Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0_Draft Minutes_07-21-2011NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers — 3300 Newport Boulevard Thursday, July 21, 2011 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Kramer, and carried (3- 0) with 3 excused (Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge) to continue the meeting for 15 minutes or until Commissioner Ameri arrives. AYES: Hawkins, Kramer, and Unsworth NOES: None. ABSENT: Ameri ABSTAIN: None. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Commissioner Kramer C. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Ameri, Hawkins, Kramer, and Unsworth ABSENT (EXCUSED): Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge Staff Present: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director, James Campbell, Principal Planner, Michael Torres, Deputy City Attorney, Jay Garcia, Senior Planner, Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, and Marlene Burns, Administrative Assistant D. PUBLIC COMMENTS Barbara Peters, resident, expressed her concerns regarding her neighbor's plan to remodel their home with the potential addition of a third floor, spoke regarding non - conforming lots, re- subdivision, subdivision codes, code setbacks, appeal rights, and respectfully asked the Planning Commission to review the situation. Discussion ensued between the Commission and Ms. Peters regarding the Planning Director's determination date. Ms. Peters stated that the case is still pending Coastal Commission approval and the plans have not been approved by the City but they will be as soon as the Coastal Commission approval is received. Chair Unsworth stated that this item should be placed on a future agenda and suggested that the most productive avenue to pursue, would be to go to the Coastal Commission and object and state that it is inconsistent with current standards. Page 1 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/21/2011 Community Development Director Brandt stated that she would give Ms. Peters her business card and the appropriate contacts for the Coastal Commission. E. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES — None. F. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 Minutes of June 23, 2011 Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Ameri, and carried (3 — 0, 1 abstention) to approve the minutes as corrected. AYES: Ameri, Hawkins, and Unsworth NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge ABSTAIN: Kramer ITEM NO.2 Minutes of July 7, 2011 Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Ameri, and carried (3 — 0, 1 abstention) to approve the minutes as corrected. AYES: Ameri, Hawkins, and Unsworth NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge ABSTAIN: Kramer G. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 3 Bowman Variance (PA2011 -099) 403 Jasmine Avenue Request for approval of a variance to allow the construction of a 6- foot -high deck and 42 -inch- high guardrail (9- foot -6 -inch total height) that would encroach five (5) feet into the required 5- foot rear alley setback. The alley is unimproved and is not utlized for vehicular access. A staff report and a PowerPoint presentation were provided by Associate Planner Murillo Mr. Murillo noted that staff made a revision to the draft conditions of approval and revised Condition No. 11 to read "In the event that the alley is improved in the future, or if the City decides to utilize the alley right -of -way for any reason which the City in its sole and absolute discretion determines that the deck and guardrail should be removed, the property owner is required, at their own expense, to remove the deck and guardrail encroachment within the rear 5 -foot alley setback, should the property owner fail to remove the deck and guardrail encroachment in a timely manner, the City may remove the deck and guardrail encroachment and recover the costs of removal from the property owner. The property owner shall not be entitled to any compensation from the City for the removed deck and guardrail." He stated that staff would like to remove Condition No. 6 from the conditions of approval and make it a finding Page 2 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/21/2011 in the resolution instead. He also stated that staff is recommending that Condition No. 7 be removed because it is a standard condition that applies to conditional use permits not variances. In response to questions from Commissioner Hawkins, Mr. Murillo clarified that staff will remove Condition No. 6 and insert it as a finding, the City installed and owns the gate preventing access to the alley but it is locked, the alley is 14 feet wide which is standard in Corona del Mar and stated that this is the only case where an above grade sewer line exists in an alley. Principal Planner Campbell stated that they had discussions at length with David Keely about the use of the alley and stated that they feel very confident in their representation that the City would not improve the alley for vehicular access. He stated that the alley would be maintained the alley for the utilities that are there and mentioned that the encroachment from the perspective of the Public Works Department does not impede the ability for the City to maintain and use the alley for the improvements that are there. In response to questions from Commissioner Ameri, Mr. Campbell stated that the purpose of the fence at this point is for security because of the unimproved alley and above ground sewer. He stated that if the City ever decides to underground the sewer line, the Public Works Department indicated that they would probably improve it with a driveway for utility access only and in that particular instance they would not be concerned about the encroachment. He stated that the access is blocked today because of the condition of the alley, noted that it is not safe for anyone to walk through and stated that there are no plans at the moment for the City to put a path through the alley. He recommended that the Commission look at the issue through the context that the City might improve the alley with an underground sewer line with a driveway for utility access and maintenance purposes and potentially add a walking path noting that it would not change their recommendation in that they feel that the encroachment is not going to be detrimental. Commissioner Ameri stated that he is still not comfortable with the fact that they are using an alley that has access from a street directly to a public park with an above - ground sewer line, it is dangerous to have exposed sewer lines, and stated that overall it is a shame to underutilize the alley the way it is with an exposed sewer line. Chair Unsworth called for Ex Parte Communication reports from the Commission. Commissioner Hawkins reported that he viewed the property and stated that he would testify for Commissioner Amer! that there is no way to travel the alley because of impediments such as, vegetation and trees. Deputy City Attorney Torres clarified that the alley is actually secure Chair Unsworth reported that he walked the property as well. Chair Unsworth opened the public hearing. Chris Brandon, architect representing the applicant, stated that he had a chance to review the revised Condition No. 11, elimination of Condition No. 7 and the moving of Condition No. 6 into a finding and stated that it is acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Brandon stated that their goal is to create a deck with the usable outdoor space Page 3 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/21/2011 Commissioner Kramer asked why there was an exposed carport instead of a garage Mr. Brandon stated that it is a typical required parking scenario for a duplex to have one enclosed parking space and one covered open parking space for each duplex and stated that it was the only place to put the open parking space facing Jasmine Avenue. Chair Unsworth closed the public hearing. Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Ameri, and carried (4 — 0) to move approval of the resolution and conditions as corrected. AYES: Ameri, Hawkins, Kramer, and Unsworth NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge ABSTAIN: None. Chair Unsworth stated that the decision of the Planning Commission will be final 14 days from today unless appealed by an interested party or by a City Council member. ITEM NO. 3 Monrovia Ave Amendments (PA2011 -082) and (PA2011 -105) 1537 Monrovia Avenue and 1539 Monrovia Avenue Amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Map to change the designation of the subject properties from Multi -Unit Residential [(RM (2420)] to IG 0.50 FAR (General Industrial) land use designations; and to change the zoning designation from Multi -Unit Residential (RM) to Industrial 0.50 FAR (IG 0.50) zoning district. The amendments were initiated by the property owners who seek to continue the existing nonconforming industrial uses of the properties. The properties are currently developed with a light industrial use buildings, and no new land uses or development is proposed at this time. A staff report and PowerPoint presentation were provided by Senior Planner Garcia. Commissioner Hawkins expressed his concern regarding the lack of a `cushion" in respect to the threshold for future general plan amendments requiring voter approval and asked whether other office buildings need a general plan amendment as well. In response to questions from Commissioner Hawkins, Mr. Campbell stated that any other building in that statistical area would have to comply with the threshold and confirmed that the next General Plan Amendment application within Statistical Area A2 it would push it over the threshold for requiring voter approval. Commissioner Hawkins asked whether there are currently any abatement proceedings or any code enforcement issues at the site. Mr. Campbell stated that they have contacted a variety of property owners in that statistical area, the property that they mentioned with the Road and Track building is a commercial use in a residential district, they, as well as other properties, have been informed of the need to abate and stated that there is not that much cushion left. He stated that should those property owners request an amendment to the General Plan to eliminate the non - conformity, any one of those properties in that area would require a vote. He mentioned that they have other avenues such as asking for an extension of time which would be heard by the Hearing Officer. He stated that Page 4 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/21/2011 he is not aware of the exact status of Road and Track but stated that staff put them on notice and they have not filed any application to date. Mr. Campbell spoke regarding the 2006 General Plan Amendment and subsequent zoning. He stated that for the two properties in question as well as other properties in the area, the general plan and zoning designations were changed from industrial to residential. In 2008, the City amended the zoning ordinance as it related to the abatement of non- conforming and non- residential uses in residential zones. He stated that if the applications are approved, the properties in question would become conforming and they could continue to use the property under industrial designations. Chair Unsworth called for Ex Parte Communication reports from the Commission. Commissioner Hawkins reported that he visited the site. Chair Unsworth opened the public hearing. There being no public comments, Chair Unsworth closed the public hearing. Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Kramer, and carried (4 — 0) to move approval as recommended. AYES: Ameri, Hawkins, Kramer, and Unsworth NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): Hillgren, Myers, and Toerge ABSTAIN: None. Chair Unsworth stated that the decision of the Planning Commission will be final 14 days from today unless appealed by an interested party or by a City Council member. Principal Planner stated that there is no appeal necessary because it is a recommendation to City Council and it is going to City Council automatically at a future date to be determined. H. NEW BUSINESS — None. S9/_19;F_1!UZK6L9h61619[0l •1:1:711A VA ITEM NO. 5 Community Development Director's report Community Development Director Brandt reminded the Planning Commission that the August 4, 2011, meeting will begin at 4:00 p.m. and stated that they anticipate that it will be a rather long meeting because they have two large projects that are complicated with multiple discretionary requests that will be presented to the Commission. She advised the Commission that the Whitacre project has been appealed and called up for review to the City Council but has not been scheduled for a public hearing yet. She stated that the Mariner's Pointe project has been scheduled for City Council consideration on August 9, 2011. She reported that the City Council Ad Hoc Committee for Neighborhood Revitalization has appointed five different citizens advisory panels for the different economic revitalization areas and mentioned that their first meeting will be held on July, 27, 2011 at 4:00 p.m. in the Central Library Conference Room. Commissioner Kramer requested more detail regarding the Whitacre project appeal. Page 5 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/21/2011 Mrs. Brandt clarified that the Whitacre project has been appealed by Mayor Henn and stated that Mr. Henn asked for a review of the application given that it was a split vote of the Planning Commission and he felt that there were some additional items that the City Council should review. ITEM NO. 6 Announcements on matters that Commission members would like placed on a future agenda for discussion, action, or report. None. ITEM NO. 7 Request for excused absences. None. ADJOURNMENT - The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:10 p.m. in honor of former Planning Commissioner (1978 -1984) Helen Chin McLaughlin. Page 6 of 6