HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0_Draft Minutes_02-17-2011CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Planning Commission Minutes
February 17, 2011
Regular Meeting — 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, McDaniel, Toerge, and Ameri —
present.
Commissioner Hillgren — excused.
STAFF PRESENT:
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager
Leonie Mulvihill, Assistant City Attorney
Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner
Fern Nueno, Assistant Planner
Marlene Burns, Administrative Assistant
POSTING OF THE AGENDA:
The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on February 4, 2011.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Commissioner Hawkins stated that on February 11, 2011, Speak Up Newport held
the Mayor's Dinner, which was well attended. Mayor Michael Henn's speech was
well received; it addressed the current and future state of the City.
REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES:
None
CONSENT ITEMS
SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of January 20, 2011.
ITEM NO. 1
Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Toerge
Approved
to approve the minutes as corrected.
Motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, McDaniel, Ameri, and Toerge
Noes:
None
Excused:
Hillgren
Chairperson McDaniel needed to recuse himself from Item No. 3, Netherton
Approved
Residence (PA2011 -016), so he proposed that Item No. 4, Discussion of Operator
License Ordinance (PA2010 -041), be heard before Item No. 3, Netherton
Residence (PA2011 -016). Item No. 2, Solar System Installations (PA2010 -113)
still to be heard first.
Motion made by Commissioner Hawkins and seconded by Commissioner Ameri to
re -order the agenda as suggested.
Motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, McDaniel, Ameri, and Toerge
Noes:
None
Page 1 of 5
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 02/17/2011
Excused:
Hillgren
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
SUBJECT: Solar Energy System Installations - (PA2010 -113)
ITEM NO. 2
The project is a proposed code amendment, voluntary guidelines, and incentives
PA2010 -113
applying to the installation of solar energy systems.
Approved
Fern Nueno, Assistant Planner gave a brief overview and added that there was
some additional documentation and some public comments related to the project,
which was received earlier in the day.
Chairperson McDaniel acknowledged receipt of the documentation; and noted that
when the documentation is received ten minutes prior to the beginning of the
meeting it is not possible for the Planning Commission to review the materials
thoroughly.
The Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• A regulation to be added in the ordinance requiring additional setback
from the roadway and additional landscaping buffers, in addition to the
solar energy permit requirement so as to mitigate glare issues.
• Drainage issue to be addressed by regulations in the Building Code
requiring properties to manage the drainage off of their property to avoid
nuisance and protect the quality of the storm drain system.
• A pitched roof versus a flat roof and the solar energy panel's height
limitation. For a pitched roof the height limit is 24 feet and for a flat roof
the height limit is that of 29 feet in order to promote solar panel
installations around the City.
• Reduction in the height of the solar panel limit to be from five feet to three
feet above the 24 -foot flat -roof height limit.
• Commissioner Ameri proposed the Commission address the solar panel
issue by looking at an overall regional solution.
City Attorney, Leonie Mulvihill, stressed the fact that aesthetics should not be taken
into consideration as it is state law, and that only an impact on health and safety
should be considered.
Public comment period was opened.
The residents of the surrounding neighborhood and general public expressed the
following opinions:
John Petry — 1239 Bayside Drive
• Impacted by the Bayside Drive solar array.
• Expressed hope that the ordinance will help others.
• The City should lobby to revise state law.
• Health and safety aspects should address engineering.
Derek Spalding of the Orange County Chapter of the National Electrical Contactors
Association — 180 South Anita Drive, Suite 103, Orange, California 92868
Page 2 of 5
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
• The ordinance has a lot of positive features.
• Solar panels already have anti - reflective coatings.
• After market anti - reflective coatings could void manufacturer's warranties.
Matt Stoutenburg — 15052 Red Hill Avenue
• Suggestion that the design of the system should fit the house, the
example at Bayside Drive is irresponsible.
• Size from manufacturer of the solar panels and the tilt of the solar panels
is always changing. So one should look at the restrictions on a case -by-
case as each building has different characteristics, including if the
building is commercial or residential.
• Height above roof 5 feet versus 3 feet cannot be a rule because of
different building characteristics.
• If something causes glare, it does not mean that glare will be there year
long.
Public comment period was closed.
Motion: made by Commissioner Toerge and seconded by Commissioner Hawkins
to adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approval of the Code
Amendment No. CA2011 -001 and voluntary guidelines with incentives with the
following modifications:
Modify the Resolution Finding No. 9 by having the word "prevent" be
replaced by the word "reduce" and should read as follows, "Screening of
equipment other than solar collectors will reduce any negative noise
impacts and dangers from exposed electrical equipment."
Modify the Draft Regulations 20.30.140.A.2.a, by changing the height to
be from five feet to be three feet and read as follows, "Roof- mounted.
Roof - mounted solar collectors may project up to twelve inches above a
roof plane with a minimum3 112 pitch, but may not project vertically above
the peak of the sloped roof to which it is attached. Roof - mounted panels
may project up to three feet above a flat roof plane, notwithstanding the
maximum height limit for the Zoning District in which the property is
located."
• Modify the resolution by adding the following under Section 3 as follows:
"The Planning Commission hereby further recommends that staff further
study the need for anti -glare coatings and their potential impacts to the
efficiency of solar energy systems and make appropriate recommendations
to the City Council.
The Planning Commission hereby further recommends that staff further
study limiting the size of solar energy systems based on the amount of
power generated to only the energy needs of the property and make
appropriate recommendations to the City Council.
The Planning Commission hereby further recommends that the City Council,
either individually, or in cooperation with other jurisdictions, inform the State
Legislature of the unintended consequences of the Solar Rights Act and
recommend appropriate amendments.
02/17/2011
Page 3 of 5
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 02/17/2011
The Planning Commission hereby further recommends that the City Council
regionalize the issue by encouraging the consolidation of solar energy
systems. "
Commissioner Hawkins proposed that the City lobby and negotiate with other cities to
challenge if necessary, and indeed look at regional solutions.
Commissioner Toerge, maker of the motion, agreed to the proposed, Commissioner
Hawkins seconded the motion.
Motion carries with the following vote:
Ayes:
Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, McDaniel, Ameri, and Toerge
Noes:
None
Excused:
Hillgren
NEW BUSINESS
SUBJECT: Discussion of Operator License Ordinance (PA2010 -041)
ITEM NO. 4
On January 25, 2011, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2011 -002 amending
PA2010 -041
the Municipal Code to incorporate a new chapter (Chapter 5.25) that will require
operators of certain establishments that offer alcoholic beverages for on -site
consumption in combination with late hours, entertainment, and /or dance to obtain
an Operator License. The intent of this agenda item is to provide the Planning
Commission with an overview of the Ordinance and answer any questions the
Commission may have.
Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, gave a brief overview of the Operator License
ordinance and presented a PowerPoint presentation.
The Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• There was some concern that one individual would have additional
obligations and may determine the fate of each case differently, whereas
some conditions may be harsher on some businesses and may be more
lenient on other businesses. However, redress is available for
discrimination and the City Attorney's Office is a resource available to
advise the decision - makers in those cases.
• The Planning Commission did not foresee that the process would be
directed to the Police Department administer the Operator License
program, resulting in no discretion of elected or appointed officials for
public oversight.
The report was received and filed.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
SUBJECT: Netherton Residence - (PA2011 -016)
ITEM NO. 3
The application is for a variance to allow a wall, up to 6 feet 8 inches in height, to be
PA2011 -016
constructed within the 10 -foot "streetside" side setback where the maximum height for
Approved
walls, fences and hedges is limited to three (3) feet.
Chairperson McDaniel recused himself, due to a real property conflict of interest at
approximately 9:07 p.m. and left Vice Chairperson Unsworth to continue with the
meeting.
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager, gave a brief overview and provided a
Page 4 of 5
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 02/17/2011
PowerPoint presentation.
Vice Chairperson Unsworth, noted that on the first page of the Resolution, Item No.
2, "6 feet 8- inches" should be replaced with "5 -foot 2- inches" as the City measures
the height differently than the Homeowner's Association measures the height.
Commissioner Eaton asked for clarification regarding the location of where the
street light would be moved to.
Public comment period was opened.
The Applicant, Larry Netherton, addressed the street light question by stating that it
arose out of a need to mitigate the parking and circulation concern at the cul -de-
sac. Proposed to go at the far corner of the Netherton's property, as approved by
the Homeowner's Association.
Commissioner Amed left the meeting at approximately 9:09 p.m.
Public comment period was closed.
Motion: made by Commissioner Toerge and seconded by Commissioner Hawkins
to adopt a resolution approving Variance VA2011 -003.
Motion carries with the following vote:
Ayes:
Eaton, Unsworth, Hawkins, and Toerge
Noes:
None
Excused:
Hillgren
Absent:
Ameri
Recused:
McDaniel
STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
Planning Director's report:
ITEM NO. 5
Planning Manager, Patrick Alford, stated that the City Council met on February 8,
2011. The Council received the first quarterly progress report, including Banning
Ranch and the project proposed in the 600 Block of Newport Center Drive.
Planning Commission reports:
ITEM NO. 6
Commission Hawkins, stated that due to staffing reductions, the Economic
Development Committee did not meet this month. The Business License Sub -
Committee did meet this month and may be continuing its work. A report from the
City Manager's office was received that proposed to eliminate the Economic
Development Committee in addition to EQAC.
Announcements on matters that Commission members would like placed on a future
ITEM NO. 7
agenda for discussion, action, or report.
Commission Hawkins requested to have the in lieu parking brought to the
Commission.
Requests for excused absences — Commissioner Toerge requested to be absent on
ITEM NO. 8
March 3, 2011.
ADJOURNMENT: 9:22 p.m.
MICHAEL TOERGE, SECRETARY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
Page 5 of 5