HomeMy WebLinkAboutMegonical residenceCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
August 21, 2008 Meeting
Agenda Item No. 3
SUBJECT: Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133)
2333 Pacific Drive
■ Modification No. 2007 -080
APPLICANT: David R. Olson, Architect
PLANNER: Patrick J. Alford, Planning Manager
(949) 644 -3235, paffordOcitv.newoort- beach.ca.us
PROJECT SUMMARY
The application consists of a modification permit to allow planter walls and a water
feature to exceed the 3 -foot height limit in the front yard setback in association with the
construction of a new, three -story single - family dwelling.
The Planning Department also requests a determination on whether the proposed
project complies with City Council Resolution No. 2007 -3 and Ordinance No. 2007 -3,
which require that all new development comply with applicable policies of the General
Plan.
RECOMMMEDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing; and
2) Find that the proposed project complies with applicable policies of the General
Plan; and
3) Approve Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 with the findings in the attached
resolution (Exhibit No. 1).
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 2
VICINITY MAP
ITO
4
ZIP :s''-" ' s� w�Jnt�.w Subject
m X30 0• Site
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
PR /RS-0 R1
qY OU IAC MFR(21t
a�
LOCATION
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
CURRENT USE
ON -SITE
Single Unit Residential —
Single - Family Residential
Vacant, undeveloped land
Detached RS -D
R -1
NORTH
Two -Unit Residential (RT)
Two Famillyy Residential
Residential
SOUTH
Multiple -Unit Residential
Multiple - Family
Residential
RM
Residential MFR
EAST
Parks and
R -1
Begonia Park
PRRecreation
WEST
RS -D
I R -1
Residential
3
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
Back - round:
At the April 3, 2008, meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for a
proposed single -unit dwelling on the subject property. The application included a
variance to exceed the height limit and modification permit for encroachment into the
required front yard setback. The Planning Department brought the application to the
Planning Commission to receive guidance on the project's consistency with the General
Plan and the Local Coastal Program. After receiving testimony from staff, the applicant,
and members of the public, the Planning Commission concluded that the project was
inconsistent with policies relating to public view protection and neighborhood
compatibility.
The Planning Commission gave the following direction to staff and the applicant
• Protection of public views has priority over protection of the coastal bluff.
• Protection of the Begonia Park view corridor has priority over protection of the
Begonia Avenue view corridor.
• Reduce the scale and massing of the residence.
• Shift portions of the residence above street grade to the west to reduce impacts
to the Begonia Park view corridor.
• Provide windows on street facing elevation to visually "open" the residence to the
neighborhood.
In addition, the Planning Commission requested the following additional information:
Installation of story poles to represent the height of the most distant points of the
proposed residence (see Exhibit No. 2).
Visual simulation depicting the proposed project and maximum development
envelope (see Exhibit No. 3).
Heights, floor area ratios, and variance history of adjacent properties (see Exhibit
No. 4).
R
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 4
Project Descriotion
The applicant submitted a revised application on July 24, 2008. The proposed three -
story, 3,566 square -foot residence conforms to all Zoning Code property development
regulations, with the exception of the planter walls and a water feature that exceed the
3 -foot front yard setback height limit. The proposed variance to exceed the height limit
has been withdrawn.
Key changes from the previous design of the residence are summarized below:
• Conforms to 24 -foot height limit (the previous design exceeded height limit by
approximately 4 feet 6 inches to 10 feet 6 inches).
• Single story at street level (two stories were previously proposed).
■ The finished floor of the ground level (Third Floor) is approximately 12 feet lower
than the previous design.
Floor area reduced from 3,717 to 3,566 square feet (151 sq. ft. reduction).
• Conforms to the 5 -foot front yard setback (previous design encroached 2 to 5
feet).
• Clearstory windows added to the front elevation.
Although the application is nominally for a modification permit, first consideration must
be given to the proposed project's consistency with the policies of the General Plan.
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -3 requires that all new development comply with
applicable policies of the General Plan. In addition, City Council Ordinance No. 2007 -3
sets forth design criteria to insure that all new single -unit and two -unit residential
projects are consistent with the General Plan.
Implementation of Resolution No. 2007 -3 and Ordinance No. 2007 -3 were delegated to
staff. However, given the complexity of the issues, and the high level of public interest,
staff requests a determination by the Planning Commission on whether the proposed
project complies with Resolution No. 2007 -3 and Ordinance No. 2007 -3.
Because the proposed project now conforms to the height limits of the Zoning Code, it
meets all of the terms and conditions of Categorical Exclusion Order E -77 -5. Therefore,
a coastal development permit is not required.
9
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 5
General Plan Consistency
Public Views
Begonia Park and Begonia Avenue provide views of Newport Harbor, Peninsula Point,
and the Pacific Ocean. The following General Plan policies require new development to
protect and, where feasible, enhance public views:
• "Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic and visual resources
that include open space, mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from
public vantage points." (LU 1.6 and NR 20.1)
• "Require new development to restore and enhance the visual quality in visually
degraded areas, where feasible, and provide view easements or corridors
designed to protect public views or to restore public views in developed areas,
where appropriate." (NR 20.2)
• "Protect and enhance public view corridors from the following roadway segments
(shown in Figure NR3), and other locations may be identified in the figure." (NR
20.3)
• 'Design and site new development, including landscaping, on the edges of public
view corridors, including those down public streets, to frame, accent, and
minimize impacts to public views" (NR 20.4)
The Planning Commission recognized that even a project that conforms to Zoning Code
height limits would impact public views from the park and street. The Planning
Commission concluded that protection of the Begonia Park view corridor should have
priority over protection of the Begonia Avenue view corridor and the coastal bluff. The
Planning Commission also offered guidance on possible design changes intended to
minimize these impacts.
The proposed project generally reflects the direction provided by the Planning
Commission. Lowering the development further down the bluff, limiting street level
development to a single story, and pulling back elements would lessen impacts to the
Begonia Park view corridor. Any street level development would completely block the
view from Begonia Avenue at the terminus of the street; however, some views would
remain further up Begonia Avenue.
Total protection of the public views may not be possible without denying the owner
reasonable economic use of the property. "Protection" under the circumstances of this
particular application may have to be interpreted as minimizing the extent of potential
impacts. To this end, staff concludes that the proposed project minimizes impacts to the
public views to the maximum extent feasible. Therefore, staff considers the proposed
I
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 6
project to be in substantial conformance with the public view protection policies of the
General Plan.
Neighborhood Compatibility
The General Plan contains the following policies relating to the visual compatibility of
new development with the surrounding area:
• "Require that residential units be designed to sustain the high level of
architectural design quality that characterizes Newport Beach's neighborhoods in
consideration of the following principles:
• Articulation and modulation of building masses and elevations to avoid the
appearance of "box- like" buildings
• Compatibility with neighborhood development in density, scale, and street
facing elevations
• Architectural treatment of all elevations visible from public places
• Entries and windows on street facing elevations to visually "open" the house
to the neighborhood
• Orientation to desirable sunlight and views" (LU 5.1.5)
"Require that new and renovated buildings be designed to avoid the use of
styles, colors, and materials that unusually impact the design character and
quality of their location such as abrupt changes in scale, building form,
architectural style, and the use of surface materials that raise local temperatures,
result in glare and excessive illumination of adjoining properties and open
spaces, or adversely modify wind patterns." (LU 5.6.2)
"Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of structures consistent with
the unique character and visual scale of Newport Beach." (NR 22. 1,)
The Planning Commission described the previous design of the residence as "box - like,"
"bulky," and "excessively tall" and concluded that it was not compatible with the scale
and massing of the neighboring development. The Planning Commission suggested
that lowering the residence by excavating further down the bluff face would make it less
bulky and reduce the size and massing. The Planning Commission also encouraged
the addition of windows on the north elevation to increase the project's openness to the
street.
The neighborhood is characterized by single -unit dwellings with one or two stories
above street grade and development on the bluff face extending down two or three
v
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 7
stories below street grade. Lowering the development further down the bluff and
limiting street level development to a single story, as is now proposed, would make the
project more visually compatible with the surrounding development. This is particularly
true along Bayside Drive, where the visual simulations indicate that the previous design
would have visually dominated the surrounding area. Furthermore, the addition of
clearstory windows on the street elevation and the proposed planters makes the
proposed residence more consistent with other street - facing elevations in the
neighborhood. Therefore, staff considers the proposed project to be in substantial
conformance with the neighborhood compatibility policies of the General Plan.
Landform Protection
The subject property is located on a coastal bluff. The General Plan contains the
following policies relating to the protection of bluffs and other natural landforms:
"Require that sites be planned and buildings designed in consideration of the
property's topography, landforms, drainage pattems natural vegetation, and
relationship to the Bay and coastline, maintaining the environmental character
that distinguishes Newport Beach." (Ltl 5.6.4)
"Preserve cliffs, canyons, bluffs, significant rock outcropping, and site buildings to
minimize alteration of the site's natural topography and preserve the features as
a visual resource." (NR 23.1)
In addition, Criterion No. 7 of Ordinance No. 2007 -3 (Residential Design Criteria) is
used to determine a project's consistency with General Plan policies relating to site
planning and resource protection:
°Site planning should follow the basic principle of designing development to fit the
features of the site rather that altering the site to fit the design of the
development. Whenever possible, natural features such as cliffs, canyons,
bluffs, significant rock outcroppings, natural vegetation, should avoided or the
extent of alteration minimized whenever possible. Adequate buffers should be
provided to protect significant or rare biological resources."
The Planning Commission concluded that protection of the Begonia Park view corridor
should have priority over protection of the coastal bluff. Furthermore, the Planning
Commission recommended lowering the development further down the bluff to lessen
impacts to the Begonia Park view corridor and to reduce the scale and massing of the
residence. Avoiding the degradation of public views and the scenic quality of the area
was considered preferable to the protection of an already degraded landform.
General Plan Policies LU 5.6.4 and NR 23.1 and Criterion No. 7 of Ordinance No. 2007-
3 require that consideration be given to landform protection in order to maintain the
City's environmental character and to preserve visual resources. The coastal bluff in
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 8
this area is severely degraded to the extent that it cannot be considered a significant
visual resource. Further alteration would not significantly impact the City's
environmental character, but would assist in minimizing impacts to public views.
Therefore, staff considers the proposed project to be in substantial conformance with
the landform protection policies of the General Plan.
Modification Permit
Approval or disapproval of a modification permit application is within the purview of the
Zoning Administrator; however, this application is being referred to the Planning
Commission so that the proposed project can be considered in its entirety.
The subject property is located within the Single- Family Residential (R -1) District. The
required front yard setback is 5 feet per Districting Map No. 16. Within the front yard
setback, accessory structures are limited to a maximum height of 3 feet from natural
grade pursuant to Section 20.060.030.A (Extensions into Yards — Accessory Buildings
and Structures and Plantings) of the Zoning Code. The proposed planter walls and
water feature exceed the 3 -foot height limit by up to 6 feet 7 inches, as measured from
the natural grade. The height of these structures from finished grade would range from
1 foot 6 inches to 5 feet 5 inches.
Right -of -Way Encroachment
The proposed planter walls and water feature would also encroach up to 13 feet into the
Begonia Avenue right -of -way. This will require an encroachment permit from the Public
Works Department.
The proposed encroachments are inconsistent with City Council Policy L -6 (Private
Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way), which limits such encroachments to 1 foot into
the public right -of -way and to a maximum height of 3 feet, measured from the top of
curb elevation or from sidewalk elevation. An encroachment permit application for such
improvements would have to be referred to the City Council for action.
The proposed stone driveway is also inconsistent with City Council Policy L -6. Paving
will have to be limited to the minimum necessary for the driveway and a walkway to the
entry to the residence. A standard sidewalk will also have to be constructed. All
remaining areas will have to be landscaped.
Water Feature
The proposed water feature encroaches 4 feet 6 inches into the public right -of -way.
The water feature includes an area for sculptures (shown as rectangular columns). No
details on the sculptures were provided, as they have not been selected by the
applicant. The Public Works Department believes that the water feature exposes the
la
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 9
City to unnecessary liabilities and would not support such an encroachment into a public
right -of -way. Given this concern, staff recommends that the water feature be removed.
Required Findings
Section 20.93.030 (Required Findings) of the Zoning Code requires that the following
three findings must be made in order to approve a modification permit:
A. The granting of the application is necessary due to practical difficulties
associated with the property and that the strict application of the Zoning
Code results in physical hardships that are inconsistent with the purpose
and intent of the Zoning Code.
B. The requested modification will be compatible with existing development
in the neighborhood.
C. The granting of such an application will not adversely affect the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property
and will not be detrimental to the general welfare or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood.
Practical Difficulties Finding
A) The granting of the application is necessary due to practical
difficulties associated with the property and that the strict
application of the Zoning Code results in physical hardships that
are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code.
When addressing this finding, the physical aspects of the property and /or improvements
and their relationship to adjacent properties may be considered. In this case, the lot
slopes from a curb elevation of 72.5 feet above mean sea level (MSL) down to an
elevation of 64 feet MSL at the dwelling. The front portion of the lot needs to be filled in
order to provide vehicular access to the residence and landscaping at street grade in a
manner that is consistent with the development pattern of the neighboring properties.
As a result, any structure in the front yard will exceed the 3 -foot height limit.
Neighborhood Compatibility Finding
B) The requested modification will be compatible with existing
development in the neighborhood.
When addressing this finding, Section 20.93.035.6 of the Zoning Code states that "the
sum of qualities that distinguish the neighborhood from other areas within the City may
be considered ;" however, only "such characteristics as they relate to the direct impact of
It
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 10
the proposed modification on the neighborhood's character and not development rights
that would otherwise be enjoyed without the modification permit" may be considered.
Most properties on Pacific Drive are developed with single - family dwellings with front
yard setback designs that include landscaping and accessory structures at street grade.
The proposed planters will be at comparable heights when measured from the finished
grade. These planters, along with the driveway and entry walkway redesigned to meet
City Council Policy L -6, will provide a front yard that is consistent with the character of
the neighborhood.
Health and Safety Finding
C) The granting of such an application will not adversely affect the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property
and will not be detrimental to the general welfare or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood.
When addressing this finding, potential and averse impacts on persons and property in
the vicinity may be considered. These include, but are not limited to, modifications that
would significantly interfere with the provision of adequate air and light on an adjacent
property, adversely impact use of a public right -of -way, impede access by public safety
personnel, result in excessive noise, vibration, dust, odors, glare, or electromagnetic
interference, interfere with safe vehicular sight distances, or result in an invasion of
privacy.
With the recommended removal of the water feature and the driveway, entry walkway,
and planters redesigned to meet City Council Policy L -6, the proposed modification will
not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the property and will not be detrimental to the general welfare or
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood.
CONCLUSION
Staff considers the project, as proposed, consistent with the Residential Design Criteria
(Ordinance No. 2007 -3) and General Plan policies pertaining to public views protection,
neighborhood compatibility, and landform alteration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project has been determined to be categorically exempt under the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures) as the proposed project is one, single - family residence
in a residential zone that contains no environmentally significant resources on site.
However, Section 15300.2 (Exceptions) of the CEQA Guidelines provides that a
"categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable
la
Megonigal Residence
August 21, 2008
Page 11
possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to
unusual circumstances."
Should the Planning Commission find there is a reasonable possibility that the project's
impact to public views, the neighborhood, or the coastal bluff would result in a
significant effect on the environment, the Class 3 cannot be used. No action can be
taken on the proposed project and either an negative declaration or an environmental
impact report will have to be prepared.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site including the applicant, and posted on the
subject property at least 10 days prior to this hearing consistent with the provisions of
the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item was shown on the agenda for this meeting,
which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Submitted by:
EXHIBITS
1. Draft resolution
2. Story Pole Staking Plan
3. Proposed project plans
4. Information on adjacent projects
5. Figure NR3
6. Letter from Applicant
7. Correspondence
FAUSERSIPLN1ShamdU2A'sIPAs - 20071PA2007- 1331Pianning Commission/ 2008 -08 -21 MD2007.080 PC rpt F1NAi.doc
13
Exhibit No. 1
Draft Resolution)
I'�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FINDING A
PROJECT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -3 AND ORDINANCE NO.
2007 -3 AND APPROVING MODIFICATION PERMIT
NO. 2007 -080 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2333
PACIFIC DRIVE (PA 2007 -133)
WHEREAS, an application was filed by David R. Olson on behalf of Mr. Kim
Megonigal, property owner, with respect to property located at 2333 Pacific Drive, requesting
a modification permit to exceed the 3 -foot height limitation in the front yard setback to allow
for planter walls and a water feature; and
WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 2007 -3 requires that all new development
comply with applicable policies of the General Plan and City Council Ordinance No. 2007 -3
sets forth design criteria to insure that all new single -unit and two -unit residential projects are
consistent with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on August 21, 2008, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place,
and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given. The application, plans, staff report, and
evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning
Commission at this meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed project is in substantial conformance with the public view
protection policies of the General Plan. The proposed project minimizes
impacts to the public views to the maximum extent feasible by placing the
development further down the bluff, limiting street level development to a single
story, and pulling back elements to avoid impacts to the Begonia Park view
corridor.
2. The proposed project is in substantial conformance with the neighborhood
compatibility policies of the General Plan. Placing the development further
down the bluff and limiting street level development to a single story results in a
building that is consistent with the scale and massing of the neighborhood.
Providing clearstory windows on the front elevation and planters in the front
yard opens the project to the Pack Drive and Begonia Avenue.
3. The proposed project is in substantial conformance with the landform alteration
policies of the General Plan. General Plan Policies LU 5.6.4 and NR 23.1 and
Criterion No. 7 of Ordinance No. 2007 -3 require that consideration be given to
landform protection in order to maintain the City's environmental character and
to preserve visual resources. The coastal bluff in this area is severely degraded
to the extent that it cannot be considered a significant visual resource. Further
[5
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 2 of 5
alteration would not significantly impact the City's environmental character, but
would assist in minimizing impacts to public views.
WHEREAS, Chapter 20.93 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code requires findings
and facts in support of such findings for approval of a modification pen-nit, which are
presented as follows:
In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.93, the granting of this application
is necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the property. The strict
application of the Zoning Code results in physical hardships that are inconsistent
with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code for the following reasons:
The subject property slopes from a curb elevation of 72.5 feet above mean
sea level (MSL) down to an elevation of 64 feet MSL at the dwelling.
The front portion of the lot needs to be filled in order to provide vehicular
access to the residence and landscaping at street grade in a manner that is
consistent with the development pattern of the neighboring properties.
■ Any structure in the front yard will exceed the 3 -foot height limit, which
constitutes a practical difficulty.
2. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.93, the requested modification
will be compatible with existing development(s) in the neighborhood for the
following reasons:
Most properties on Pack Drive are developed with single - family dwellings
with front yard setback designs that include landscaping and accessory
structures at street grade.
The proposed planters will be at comparable heights when measured from
the finished grade.
The proposed planters, along with the driveway and entry walkway
redesigned to meet City Council Policy L -6, will provide a front yard that is
consistent with the character of the neighborhood.
3. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.93, the granting of this
Modification Permit will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons
residing or working in the neighborhood of the property and not be detrimental to
the general welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood
based on the following:
■ The proposed water feature will be removed.
The proposed driveway, entry walkway, and planters are conditioned to be
redesigned to meet City Council Policy L -6.
14
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 3 of 5
WHEREAS, this project has been determined to be categorically exempt under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures) as the proposed project is one, single - family residence in a
residential zone that contains no environmentally significant resources on site.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves
Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 subject to the findings herein.
Section 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of
this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance
with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF August, 2008.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
W4
Scott Peotter, , Chairman
BY:
Barry Eaton, Secretary
11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paoe 4 of 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans
and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval (Except as
modified by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless
specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning
Department.
4. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction
vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic
control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with
state and local requirements.
5. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not in and of
itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide constitute a
precedent for future approvals or decisions.
6. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise - generating construction activities that
produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday
and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise - generating construction activities are not
allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
7. All improvements shall be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
8. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right -of -way.
9. All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. See City
Standard 110 -L
10. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by the
private construction, additional reconstruction within the public right -of -way could be
required at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
11. All on -site drainage shall comply with the latest City Water Quality requirements.
12. Water meter and the sewer cleanout will be located in the public right -of -way. If installed
at a location that will be subjected to vehicle traffic, each shall be installed with a traffic -
grade box and cover.
13. The existing street tree(s) shall be protected in place. Unauthorized tree removal(s) will
trigger substantial penalties for all parties involved.
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Pane 5 of 5
14. Paving in the public right -of -way shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the
driveway and a walkway to the entry to the residence. A concrete sidewalk be shall be
constructed per applicable City Standards. All remaining areas shall be landscaped.
Non - standard encroachments within the public right -of -way shall comply with City Council
Policy L-6, prior to the issuance of an Encroachment Agreement and Permit.
15. The proposed water feature shall be removed.
Exhibit No. 2
Story Pole Staking Plan
N
< <y ab
�o
w Ot N
W
zN
aN�
Dr ^�
�yllllf���j►'��.�_ 1
ll\' ! IIlar
n
S g
Y
d
d
d
F
ono
id
.. m w m w w
J#
N f7 V Ip m A
0000000
� €_
��o
W
n
S g
Y
d
d
d
F
Exhibit No. 3
Proposed Project Plans
a5
4..
Jim
.
!
!lmGD |m,
)
@#!
U MEq N
�]§)'
)| �
k�
f
!`
�
#�
I�
.mot
d
2
P30
a
C
N
V
.y
m
3�
•tip .-'v.•�
v•..
-
_
Li
ter•.
can
••[��
-
-•'�
-.._
don-
. . . . . . . . . . .
ir 0,
ct"
nip
V. OR M-T
ic
ao
Al.
V. OR M-T
ic
e
.y
H
w
V
C
w
w
m
�G
O1
w
3�
"a-l"?
m
U
C
W
d
N
.0
d
m
11�2
I
lepa
M
c
m
a
G1
C
O.
to
m
m
C
5
V
i
oz I O
b �; b
� IOOOOOOO
b
E
d $
ro
N 2
t
O! U
QO $
N
N
qo
a
Y
4 ag
m�
S g
�z6
oea
sY
9
T3 S
��9
9
bl'1O
� ����v.vv ��vS���pOVIIIA11111 / 11 II
\���
\t1\�n �\ iC�� \ \� \III1111111VIi \11VIIIVII �%— /'�/l9s
d
y'�
��.v v vvPv _ " /v /�I1111111H..111111111�1 / >
0�vvv1VvAA'11I1 �IV1l1�jV V1l�VI1V511�1111111111� i�
\�����IIII ��.
I.
a'
a°c�;
I ��1�1y��11111111VV111 A�AAA�A�AA�
1 ��9111111V 11 11 11 1A1�
I��
g.<
'�z �
� �AVA UA�AAA�V�AAAVAl1^�f,�l'
1 11 V I l�WAAV111 /11
I.m 1 ll 11��111 V11V 1 �F�p }111 111 i11Vj111 I I /
1
� �
Y
ae
qg�
�+� 1111 1 I 1 1111 11 1111151111AUI15151111 sl�i � I
���y
JF-
9 A
Y
ei 1 I 11 � 1 V f VII 11 Vg111111 III1 l
4 � �``a �
\
9
�
l °ge
�
/�
.G
1
�� l l f l l �,I I I• I ?�
\
8
i
I
A
_
d
�
\Y
\\
O
F
�
U
Z
I
�
Exhibit No. 4
Information on Adjacent Projects
l
W
a
z
V
(d
L
LU
16
'
(D
O
Ql
E
to
a
o
m
O
X
1—
N
N N
M
Q
M
N
O
N
N
N
W
N
N
I—
00
O
O
CO
O
O
O
co
uj
W
<
LL
O
O
O
O
O
7
0
.�
CO
CA
N
It
O
IL
W
O
LO
V
M
d'
N
H
N
Z
W
W
�
Q
�
�
m
O
Q
M
Z
!i
N
v
N
N
co
`-
O
W
O
O
O
M
N
co
O
Z
0
y
F
O
Q
�
N
ON
U.
W
U
V
V
U
V
Z
p
MEm!Etnw�!Einw
O
co U
� U
� 00 U
� U
Ch M
M M
M M
M M
N C6
Q
N O.
N O_
N 0- N 0_
N 0.
z
0
N
N
Q
O
O
O
U
O
M
J
IL
C%j
Co O
O
N
Q
g
>
>
>
w
v
m
m
°O
°O
°o
rn
rn
N
N
N
W
r
M
co
N
I.-
N
OO
Q
=
N
co
co
O
0
O
Cl O
O
l
Exhibit No. 5
General Plan Map (Figure NR3)
kki
0
)
q
E
B
0 �
§ >
\ \
2 \
ot
! |,
§
°
M
0
Exhibit No. 6
Letter from Applicant
M
RUG -12 -2000 03:55P FROM: TO:6443229 P.2
August 11, 2008
Russell Bunim
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92858 -8915
RE: Megonigal Residence
2333 Pacific Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
Dear Russell:
In response to our miscellaneous meetings and conversations as well as Planning Commission
comments and community input we are enclosing a revised design concept for the Megonigai
Residence on Pacific Avenue. This proposal opmalies with the allowable heights on the sublW
This revised concept incorporates the following:
1) Mass and bulk were reduced at street level by removing the entire top floor. This square
footage was reduced and redistributed so that It cascades down the hillside on the left side of
the site as requested. This results in a single story appearance at street level which provides
considerably improved views from Begonia Park when compared to our previous submittal.
There is also less impact to the view from Begonia Avenue, particularly from areas up the
street where the topography rises.
2) Overall reduction in the size of the proposed home which was already below the allowable
size.
3) A greater emphasis was made to modify the appearance of the home to blend more with the
development pattern in the neighborhood as requested. This includes reduced bulk, added
glazing, enhanced horizontal lines, and added planters to reduce scale and add interest,
landscape, and a subtle water sculpture feature.
4) A greater emphasis was made to break up the massing for a cascading appearance from
Bayside as requested.
We believe that these changes strike a reasonable compromise between the Intent of the General
Plan and the development rights of the owners and we look forward to a favorable review. As
always, please fell free to contact me If you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ck - miamcx��
David R. Olson, AIA, NCARB
Principal
CC: Patrick Alford, NB PLanning
Kim and Carolyne Megonigal
i
470 wale
4vkw ca 9281 11,4838
t 949.450.0095
i 949.450.0094
vww.olso 4
narcMect.cam
Exhibit No. 7
Correspondence
A�
Fw begonia park.txt
From: Lepo, David
sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 8:46 AM
To: 'Earl McDaniel'; 'eaton727 @earthlink.net'; 'Robert C. Hawkins';
bhillgren @highrhodes.com; 'Scott Peotter'; 'Michael Lee Toerge';
cwunsworth @roadrunner.com'
Cc: Alford, Patrick; varin, Ginger
subject: Fw: begonia park
FYI regarding Megonigal residence.
David Lepo, Director
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
(949) 644 -3228 w (949) 644 -3229 f
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Kate Kearns [mailto:garykearns@mac.coml
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 3:44 PM
TO: Lepo, David
subject: begonia park
Mr Lepo:
I am writing because of my concern with the development of the Megonical property on
Pacific Drive at the end of Begonia Avenue. I attended the last pplanning meeting
this was discussed because of my concern. Unfortunately, I will be out of town on
21st and will not be able to attend.
My husband and I are concerned with the major loss of public view from both the park
and the Begonia Avenue corridor. The poles that were suggested at the last meeting
have been placed and it is distressing to see how much of these views would be
destroyed should the Megoinicals be allowed to build as planned. I have to sax, it
was even worse than we had envisioned. I firmly believe that if allowed to build as
planned, this building would be against the General Plan adopted by the City of
Newport Beach. I understand that the Megonicals have a right to build on their
property, but they must do so in accordance with the rules and regulations
stipulated by the city including the General Plan.
I encourage you and all members of the Planning Commission to come to Begonia Park
and view firsthand what the building of the Megonical residence would ruin for the
general population should they be allowed to continue as planned.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
sincerely,
Gary and Kate Kearns
423 Begonia Avenue
Corona del Mar
Page 1