8:35 p.m. Pr. Hoga.n then explained to the Planning Commis - ion that in the P -C text, there was 2,700,000 q. ft. allowed for office develop ent and a hote ind that in the Traffic Phasing Or inance of Amendment No. 514, it indicated that development xisted a 1,651,757 square footage and that the additional allowable was 1,058,863 sq. ft:, or a total of approximately 2,700,000 s ft. of offic • Oevelopment, and that the hotel wa not mentioned in Amendment No. 514. ommissioner Balalis stated his un erstanding hat the Koll Center has 325,000 s . ft. and that he Irvine Company has 363,000 sq. ft., and in ad ition to this is the 155,000 sq. t. figure for he hotel. r. Wilson stated his understandin that to at- empt to join their Koll Center pr ject and their otel project would.necessitate am nding the . rdinance as well as the Traffic.P asing Ordi- ance. bob Shelton, Irvine Company, appeared before the lanning Commission and stated their position s being in agreement with staff relating to he portion entitled, "Office Site 'C "', express - ng that they are in favor of the 24% figure. in response to a question posed by Commissioner Alen, Mr. Shelton relayed that theirs would be a case of taking 24% of 364,000 sq. ft. • om Morrissey, Ford Aerospace.Communications orporation, appeared before the Planning Commis - ;ion and requested that the Planning Commission COMMISSIONERS September 13, 1979 Page 6 171 MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX cept the P -C plan that was approved as the tion that would be taken under any general plan ange. mmission.er Balalis posed a question, to which gh Coffin, Acting City Attorney, replied that ere are provisions in the State lanning Act r extraterritorial general plan esignations property and that it is his and rstanding that. ey most likely do have the juris iction.over co. Mr. Shelton again appeared before lhe.Planning Commission and stated his understanding that the Planning Commission is dealing witt less than 10% of the land area of the City and Vat of.that 10% The Irvine.Company is the owner of 8% of this lane .area and that if the current general plan were to be radified and buildout were to.o cur on the va • ant residential parcels, this wou d increase the City's dwelling units by only abou 6% and the coi Mercial /industrial square footage y only about 1�5 %.9 land he expressed his feeling- hat.the action taken by the City last November in General Plan mendment 78 -2 represent already a very signifi- cant and sufficient reduction in b th categories, at which time about a 30% reductio in then -allow able residential dwelling units oc ured and about 6% reduction in allowable square ootage.in Ir ine and Newport Center, Newport C nter being.the my one to receive that type of r duction. He urther stated regarding the subje t of traffic hat they feel that the traffic pr blems can be iolved and are not what they thoug t a year ago hey would be and that they believ2 strongly in he concept of phasing and are com fitted to the lotion that development and road capacity shou.ld e syncronized, no matter what period of time it akes. In conclusion, he expressel his feeling Ahat this process should involve a full - fledged R and is.in good practice and in everyone's best interest. Keith Greer,.Director of Community Development fo The Irvine Company, appeared befora the Planning . Commission and reviewed the projects surrounding COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 13, 1979 Page 7 of Newport Beach [Z51: pper Newport Bay, provided a pres ntation regard ng the Baywood Apartments and gav an overview f the history of the 1978 General Plan Amend- ent. n response to a question posed by Commissioner llen, Mr. .Greer replied that if i can be demon - trated by an objective traffic an lysis that the evelopment. in question is, in fact, going to,cre n impact that.cannot be otherwise mitigated xcept by completion of the San Jo quin Hills ransportation Corridor, then they would agree o not develop until that time. Ir. Greer'then continued with his resentation: 'Castawa s Pro'ect; a) a plateau. h) concept �s a mix, of resi ential communitie integrated cith a park system, with private r creation cen- er and public bicycle trail syste . c) interior irculation system. d) single family homes.and townhomes. e] 325 dwelling units. 2) Westbay m tio ect; a) bluffs that provide f r the protec- n of the canyon areas. b) public park. 0 adult community. d) 348 dwelli g units. e) cluster townhomes with greenbel s and private recreation areas and public bicycle trail system. 3) New grter North; a) preservation of open space through pu b11C parks, trail systems and.pri 'vate recreation center. b) cluster development If adult community c) urban chara ter d) 440 welling units. n response to a question posed by Commissioner 11aidinger, Mr. Greer stated that Castaways would be their first and immediate community with which to proceed. Or. Radovich then appeared before the Planning Commission and': 1) reviewed the project from a abitat mapping standpoint and the possibilit-ies f related.tradeoffs, explaining that the special mportance of riparian areas is that they, have al terrestrial systems, including source of water, shade, etc., and are quite valuable ecologically. He stated their general disagreement with 'The rvine.Company related to one area that is not • specifically a bluff, but, nevertheless, steep,. and that they would like to see it set back from Motion All Ayes 40 September 13, 1979 Page 8 itv of Newaort Beach he Dehli Channel, rather than dev p to it and.look at it as an exte ay, rather than a clearly defined ) In conclusion, he relayed that of be in favor of a bicycle path he riparian and /or marshes involv egarding a portion of the Newport rea., Mr.:Radovich stated a concer ng this as an important area for f Lightfooted Clappera.il, and the mprove this riparian canyon and p tructures within to slow down wat ow greater ponding, rather than d n this area. n response to a question posed by okas as to whether affordable hou uired, Mr. Coffin replied that th erence of opinion among the Gover ey General and others within the arding this issue and that the Ci ort Beach has taken the position of a legal requirement through th lan mandatory versus advisory gui ulgated by the State. loped right sion of the channel. hey would hrough d. 4) r North regard - itings need to t some r.and a1= velopment Commissioner ing was.re- re is a dif- or, Atto.r tate re- y of New - hat it is General elines pro- MINUTES ommissioner Balalis referred them to the letter rom the office of the Mayor, stating that the ity is on record in opposing to the Local Coast - 1 Program, including such require ents related o affordable housing. r. Coffin then responded regardin establishing eneral Plan elements and designations for land utside our boundaries, stating that the code . tates that the City can establish and designate ame. otion was made to excuse Commissioner Cokas from he regular Planning Commission meeting of Sep - ember 20, 1979. ff ED] COMMISSIONERS September 13, 1979 Page 9 Of Beach MINUTES ROLLCALL1111 J i l I I I INDEX he Planning Commission continued the public hear ng regarding General Plan Amendme t 79 -1 and eneral Plan Amendment 79 -2 to the regular Plan- ing Commission meeting of Septemb r 20, 1979 and djourned at 10:00 p.m. Debra Allen, S cretary Planning Commi sion City of Newpor Beach . IIIIIIII'i ° °' • 1