HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrchid Plaza Appeal (PA2004-194)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 6
January 6, 2005
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner
run.gOcitv.newport- beach.ca. us
(949) 644 -3208
SUBJECT: Orchid Plaza
Appeal of Use Permit No. 2004 -033
3600 E. Coast Highway
(PA 2004 -194)
APPLICANT: Steven Fischer
On November 19, 2004, the Planning Director denied Use Permit No. 2004 -033
requesting a new, 32 -foot high building with at grade covered parking to exceed the
maximum allowable building bulk. The proposed building bulk is 1.29 and the maximum is
0.75. The application also includes a request to exclude an elevator mechanical room from
the base floor area ratio (FAR) calculation per Section 20.63.040.D.
The project consists of a 3,533 square foot retail commercial building with the commercial
space above a 13 -space parking lot. Building bulk is defined as the gross floor area plus
the gross floor area of above grade or partly subterranean covered parking areas.
Building bulk shall not exceed the permitted floor area (0.5) plus an additional 0.25 for
commercial uses, totaling 0.75. The Planning Director may approve a Use Permit for a
project that exceeds the building bulk limits, upon making the findings contained in Section
20.63.040 C -2. The Planning Director denied the Use Permit based upon the inability to
make the findings. The specific facts are contained in the denial letter attached as Exhibit
No. 1. The primary concerns were the building height and bulk in relation to surrounding
commercial and residential uses, and inadequate on -site vehicular maneuvering areas.
The request to exclude the area of the elevator mechanical room from the gross floor area
calculation per Section 20.63.040.D, was also denied since the area was a contributing
factor to the overall building bulk.
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 2
Site
Use Permit No. 2004 -033 (PA2004 -194)
y�
Current
Development:
Vacant
To the north:
U.S Postal Office
To the south:
Retail Commercial
To the east:
Retail Commercial & Two-Family Residential
To the west:
Retail Commercial & Two-Family Residential
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 3
The applicant subsequently filed an appeal to the Planning Commission (Exhibit No. 2).
In addition to the appeal, the applicant submitted revised architectural plans in an
attempt to address the concerns identified by the Planning Director (Exhibit No. 3).
DISCUSSION
Located at the northeast comer of Orchid Avenue and Coast Highway in Corona del
Mar area, the subject property is an irregular, rectangular- shaped lot. The property is
designated Retail & Service Commercial by the General Plan Land Use Element and
has a zoning designation of RSC (Retail Service Commercial). The subject property is
within the 32/50 Height Limitation Zone established in the Zoning Code and has no
setback requirements as the property is abutting RSC properties.
Appeal and Revised Project
The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission consider the appeal favorably
by approving their revised plans. The revised project is slightly smaller in that it contains
3,500 square feet of commercial space [a 33 square foot reduction]. The new plan has
the parking area lowered and partially subterranean, which reduces the bulk of the
proposed building.
Below is a summary of the proposed changes made to the development:
• The retail tenant spaces have been reduced from 3,533 square feet to 3,500
square feet. The proposed FAR for the retail building has been reduced slightly
from .50 to 0.495. The reduction of retail tenant space reduces the number of
required parking spaces from 15 to 14 spaces that in turn provides a turn - around
area inside the parking garage.
• A turn - around area has been provided inside the parking garage to eliminate
vehicles from backing out of the parking area and onto Orchid Avenue. The
Traffic Engineer finds the revised parking layout acceptable.
• The building height has been reduced from 32 feet to 29 feet, 4 inches. The
applicant accomplished this by providing a partial subterranean, covered parking
garage as opposed to the at -grade covered garage previously proposed.
• The setback of the upper level (retail tenant spaces) has been provided and is 5
feet from the rear property line while the original proposal has no setback along
the rear property line.
• The rear building elevation now has a sloped roof element and decorative wood
shutters.
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 4
• The area of the elevator /mechanical room has been reduced from 77.5 square feet
to 52 square feet.
The table below provides several statistics of the original and revised proposals:
Section 20.63.060 allows the gross floor area of the covered parking area be reduced
proportionally based on the height of ceiling above natural grade. The ground floor
parking is 5,530 square feet in size and the ceiling height of the parking garage is 7 feet
5 inches; therefore, the total parking area counted towards gross square footage is 75
percent of 5,530 or 4,148 square feet. The proposed building bulk for the revised
development is 1.09 (7,700/7,066).
All of the changes outlined were not considered by the Planning Director but rather than
simply referring this matter back, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission
consider the proposed changes in the context of the appeal in the interest of saving
time.
Utilities and Mechanical Equipment
The applicant continues to request that the area of the elevator mechanical room be
excluded from the gross floor area calculation as with the original proposal. Section
20.63.040.D, permits the City to exclude utility and mechanical equipment rooms, totaling
up to 10 percent of the gross floor area, from the calculation of the floor area ratio when it
is clearly demonstrated that such areas do not contribute to the traffic generation potential
of the property. The elevator mechanical room measures approximately 52 square feet or
1.46 percent of the floor area.
The elevator mechanical equipment room will be strictly used for the roof access ladder
and the elevator machine equipment. The use of this room will not contribute to the traffic
generation characteristics of the property since it is not a conditioned useable retail space.
Original Proposal
Revised Proposal
Lot Area
7,066 s.f.
7,066 s.f.
Ground Floor Parking
5,518 s.f.
4,148 s.f.
75% of 5,530 s.f.
GFA (tenant space &
mech. equip. room
3,611 (3,533 + 77,5) s.f.
3,552 (3,500 + 52) s.f.
Total Building Bulk
Area
9,129 s.f.
7,700 s.f.
Building Bulk Ratio
1.29
1.09
Building Height
32 ft.
29 ft. 4 in.
Section 20.63.060 allows the gross floor area of the covered parking area be reduced
proportionally based on the height of ceiling above natural grade. The ground floor
parking is 5,530 square feet in size and the ceiling height of the parking garage is 7 feet
5 inches; therefore, the total parking area counted towards gross square footage is 75
percent of 5,530 or 4,148 square feet. The proposed building bulk for the revised
development is 1.09 (7,700/7,066).
All of the changes outlined were not considered by the Planning Director but rather than
simply referring this matter back, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission
consider the proposed changes in the context of the appeal in the interest of saving
time.
Utilities and Mechanical Equipment
The applicant continues to request that the area of the elevator mechanical room be
excluded from the gross floor area calculation as with the original proposal. Section
20.63.040.D, permits the City to exclude utility and mechanical equipment rooms, totaling
up to 10 percent of the gross floor area, from the calculation of the floor area ratio when it
is clearly demonstrated that such areas do not contribute to the traffic generation potential
of the property. The elevator mechanical room measures approximately 52 square feet or
1.46 percent of the floor area.
The elevator mechanical equipment room will be strictly used for the roof access ladder
and the elevator machine equipment. The use of this room will not contribute to the traffic
generation characteristics of the property since it is not a conditioned useable retail space.
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 5
Staff believes the exclusion of 52 square feet can be approved based upon the traffic
consideration, however, the area affects the bulk and it must be considered in the context
if the findings for building bulk could be made. Since it is such a minor fraction of the
overall bulk of the proposed development, staff does not see a significant negative
consequence to its approval.
Building Bulk
The revised project has a building bulk of 1.09. The Planning Commission, when
considering the building bulk request, must make the following findings in accordance to
Section 20.63.040C.2 (Land Use Intensities):
1. The increase development, including above grade covered parking, does not create
abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development and development in
the surrounding area.
The site is bounded on the west and south by streets. The Corona del Mar Post
Office, a one -story building, abuts the project site to the north. Residential
properties that appear to be consistent with R -2 height limits are also to the
north. The retail building to the east is also single story. The height of these
buildings is shown on the elevation drawings for comparison. The 29 -foot, 4 -inch
high building is below the 32 -foot height limit. Taller, and therefore
nonconforming, commercial buildings are also located along Coast Highway in
the area. The highest portion of the building is located 22 feet from Orchid
Avenue and approximately 13 feet from Coast Highway. The proposed building
has a single story element at the sidewalk that is at a pedestrian scale adjacent
to the Coast Highway sidewalk. The second floor has a 5 -foot setback to the north
that provides articulation, architectural details and a sloping roof. These features
reduce the bulk of the building as perceived from the north. The previous project's
32 -foot high, blank wall to the north has been eliminated. The building is massed to
the east property line; however staff does not believe the transition from the
adjacent one -story building to the proposed two story building is an abrupt change
in building massing or height. The adjacent property to the east can redevelop with
a 32 -foot high building.
2. The proposed use and structures, including above grade covered parking, are
compatible with the surrounding area.
The proposed retail commercial use of the building is permissible in the RSC district
and it is compatible with the existing commercial uses along Coast Highway. The
design of the structure does not place the retail space at the elevation of the
sidewalk, which is typical in Corona del Mar. The parking garage takes this
prominent location, although it is screened in an aesthetically pleasing way (in
staffs opinion) and is partially below grade. These design features are not found in
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 6
Corona del Mar, but this fact does not preclude finding the building compatible with
the area. The architectural styling and materials proposed should give the building
a sense of quality, which is generally considered compatible with the Corona del
Mar district. The proposed building does conform to the required setbacks and
height limits established for the RSC District. The 5 7foot setback of the second
floor level from the rear property line, the sloped roof design and decorative wood
shutters has softened the change in building scale between the subject property
and the neighboring post office building in an attempt to promote compatibility.
3. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, will not
result in significant impairment of public views.
There are no public views through or across this property that will be adversely
impacted by the project.
4. That the site is physically suitable for the development proposed, including above
grade covered parking, taking into consideration site characteristics including, but
not limited to, slopes, submerged areas, and sensitive resources.
The site is flat with street access on two sides and it has no slopes, submerged
areas or sensitive resources. The relatively small site is large enough to
accommodate the proposed design in that it strikes a balance between providing
the minimum required parking, in a safe and as efficient a manner as possible,
while avoiding the creation of abrupt scale relationships.
The project highlights the fact that it is difficult to comply with all development
standards and achieve the maximum floor area ratio possible. If the parking garage
were lowered further to have the finished floor of the retail space at or near the
sidewalk, the slope of the drive aisle would become too steep for safe and efficient
use resulting in a reduction of parking supply. Parking on the roof presents other
compatibility issues. The project can be redesigned as a two story commercial
space on roughly '/ the lot with the other half used for surface parking. This
concept also does not work in that nearly the entire area of the site is needed to
provide the minimum parking spaces. The last alternative might be to waive most of
the parking and design the building at grade. The bulk of such a designed project is
advantageous and the retail element at street level is desirous; however, the lack of
parking creates other compatibility issues.
Staff believes sufficient facts to support the affirmative findings are evident given the size,
configuration and location of the lot. The changes to the project after its initial denial have
addressed all of staffs concerns. The applicant has presented a building design that
respects the scale of the development along Coast Highway and steps the higher second
floor substantially back from the front property line. The north side of the building as
viewed from the residents on Orchid Avenue has sloping roofs, recessed openings and a
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 7
5 -foot setback for the upper floor. The reduction in building height and bulk has affectively
eliminated the abrupt change in building scale than that previously proposed that in part
lead staff to deny the prior design. The project does not impact public views since there
are no views currently enjoyed by the public in this area through or across the property.
Finally, it is staff belief that the site is physically suitable for the proposed project.
Environmental Review
Staff believes that the project qualifies for a Class 3 categorical exemption from the
California Environmental Quality Act, which permits the limited number of new
structures. In urbanized areas, up to 4 buildings with up to 10,000 square feet would
qualify provided that the site is not environmentally sensitive. The total floor area is well
below this threshold. The site is vacant and no environmental resources are known to
exist at the site. The former use of the site is a gasoline service station and the
applicant has initially obtained site clearance from of the Orange County Health Care
Agency for the original project. Since the garage is now proposed to be further below
grade, approval of the new plan by the County prior to the issuance of a building permit
is necessary to ensure that health safety issues are avoided.
Public Notice
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within
300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this
hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the
agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant the appeal and approve Use
Permit No. 2004 -033 as modified. A draft resolution for this recommendation has been
prepared for consideration, which includes conditions applied for the revised proposal.
The Planning Commission has the following additional options for the appeal:
1. Deny the Use Permit should any one of the required findings not be met.
2. Refer this matter back to the Planning Director with instructions if necessary.
3. Continue this item to allow the applicant an opportunity to develop alternative
project design.
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
Orchid Plaza
January 6, 2005
Page 8
I ya-� (2=4 - 24A Add jTQkbL i
o
M. Ling, Ass late Planner Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director
1. Resolution No. 2004 -_; findings and conditions of approval
2. Planning Director Letter dated November 19, 2004
3. The Appeal Application
4. Plans
EXHIBIT 1
DRAFT RESOLUTION
Li
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -033 FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3600 E. COAST HIGHWAY (PA2004 -194)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS,
RESOLVES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, an application was filed by Steven Fischer, with respect to property
located at 3600 E. Coast Highway, and legally described as portions of Lots 1, 2, 3, Block
V of Tract 323, requesting an approval of a Use Permit to allow a new commercial
development to exceed the allowable 0.75 building bulk. The proposed building bulk is
1.09. The application also includes a request to exclude a 52 square-foot
elevator /mechanical room from the base floor area ratio (FAR) calculation per Section
20.63.040.13 of the Municipal Code.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 6, 2005, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place
and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given in accordance with the Municipal Code.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning
Commission at this meeting.
WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use designation for the property is Retail &
Service Commercial, and the lot is zoned Retail Service Commercial.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The 29 -foot, 4- inch.high building is below the 32 -foot height limit. The highest
portion of the building is located 22 feet from Orchid Avenue and approximately
13 feet from Coast Highway. The proposed building has a single story element at
the sidewalk that is at a pedestrian scale adjacent to the Coast Highway
sidewalk. The second -floor has a 5 -foot setback to the north that provides
articulation, architectural details and a sloping roof. These features reduce the bulk
of the building as perceived from the north. The building is massed to the east
property line; however the transition from the adjacent one -story building to the
proposed two story building is not an abrupt change in building massing or height.
The adjacent property to the east can redevelop with a 32 -foot high building.
Therefore, the increase building bulk of the proposed project, including the covered
parking area, does not create abrupt changes in scale between the proposed
development and development in the surrounding area
2. The proposed retail commercial use of the building is permissible in the RSC district
and it is compatible with the existing commercial uses along Coast Highway. The
design of the structure does not place the retail space at the elevation of the
sidewalk. The parking garage takes this prominent location, although it is screened
10
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paoe 2 of 5
in an aesthetically pleasing way and is partially below grade. Although these design
features are not generally found in Corona del Mar, the building is compatible with
the area since the architectural styling and materials proposed gives the building a
sense of quality. The proposed building does conform to the required setbacks
and height limits established for the RSC District. The 5 -foot setback of the
second floor level from the rear property line, the sloped roof design and
decorative wood shutters has softened the change in building scale between the
subject property and the neighboring post office building in an attempt to promote
compatibility. Therefore, proposed use and structures, including above grade
covered parking, are compatible with the surrounding area.
3. There are no public views through or across this property that will be adversely
impacted by the project.
4. The site is flat with street access on two sides and it has no slopes, submerged
areas or sensitive resources. The relatively small site is large enough to
accommodate the proposed design in that it strikes a balance between providing
the minimum required parking in safe and as efficient a manner as possible, while
avoiding the creation of abrupt scale relationships. The site, therefore, is physically
suitable for the development proposed, including above grade covered parking,
taking into consideration site characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes,
submerged areas, and sensitive resources.
5. The elevator mechanical equipment room is approximately 52 square feet in area,
or 1.45% of the total gross floor area of the project. The room will be strictly used
for the roof access ladder and the elevator machine equipment and it is not a
conditioned useable retail space and as such, will not contribute to the traffic
generation characteristics of the property. The request is a minor fraction of the
overall bulk of the proposed development and therefore, it will not result in any
significant negative issues.
WHEREAS, the project is categorically exempt under the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures) which permits the limited number of new structures. In urbanized
areas, up to 4 buildings with up to 10,000 square feet would qualify provided that the
site is not environmentally sensitive. The total floor area is well below this threshold.
The site is vacant and no environmental resources are known to exist at the site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby
approves Use Permit No. 2004- 033(PA -2004 -194), subject to the Conditions of Approval
set forth in Exhibit "A ".
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 3 of 5
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 provision of Title 20, Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2005.
AYES:
NOES:
M2
Larry Tucker, Chairman
BY:
Jeffrey Cole, Secretary
I
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Paae 4 of 5
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2004-033
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans
dated December 15, 2004, except as noted in the following conditions.
2. Development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan,
floor plan and elevations.
3. A total of 14 on -site parking spaces shall be provided and maintained for the
commercial development. A covenant approved by the Office of the City Attorney
as to form and content shall be recorded against the property guaranteeing that
the twelve -car garage shall remain accessible for the parking of vehicles during
the regular business hours of the retail facility and shall not be used for storage
purposes or any other use that will prevent the required use of the parking
spaces.
4. The exclusion applies only to the elevator mechanical room identified on the
approved set of plans up to a maximum of 52 square feet. Any further additions
to the building or exclusions to the FAR shall require a separate review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Prior to issuance of building permits and if deemed appropriate, a parcel map,
certificate of compliance or lot line adjustment shall be submitted and approved
to combine the existing portions of lots that comprise the subject property into a
single parcel of land for the proposed commercial development.
6. The enclosure of commercial off - street parking shall be subject to the following
conditions:
a. The doors shall remain open during regular business hours.
b. That a sign be posted on the business frontage which advises patrons of
the availability and location of parking spaces. The location of such signs
shall be identified on the construction set of plans approved by the
Building Department for the subject building.
C. A sign shall be posted on the rear of the site which contains the following
information, and the location of such signs shall be identified on the
construction set of plans approved by the Building Department for the
subject building:
(i) Doors are to remain open during business hours.
13
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 5 of 5
(ii) A number to call for Code Enforcement.
(iii) Municipal Code Section related to the required parking.
d. The location, size and color of the signs required by this condition shall be
approved by the Planning Department.
7. The parking layout shall comply with City Standard STD - 805 -L -A. The parking
garage shall provide and maintain a turn around area.
8. The site shall accommodate all deliveries/trash pick up to be handled on -site.
9. The minimum allowable width for a drive aisle opening shall be 24 feet.
10. The driveway shall comply with City Standard STD - 160 -L -A modified to comply
with ADA requirements.
11. Prior to issuance of building permits, the site plan and construction drawings
shall be revised and reviewed and approval by Public Works/Traffic Engineering
is required.
12. Prior to issuance of the building permit, area calculations of the overall building
square footage and site area shall be verified. The total retail tenant space shall
be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet of gross floor area as defined in
Chapter 20.63 of the Municipal Code.
13. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.67 of the Municipal Code.
14. The Planning Director, or the Planning Commission, may add to, or modify the
conditions of approval for this use permit. In addition, the Planning Director or
Commission may revoke this permit upon a determination that the operation (which
is the subject of this approval) causes injury or is detrimental to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community.
15. This approval shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of
approval as specified in Section 20.93.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
unless an extension is approved prior to the expiration date of this approval, in
accordance with Section 20.93.055 (B) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
16. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall provide to the Planning
Department proper proof of site clearance from the County of Orange Health Care
Agency for the project.
H
USE PERMIT NO. UP2004 -033
(PA2004 -194)
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
(949) 644-3200; FAX (949) 644 -3229
November 19, 2004
Steven Fischer
4921 Longridge Avenue
Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Application:
Applicant:
Address of
Property Involved:
Legal Description:
Request
Staff Person: Javier S. Garcia 949 -644 -3206
Appeal Period: 14 days after approval date
Use Permit No. UP2004-033 (PA2004 -194)
Steven Fischer
3600 E. Coast Highway
Portion of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block V, Tract 323
In accordance with the provisions of Section 20.63.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code (NBMC), the Planning Director may issue a Use Permit to approve a project that
exceeds the building bulk limits established by the Zoning Code. The proposed 32- foot -tall
building and covered parking area with a building bulk of 1.28 will exceed the permitted
building bulk allowance of 0.75. The building will maintain a front yard setback of 22 feet from
Orchid Avenue, with the exception of the access stairway that will extend to the front property
line at Orchid Avenue. The Planning Director determined, in this case, that the proposal
would be detrimental to persons, property or improvements in the neighborhood since the
required findings of Section 20.63.040 (C -2) of the NBMC could not be justified and that the
Use Permit request as proposed is not consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code based on the findings.
The request to exclude the area of the elevator mechanical room from the gross floor
calculation in accordance with the provisions of Section 20.63.040 D of the NBMC, was also
denied since it is a contributing factor to the overall building bulk.
16
November 19, 2004
Page - 2
Director's Action: Denied on November 19, 2004
In review of this application, the Planning Director analyzed issues with regard to FAR
compliance, building bulk, the parking requirements, the exclusion of the elevator
mechanical equipment room from the FAR calculations and compliance with Title 19
(Subdivision Code). The detailed analysis can be found in the attached appendix. In
consideration of those aspects, the Planning Director determined, in this case, that the
proposal would be detrimental to persons, property or improvements in the
neighborhood. In addition, the Use Permit request, as proposed, is not consistent with
the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code based on the
following findings:
The Municipal Code Section 20.63.040D permits the Planning Director to exclude utility
and mechanical equipment rooms, totaling up to 10 percent of the gross floor area, from
the calculation of the floor area ratio when it is clearly demonstrated that such areas do
not contribute to the traffic generation potential of the property. The applicant has
requested that the area devoted to the elevator mechanical room be excluded from the
gross floor area calculations. The elevator mechanical room measures approximately 100
square feet. Although staff has no objection to the purpose of exclusion of the area from
the gross floor area calculations, it is possible that a redesign of the project may
accommodate the mechanical room without the necessity to exclude it from the gross
floor area calculation.
FINDINGS:
The property is designated for 'Retail and Service Commercial" use by the Land
Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed use is consistent with that
designation.
2. This project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is categorically
exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under
Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction).
3. The approval of Use Permit UP2004 -033 (PA2004 -194) for the proposed project to
exceed the building bulk limitations is not consistent with the provisions of Section
20.63.060 or the required findings of Section 20.63.040 C-2 of the Municipal Code
(Building Bulk Ordinance) for the following reasons:
• The increased development, including above grade covered parking,
creates abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development and
the development in the surrounding area because the building design is
higher than other buildings in the vicinity, as viewed from Coast Highway
and Orchid Avenue. Although the building conforms to the 32 -foot height
limit permitted by the Zoning Code, the height of the covered parking area
that raises the overall height of the building to the maximum permitted by
Code creates a design that is not justifiable.
11
November 19, 2004
Page - 3
• The ceiling height of the parking area level could be reduced to create a
partially subterranean level that could in turn reduce the overall height of
the building.
• Although the project, as designed, conforms to the required setbacks and
height limits established for the RSC District and the commercial area, the
proposed retail commercial structure and above grade covered parking is
not compatible with the surrounding area since the project is designed to
abut the property line on three sides and maintains a setback of 25 feet
from Orchid Avenue.
• The increased development, including above grade covered parking, will
not result in the significant impairment of public views.since the building
bulk is accommodated within the buildable envelope of the site and no
increase in building height is sought in conjunction with the application.
• The site is not physically suitable for the size of the development
proposed, including above grade covered parking, taking into
consideration site characteristics that include the overall depth and width
of the property, and the inability to provide adequate access and vehicular
circulation for the parking lot, evidenced by the comments from the City
Traffic Engineer.
• The provision of 15 parking spaces to satisfy the Zoning Code
requirement causes the need for the increase in the building bulk of the
site because the covered parking is located above ground. If the number
of parking spaces was reduced or the parking lot was provided as
subterranean or partially subterranean, the building bulk could be
reduced.
4. The exclusion of elevator mechanical equipment room from the floor area
calculations is not warranted since a redesign of the project could accommodate
the mechanical room area within the required gross floor area.
5. The proposed design of the parking lot requires that vehicles parked in parking
spaces 1, 2 and 3 to back out of the parking area and onto Orchid Avenue a
distance of approximately 80 to 900 feet. The City Traffic Engineer has identified
this as an unacceptable and dangerous design that can only be remedied by a
further redesign of the building and circulation system.
6. Under the circumstances of this case, the project will be detrimental to the health,
safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of the city since the garage
portion of the project that elevates the project building bulk calculation increases
the overall height of the project that results in or creates an adverse negative effect
on the neighboring commercial and residential properties.
The decision of the Planning Director may be appealed by the applicant or any interested
party to the Planning Commission within 14 days of the date of the decision. Any appeal
filed shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $975.00 .
1�
November 19, 2004
Page - 4
PATRICIA L. TEMPLE, Planning Director
By
Senior P nner J r S. Garcia, AICP
Attachments: Appendix
Vicinity Map
Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations
Applicant's
Letter of
Justification: Keisker and Wiggle Architects
Letters of
Opposition: Jeff Pence, neighbor
William Dean and Kathleen Schultz,
415 Orchid Ave
Tom and Macarena Ronk,
417 Orchid Ave
FAUSERSIPLN1Shared\PA's1PAs - 2004VPA2004- 1941UP2004 -033 appr.doc
cc:
Contact:
Gary Wiggle
Keisker & Wiggle Architects, Inc.
26961 Camino de Estrella
Suite 200
Capistrano Beach, CA 92624
Code Enforcement Officer
I"I
November 19, 2004
Page - 5
APPENDIX
FAR Compliance
With regard to FAR (Floor Area Ratio) calculations, the Zoning Code draws no distinction
between covered parking spaces and enclosed parking spaces and does not specify that
enclosed garages are to be considered in the overall allowable FAR calculations. In
support of that interpretation, Section 20.66.050 of the NBMC allows for the enclosure of
commercial parking in accordance with specified conditions of approval to accommodate
property security and patron convenience. The limitation and restrictions on the use of
enclosed parking is discussed in the parking requirement discussion later in this report.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 20.63.040, the Planning Director has determined
that the proposed project will comply with the base development allocation specified by
the Land Use Element of the General Plan and will not exceed the floor area ratio (FAR)
established for the statistical area in which the project is located, with the exception of the
request accompanying this application to exclude approximately 100 square feet for the
elevator mechanical room. The elevator area is calculated in accordance with the
Municipal Code requirements and has been included in the gross floor area calculations.
The project, as proposed, consists of a 3,758 sq. ft. (gross floor area) retail building with a
weighted floor area of 3,758 sq. ft. (0.53 FAR). The proposed thirteen -car garage (5,376
sq. ft.) does not contribute to an increase in the weighted FAR of the project nor is it
counted in the FAR entitlement. The maximum FAR allowed on -site is 3,533 sq. ft. (gross
floor area). Therefore, approximately 225 square feet of gross floor area will have to be
removed from the project as currently designed. The 225 square foot reduction in the
gross floor area will bring the project into compliance with the allowed base development
allocation for the Statistical Area and will therefore be consistent with the guidelines and
intent of the FAR provisions of the Municipal Code.
Exclusion of Mechanical Room from FAR Calculations
The provisions of Section 20.63.040 D of the Newport Beach Municipal Code permit the
Planning Director to exclude utility and mechanical equipment rooms, totaling up to 10
percent of the gross floor area, from the calculation of the floor area ratio when it is clearly
demonstrated that such areas do not contribute to the traffic generation potential of the
property. Based on the site plan and floor plans presented, the Planning Director has
determined that the proposed exclusion of 77.5 square feet (0.01 FAR) to accommodate
the elevator mechanical room is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code since it
does not directly contribute to traffic generation of the project. This reduction in FAR
footage does not reduce the gross floor area used to calculate the parking requirement
for the project and is discussed later in this report.
Y)
November 19, 2004
Page - 6
Buildina Bulk Compliance
In accordance with the provisions of Section 20.63.060 of the Newport Municipal Code,
the building bulk shall be calculated to be gross floor area excluding outdoor dining
areas and with the addition of courtyards not open on at least 2 sides. An area that is
open to the sky and is open on one side is considered to be consistent with this
provision.
Additionally,. the Code specifies that the building bulk shall also include the gross
square footage of above grade or partially subterranean covered parking areas, except
where specifically excluded for a particular location under the Land Use Element of the
General Plan. The ground floor garage area is therefore counted toward the building
bulk of the project. The table below describes the proposed project's building bulk.
BUILDING BULK (BB) TABLE:
The project consists of a 3,758 square foot commercial retail building with an allowable
building bulk of 5,299 sq. ft. The proposed thirteen -car garage (5,376 sq. ft.) increases the
building bulk to 9,134 sq. ft. (1.29 Building Bulk).
In accordance with Section 20.63.060, the Planning Director may issue a use permit to
approve a project that exceeds the building bulk limits established in this section upon
making the findings contained in Section 20.63.040 (C -2), as follows, and upon finding
that the project is consistent with any applicable design criteria adopted by the City
Council.
a. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, does
not create abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development
and development in the surrounding area.
Applicant's Response: The street edge scale of the proposed building matches the
scale of the adjoining structures along PCH. The second -floor space is stepped back
significantly from the street and is within the allowable height of the lot.
Staff Response: The applicant has revised the second -floor elevation that faces the
residential properties to provide articulation that reduces the previous blank full height
Al
Permitted BB
Proposed BB
Site Area 7,066 sq. ft.
Covered or Garage Area:
0.25
1,766 sq. ft.
0.77
5,376 sq. ft.
Building Area:
0.50
3,533 sq. ft
0.53
3,758 sq. ft.
TOTAL BUILDING
BULK AREA
0.75
(5,299 sq. ft.)
1.29
9,134 sq. ft.
The project consists of a 3,758 square foot commercial retail building with an allowable
building bulk of 5,299 sq. ft. The proposed thirteen -car garage (5,376 sq. ft.) increases the
building bulk to 9,134 sq. ft. (1.29 Building Bulk).
In accordance with Section 20.63.060, the Planning Director may issue a use permit to
approve a project that exceeds the building bulk limits established in this section upon
making the findings contained in Section 20.63.040 (C -2), as follows, and upon finding
that the project is consistent with any applicable design criteria adopted by the City
Council.
a. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, does
not create abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development
and development in the surrounding area.
Applicant's Response: The street edge scale of the proposed building matches the
scale of the adjoining structures along PCH. The second -floor space is stepped back
significantly from the street and is within the allowable height of the lot.
Staff Response: The applicant has revised the second -floor elevation that faces the
residential properties to provide articulation that reduces the previous blank full height
Al
November 19, 2004
Page - 7
building face originally proposed. Although, the building, as proposed, complies with the
32/50 Height Limitation Zone established in the Zoning Code, staff is of the opinion that
a reduction in the overall height would achieve a greater reduction in the adverse effect
of the increased building bulk. The minor step -back of the second floor from the
property line does little to reduce the abrupt change in scale between the subject
property and neighboring post office building, and the residential uses in the vicinity.
b. That the proposed use and structures, including above grade covered
parking, are compatible with the surrounding area.
Applicant's Response: The proposed use, retail as well as the parking, is consistent
with all surrounding development along PCH and Orchid.
Staff Response: Although the building design of a single -level of parking under a
single level of retail, with a building ridge height of 31 feet and two 32- foot -high parapet
elements, complies with the height limit of the RSC Zoning District, staff is of the
opinion that a reduction in the height of portions of the proposed building would be
more compatible with the surrounding commercial and residential uses in the area. The
change in Zoning Districts from commercial to residential is by nature an abrupt change
and the height 'limits authorized are also abrupt solely based on the Zoning Code
permitted height limits of 32 feet for the commercial district and 24 feet for the
residential district located across the alley.
C. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, will
not result in significant impairment of public views.
Applicant's Response: The proposed development has no impact on public views.
Again the second -floor space is at the rear of the property, stepping back from the PCH
edge.
Staff Response: There are no public views through or across this property that will
be adversely impacted by the project. Additionally, the building, as designed, complies
with the 32 foot height limit of the RSC District.
d. That the site is physically suitable for the development proposed,
including above grade covered parking, taking into consideration site
characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes, submerged areas, and
sensitive resources.
Applicant's Response: The site is suitable for the proper development. The
proposed design not only allows this project to self -park on -site, but it adds up to 4
parking spaces along the street back into use with the closure of the driveways along
PCH. Other projects have development over - parking along the highway within Corona
Del Mar.
Staff Response: In staff's opinion, the site is not physically suited for the
development as designed since it lacks adequate on site vehicular maneuverability and,
;2.
November 19, 2004
Page - 8
based on the proposed floor area of the building; adequate room is not available on site
to provide the Zoning Code required accessible parking. Additionally, the site
characteristics of lot depth and width negatively affect the ability to provide adequate
vehicular turnaround space for the parallel parking spaces without backing out onto
Orchid Avenue, which the City Traffic Engineer has identified as an unsafe condition.
Staff is of the opinion that the above findings have not been adequately addressed and
also finds that the project, as proposed, is not consistent with the findings specked under
Section 20.63.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Parkina Requirements
As proposed by the applicant, the covered parking is an above - ground garage structure
that is only partially open on the westerly side by the mesh grill garage door and on the
southerly side by four openings that are enclosed by steel grid screens. In accordance
with the provisions of Section 20.66.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, one
parking space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area is required; therefore, based
on a maximum building size of 3,750 square feet, 15 parking spaces are required.
The following is an excerpt of Section 20.66.050 B -3 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code and specifies limitation and conditions of approval that shall be applied to the
enclosure of commercial parking spaces:
3. Enclosed Parking. The enclosure of commercial off - street parking may be
permitted, subject to the following conditions:
a. That doors remain open during regular business hours.
b. That a sign be posted on the business frontage which advises patrons of
the availability and location of parking spaces.
C. That a sign be posted on the rear of the site which contains the following
information:
(1) Doors are to remain open during business hours.
(2) A number to call for Code Enforcement.
(3) Municipal Code Section.
d. That the location, size and color of the signs required by 2 and 3 above
shall be approved by the Planning Director.
Associate Engineer David Keely for the Public Works Department (Traffic Engineering)
forwarded the following traffic related comments, corrections and conditions for the proposed
Commercial project, where applicable the following has been included as a condition of
approval:
A Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) study is not required for this 3,533 square foot
general commercial project.
a3
November 19, 2004
Page - 9
• The parking layout shall comply with City Standard STD - 805 -L -A. The parking area will
need to be reconfigured to eliminate the need for vehicles to back out of the parking
area and onto Orchid Avenue.
• As previously commented, the parking layout shall comply with City Standard STD -805-
L-A. The parking area will need to be reconfigured to eliminate the need for vehicles to
back out of the parking area and onto Orchid Avenue. The parking layout shall provide
turnaround area on -site possibly requiring a loss of one parking space. The current
configuration requires spaces 1, 2 and 3 to back out onto Orchid Avenue.
• Parking spaces 14 and 15 shall be setback 1 foot from the property line unless
otherwise specified in planning or zoning regulations, per STD - 805 -L -A. Wheel stops or
curb and concrete ribbon shall be placed along the front edge of parking spaces 14 and
15 (2' -6" overhang). A 5 -foot hammerhead area shall be provided in the back up area
behind space 14.
• The site shall accommodate all deliveries /trash pick up to be handled on -site
• The minimum allowable width for a drive aisle opening is 24 feet. The plans shall be
revised to accommodate a 24 foot rolling security gate. The drive aisles on both sides of
the proposed security gate shall align.
• The location of the proposed driveway cut may need to be relocated due to the close
proximity to the catch basin on Orchid Avenue. The driveway shall comply with City
Standard STD - 160 -L -A modified to comply with ADA requirements.
• Plan set to be revised and further review and approval by Public Works/Traffic
Engineering is required.
Title 19 Comullance
The Subdivision Code Section 19.68.040 provides that no new construction or building
alteration of value greater than $20,705 shall be permitted on a lot adjacent to a lot held
by the same owner if any one of the contiguous lots held by the same owner does not
conform to standards for minimum lot size under Title 20 (Zoning Code) until a
resubdivision or, if deemed appropriate by the Planning Director, a lot line adjustment,
has merged said lots into a single- development site. Since the site is comprised of
portions of three lots, a parcel map is required to combine them into a single parcel of
land for the proposed development. The appropriate condition of approval has been
included in the application approval.
It is possible that a certificate of compliance may be approved to accomplish the
combining of the portions of lots, if adequate supporting documentation can be provided.
If the certificate of compliance cannot be supported or approved, a parcel map to
combine will be required. .
+x�xzx�e:eixextxx��
M1
VICINITY MAP
�
: r..
qb
Planning Director's Use Permit UP2004 -033
Project No. PA2004 -194
Site Address
3600 E. Coast Highway
as
Keisker
W ggL
Architects=
August 30, 2004
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658
RE: Building Bulk Use Permit and FAR Exception For
Orchid Plaza, 3600 East Pacific Coast Highway
Corona del Mar, CA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION
The proposed project consists of an at -grade exterior parking area for two cars
and an enclosed at -grade parking garage for an additional 13 cars and the
trash. Above the garage is a single level of retail shops, set to the rear of the
property with a large deck along the street frontage. At the corner of Orchid
and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) is a feature stairway to the upper level. At the
south end of the property is another stair and an elevator.
The design allows for a single story height at Pacific Coast Highway similar to the
adjoining buildings and stepping up to the second floor area at the rear of the
site. The colors and materials include a dry stack ledger stone walls, smooth
plaster walls, precast concrete detailing and pavers, glass guardrails and
copper gutters and roofs. Portions of the deck have overhead trellis structures.
This is a former Shell gas station site, which included two driveways onto PCH
and a driveway on Orchid. The proposed project has no access onto PCH and
retains the single driveway at Orchid.
This is a request for a Building Bulk permit due to the ground floor covered
parking proposed with this project. Refer to the calculations below for the bulk
area as outlined in Section 20.63.060 of the Municipal Code,
Lot Area 7,066 SF
Ground Floor Parking
Tenant Spaces
5,518 SF
3,533 SF
Total 9,051 SF
Proposed Bulk
Allowable Bulk
9,051/7,066 = 1.28
0.5 +0.25 =0.75
26961 VlU il; C o cl _ E 200, oS'o E CA "H ?F(. } G � 92
OM
City of Newport Beach
Orchid Plaza
Keisker & Wiggle Architects, Inc.
August 30, 2004
Page 2
Per the exception outlined in 20.63.0601, we request approval of the bulk as
submitted, We offer the following responses to the required findings:
a. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, does not create
abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development and development in the
surrounding area;
The street edge scale of the proposed building matches the scale of the
adjoining structures along PCH. The second floor space is stepped back
significantly from the street and is within the allowable height of the lot.
b. That the proposed use and structures, including above grade covered parking, are
compatible with the surrounding area;
The proposed use, retail as well as the parking are consistent with all surrounding
development along PCH and Orchid.
c. The increased development, including above grade covered parking, will not result in
significant impairment of public views;
The development as proposed has no impact on public views. Again, the
second floor space is at the rear of the property, stepping back from the PCH
edge.
d. That the site is physically suitable for the development proposed, including above grade
covered parking, taking into consideration site characteristics including, but not limited to,
slopes, submerged areas, and sensitive resources.
The site is suitable for the proposed development. The proposed design not only
allows this project to self park on site, but it adds up to 4 parking spaces along
the street back into use with the closure of the driveways along PCH. Other
projects have development over parking along the highway within Corona del
Mar.
Additionally, per Section 20.63.040.D, we are asking for the determination by the
Planning Director that will exclude the square footage of our elevator machine
room from the calculation of the floor area ratio. The room is just 93 square feet,
or 2.6% of the floor area, and is strictly used for the roof access ladder and the
elevator machine equipment, neither of which will contribute to the traffic
generation potential of the property.
With the exception noted above, the design conforms to the FAR, the setbacks
and the height restrictions of the lot. The design respects the scale of the
development along PCH and steps the second floor substantially back from the
front wall. The project as presented offers a well crafted design, quality materials
and finishes, and will be an asset to the surrounding area. We respectfully
request the approval of the Building Bulk and Utility room exception as
presented.
Al
LO
0
10
x pa
W
x
Cv
17
�l
� I --j I -------------- -
--------- ----
fnl
2.
) z S
CaOp
oc-0
0 a 0
u
C) 0 Lj
cli
SwG
11:
ob
Cl) E
0
9 CL
LL m
mm
0
C4
z
0. o Z
=.- -
M F-
0
0 w
(n LU
c
'It M
CD
m 0
U-
uj 0
%
W
F-
IL m 0
is
SwG
00,0
mac
Y ox
7i
OP
<
wU
�(D
ads
Q
Cl)
\
�§
Z
O
2/i
!� |.
j
® ! MIN
/ '
LU
�()
@ > p\
/
§t § om
3 g2 o
§�:\
�
§ /
ri"Ar
< k (
N 2�
2 /U§
z 6 \/
*§
C) /
Cl)
\
CL
C14
IL
LU
0
\w\
°/
/dk
�q
PACIFIC MARINA DEVELOPMENT INC.
DEVELOPMENT • CONSTRUCTION • MANAGEMENT • CONSULTING
September 7,2004
Planning Director
City of Newport Beach, Ca. 92663
Re: Use Permit UP2004 -033
3600 E. Coast Highway
RECEIVED BY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
SEP 1 10 2004
AM 71819110111112 11
1213 {41516
I am writing you concerning Use Permit UP2004 -003. As the owner of the Commercial
Property across Orchid Avenue and other commercial properties within the city
boundries, I am concerned about the following items:
1. Putting the parking portion of the building right against the sidewalk along PCH
does not create the Village Concept that the City Council wants to see as the
future of CDM.
2. The height of the structure is overwhelming and does not conform to the
residential neighborhood that is adjacent. The lowering of the foundation would
help eliminate this issue and still not take away from the tease ability of the
project.
3. Putting the Stairwell in the center of the property along PCH would take away
from the mass that is being created on the comer of the street. This would more
that likely also reduce some construction cost for the project.
The project across from Starbucks Coffee is the prime example of the type of
development we do not wish to repeat in CDM and this isa carbon copy of that
development. Architecturally and economically that project has been suffering since
- its conception.
I am not against a development on the property, but trying to maximize.the square
footage of the property at the expense of the surrounding neighbor and long term
:goals of the City - should be strongly taken into account.
America's Premier Marina Experts
3416 Via lido, Suite G, Newport Beach, California 92663 • (949) 851.8111 (888) 411 -3811 Fax (949) 8516970
pacificmarina@aol.com
3t
Message Page 1 of I
Garcia, Jay
From: Temple, Patty
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 8:48 AM
To: Garcia, Jay
Subject: FW: Permit UP 2004 -033
FYI.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: bill dean [mailto:billdean @dean - assoc.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 10:23 PM
To: ptemple @city.newport- beach.ca.us
Cc: Bludau, Homer
Subject: Permit UP 2004 -033
Dear Ms Temple
I am writing you about the above permit as we received a notice from your department this week telling us we
had until next Monday the 13th to register any comments.
My comments are:
1. The post mark on this notice is 9/3 and is from Santa Ana so we didn't receive it until 9/7. Not a lot of
time to run up to city hall to check plans, etc. especially since due to Labor Day this in essence provided
only five days when your offices would be open.
2. The developer is asking for several variances, notably that of bulk being almost 71 % greater than of the
allowance per what I assume are the city's standards.
3. The building would be 32 feet tall and would totally dominate the skyline in this area. If you go to the
location you will see that for two blocks on both sides of the proposed building there are only 2 buildings
that are taller than a single story and this will be three stories. The two exceptions are both two story
buildings and are several hundred feet from this lot -- Carmelo's restaurant and a building at the corner of
Mangold and ECH.
4. The building immediately adjacent on Orchid is the Corona del Mar US Post Office which has
approximately 150- 175 cars a day coming by to drop off mail, buy stamps, etc. Also the post office is
one story tall.
5. My wife and I live on the other side of Orchid from where this proposed building will be built and at a
height of 32 feet with only the post office between us we'll definitely have a very clear view of the
building, on its back side.
Given all this we request that the before permission is granted that more time for community response be
allowed. And that the complete architectural plans, including roof line treatment and the back side of the
building be open for review by those effected such as ourselves and our neighbors.
Thank you and I hope that this reaches you in time.
Sincerely
William A. Dean and Kathleen M. Schultz
415 Orchid Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
949.566.9933
3a
09/10/2004
Message Page 1 of 1
Garcia, Jay
From:
Temple, Patty
Sent:
Friday, September 10, 2004 12:03 PM
To:
Garcia, Jay
Subject: FW: [BULK] PERMIT UP2004 -033
Importance: Low
FYI.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Tom Ronk [mailto:tronk @adelphia.net]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:00 PM
To: ptemple @city.newport- beach.ca.us; hbludau @city.newport- beach.ca.us
Subject: [BULK] PERMIT UP2004 -033
Importance: Low
Dear Ms. Temple:
I have owned my home at 417 Orchid Ave. since October 1997. For nearly half that time the vacant lot on the comer of
Orchid and Coast Highway has been an embarrassment to our community. The "Corona Del Mar 2004 Beautification
Project" was touted as a "cleanup" of CDM and it seems that the homeowners around Orchid Ave. have been left out of
this process. The proposals that you have sent us have included an oil change shop and now a large commercial
building. I am surprised that these proposals even make it past your initial screening process. We are residents, not
industrialists. Between the post office, Carmelos and surrounding businesses, Orchid Ave. is already a warzone. My dog
was killed in 1998 in front of my house as we attempted to cross the street.
I believe the vacant lot which is a now a toxic enviromental issue, along with its chain -link fence with ripped green plastic,
is devaluing the homes nearest to this lot. And now you are allowing a proposal to violate the maximum height limit? It
doesn't make sense. I would like to add a third story to my home ..... I'll bet it would be impossible to get the planning
commission to even open the letter holding my request for permit!
Please do not allow builders to get past your screening process with ridiculous requests that violate what have been strict
zoning guidelines in the past. Consider that there are hundreds of homes and residents and little children and dogs that
walk in this area 7 days a week from 5am until 10pm. Please consider proposals that will add to the "quaint ambiance" of
Corona Del Mar, not turn our lovely neighborhood into a commercial embarrassment.
Sincerely,
Tom and Macarena Ronk
949- 675 -4469
tronk@adelphia.net
417 Orchid Ave.
09/10/2004
EXHIBIT 3
APPEAL APPLICATION WITH
REVISED PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
3
CITY OF NEWPORT BEALN
APPLICATION TO APPEAL DECISION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
Application No. Up_03 3 �A ac�Y (q4�
Name of Appellant
or person filing: 5�11lVJ 4=19 Eft- Phone: 90 - 9df°' $ 103
Address: LoA(,V40&1z: A -Ven0le: ., `; tA-n &)A% CA `tt+? -3
Date of Planning Director's decision: dell 19 20
Regarding application of: 0* PMkr' %.O- U j?2gx*- 033 �1�A 2-oaq- c?y 012CF{�Qr pLgzp
(Description of application filed with Staff)
- .., . Z 0 - 1 0,
�aa..
I c ♦ � / 'dlr�U
L % '/
4
Date �Z
PTI
ING DEPT. ASSISTANT or STAFF
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Appeal filed and Administrative Fee received:
20 _
Hearing Date. An appeal shall be scheduled for a hearing before the Planning Commission within thirty (30)
days of the filing of the appeal unless both applicant and appellant or reviewing body consent to a later date
(NBMC Sec. 20.95.050)
cc: Appellant
File
APPEALS: Municipal Code Sec. 20.95.0406
Appeal Fee: $975.00 pursuant to Resolution No. 2004 -060
(Deposit funds with Cashier in Account #2700 -5000) PA2004 -194 for UP2004 -033
3600 E. Coast Highway
F:\USERS \PLN \Shared \Farms \Old Forms \tforms \Staffappeal.doc DATE OF MEETING -
Revised 8 -25 -04
jcr
Keisker
VU-`
gg e
Architects=
December 15, 2004
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658
RE: Building Bulk Use Permit and FAR Exception For
Orchid Plaza, 3600 East Pacific Coast Highway
Corona del Mar, CA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION
The proposed project consists of an at -grade exterior parking area for two cars
and an enclosed partially subterranean parking garage, for an additional 12
cars and the trash. Above the garage is a single level of retail shops, set 5 feet
off of the rear of the property with a deck along the street frontage. At the
corner of Orchid and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) is a feature stairway to the
upper level. At the south end of the property is another stair and an elevator.
The design allows for a single story height at Pacific Coast Highway similar to the
adjoining buildings and stepping up to the second floor area towards the rear of
the site. The colors and materials -include a dry stack ledger stone walls, smooth
plaster walls, precast concrete detailing and pavers, glass guardrails and
copper gutters and roofs. Portions of the deck have overhead trellis structures.
This is a former Shell gas station site, which included two driveways onto PCH
and.a driveway on Orchid. The proposed project has no access onto PCH and
retains the single driveway at/Orchid:
This is a request for a Building Bulk permit due to the ground floor, partial
subterranean. covered parking proposed with this project. Refer to the
calculations below for the bulk area as outlined in Section 20.63:060 of the
Municipal Code.
Lot Area 7,066 SF
Ground Floor Parking 5,530 SF X 75% = 4,148 SF
Tenant Spaces 3,500 SF X 100% = 3,500
Total 7,648 SF
Proposed Bulk 7,648/7,066 = 1.08
Allowable Bulk 0.5+0.25 = 0.75
26961 Camino de Estrella, Suite 200, Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 P. 949/388 -1250. R 949/388 -2760 3(y
City of Newport Beach Keisker & Wiggle Arch �Mfil 5Y
Orchid Plaza D�T
EA N �l TB
EACH
utL 15 2004
Per the exception outlined in 20.63.060.E, we request approval of l kl9l42,11213141516
submitted. We offer the following responses to the required findings.
a. The increased development, including partially subterranean covered parking, does not
create abrupt changes in scale between the proposed development and development in the
surrounding area,
The street edge scale of the proposed building matches the scale of the
adjoining structures along PCH. The second floor space is stepped back
significantly from the street and is almost three feet lower than the allowable
height for this lot.
b. That the proposed use and structures, including partial subterranean covered parking, are
compatible with the surrounding area;
The proposed use, retail as well as the parking are consistent with all surrounding
development along PCH and Orchid.
c. The increased development, including partial subterranean covered parking, will not
result in significant impairment of public views;
The development as proposed has no impact on public views. Again, the
second floor space is towards the rear of the property, stepping back from the
PCH edge and setback from the post office edge.
d. That the site is physically suitable for the development proposed, including partially
subterranean covered parking, taking into consideration site characteristics including, but not .
limited to, slopes, submerged areas, and sensitive resources.
The site is suitable for the proposed development. The proposed design not only
allows this project to self park on site, but it adds up to 4 parking spaces along
the street back into use with the closure of the driveways along PCH. Other
projects have development over parking along the highway within Corona del
Mair.'It should be noted that this lot has noalley access, which most other lots
along this side of PCH have.
Additionally, per Section 20.63.040.D, we are asking for the determination by the
Planning Commission that will exclude the square footage'of our elevator
machine room from the calculation of the floor area ratio. The room is just 52
square feet, or 1.46% of the floor area, and is strictly used for the roof access
ladder and the elevator machine equipment, neither of which will contribute to
the traffic generation potential of the property.
With the exception noted above, the design conforms to the FAR, the setbacks
and the height restrictions of the lot. The design respects the scale of the
development along PCH and steps the second floor substantially back from the
front wall. Additionally, the north side of the building as viewed from the
residents on Orchid, has sloping roofs, recessed openings and a 5 foot setback
for the upper floor. The project as presented offers a well crafted design, quality
materials and finishes, and will be an asset to the surrounding area. We
respectfully request the approval of the Building Bulk and Utility Room Exception
as presented.
31
----------------
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
kki
, -ME
cn
z
_3
M
ob
0' Lu q*
0 ui
\ \/
..\ //
z F,
Ma
0 0
z z
ga�
3:
0 Mi.
¢3e
<
Z
0
C)
cn
z
_3
M
ob
0' Lu q*
0 ui
\ \/
..\ //
k
s
z F,
Ma
0 0
z z
ga�
3:
0 Mi.
k
s
. !
2� / |
of ) U
/i
«
i
I
I !1
� IIII I
i
I I j
it
0
0
CY
,e
Q
u
co b
0
W
y
:. ES
J b
W
N m
c
ol
z
0
W.
J �
W
(lam n
Q m
W
L1 aL