HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0A - Draft Minutes - June 5, 2014 Study SessionNEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES
A.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Council Chambers — 100 Civic Center Drive
Thursday, June 5, 2014
STUDY SESSION
4:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Amed, Brown, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker
ABSENT: Brown (Excused) and Lawler (Excused)'
RECUSED: Hillgren
6/5/14
Staff Present: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director; Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Director, Community
Development; Leonie Mulvihill, Assistant City Attorney; Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer; Jim Campbell, Principal
Planner; and Brittany Ramirez, Administrative Technician
B. CURRENT BUSINESS
ITEM NO. 1 LIDO HOUSE HOTEL (PA2013 -217) AND CITY HALL Rk,USE AMENDMENTS (PA2012 -031)
Site Location: 3300 Newport Boulevard and 475 32nd Street
Vice Chair Tucker addressed the purpose of the meeting. He noted that Chair Hillgren has a financial interest in the
proposed project and has therefore, recused himself from this matter.
Principal Planner Jim Campbell provided a PowerPoint presentation providing an overview of the overall project
including a description of the location, background, proposed land use plan and zoning amendments, the
density /intensity of the amendments, and the proposed hotel. Additionally, he noted that an environmental impact
report (EIR) has been prepared for the project and the comment period closes on June 13, 2014. He indicated that
the draft EIR concludes that the project will not create significant impacts and several mitigation measures are
required. Lastly, he indicated that a public hearing on the project is scheduled for July 17, 2014.
In response to Commissioner Ameri's inquiry regarding the anticipation of major public comments before June 13,
2014, Mr. Campbell reported that the EIR comment period closes on June 13th and that written responses will be
prepared for any written comments received. He reported that three (3) letters have been received so far and that
staff does not expect many more.
Commissioner Ameri expressed concerns with comments received that may affect the Commission's perspective on
the project.
Mr. Campbell added that any comments received will be responded to and presented to the Commission on July 17,
2014.
Mr. Campbell introduced Bob Olson and Anthony Wrzosek from R.D. Olson Development, and Greg Villegas from
WATG, the project architect, and deferred to them for a presentation of the project.
Mr. Olson provided a PowerPoint presentation addressing the RFQ and RFP process, changes to the plans,
architecture, views, his industry experience and the company's track record, other Olson projects, the Lido House
concept, restaurant, spa and fitness center, ballroom and the design team.
Greg Villegas, WATG, project architect, discussed the project design, architectural materials, location, hotel
courtyard, public spaces, fire access diagram, guest and service access, parking, tree analysis plan, public parking
spaces, compliance with proposed zoning, building heights, the site plan, service and entry/exit gates, guest rooms
and suites, roof plan, swimming pool, building elevations, the goal of the project and a variety of architectural details.
Mr. Olson discussed the intended guest experience, the Olson Company's goals, extended stay units, design
theme, benefits to the community, amenities and community outreach.
Page 1 of 3
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 615/14
In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry, Mr. Campbell clarified the number of hotel rooms and the maximum
allowable density for residential that would be allowable pursuant to the proposed amendments.
Commissioner Ameri asked regarding visibility of the main entry to the hotel from Newport Boulevard and Mr.
Villages responded that the main entrance to the hotel will be highly visible from the street to the point that
wayfinding signs might not be necessary.
Discussion followed regarding adjacent properties.
Assistant City Attorney Mulvihill reported that the property to the north has asserted an easement but she noted that
the City disagrees and the parties are currently litigating an action to find out the nature of the easement. Staff does
not believe that it affects this analysis.
Ensuing discussion pertained to issues related to the Fire Department. It was noted that the Fire Station will remain
at its current location and Mr. Olson addressed minor changes that will not affect emergency access.
Ms. Mulvihill reported that it is the City Attorney's position that there is no easement in relationship with the property
to the north. If the courts decide there is an easement, the site plan would need to be modified. She added that the
Finley Avenue portion is an easement and is recorded and the project respects that easement. The adjacent
neighbors have responded to comments in response to the Notice of Preparation and staff will respond to same.
In response to Commissioner Kramer's inquiry regarding the conference room roof deck being useable square
footage, Mr. Villegas reported it is not. I.
Commissioner Kramer stated that it would be premium space and would be a great public benefit. He suggested
that additional study should be conducted regarding the matter.
Discussion followed regarding the residential units being 100% hotel use, the parking study and plan, valet tandem
parking, loss of parking should be easement result in being valid, the public plaza along Newport Boulevard and
enhanced public access, whether the public plaza is under the control of the ground lessee and the possibility of
including that in the conditions of approval. It was clarified that the proposed hotel does not include any residential
use.
Ensuing discussion pertained to the trash enclosure, materials for windows and doors, retail signs, the Coastal
Land -use Plan amendment relative to impacts on public views, whether dancing will be allowed, issues addressed
within the CUP and the EIR.
Commissioner Ameri expressed concerns with the open space and public plaza and the possibility of the definitions
of same, changing and limiting the control of the owner /operator over those areas. He suggested eliminating those
terminologies for clarity.
Vice Chair Tucker stated that the Planning Commission is not the "last word" on this project and that it will need to
be reviewed by the Coastal Commission.
Vice Chair Tucker opened public comments.
Hugh Helm, liaison between the Lido Home Owners Association Board and City Council, spoke in support of the
project adding that hotel will be an anchor to the entire Lido Revitalization project. He urged the Planning
Commission to vote in favor of the project.
Buck Endemann, Attorney with Paul Hastings representing Lido Partners, owners of Via Lido Plaza, spoke in
support of the project but expressed concerns that the draft EIR does not recognize an alternative that preserves the
hotel project but also preserves emergency and delivery truck access to Via Lido Plaza. He added that CEQA
requires that the draft EIR examine feasible alternatives. He addressed the importance of preserving the alley that
provides access from 32ntl Street for Via Lido Plaza and noted that the original proposal had the alley in place. He
reported that they will submit a detailed comment letter prior to June 13, 2014, pointing out those issues.
Page 2 of 3
C.
B
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES
615/14
George Schroeder commended the developer but expressed concerns regarding parking in the area. He
addressed ensuring that all of the parking needed for this site can be accommodated on the site.
Jim Mosher stated that the proposed amendments to the General Plan have not changed from what was presented
a year ago and claimed that it is not good planning. He questioned the acceptance of the proposed height limitation
and commented on the City being highly invested in the project being successful. He noted that Mr. Olson will be
paying all entitlement costs and asked the Commission to compare it with projects that will be heard during the
upcoming regular meeting where the City will be paying all entitlement costs.
Linda Kline commented on parking noting that the same situation will exist with the new hotel as existed with the old
Civic Center site.
Denys Oberman reported that residents were presented with a different zoning scheme that was presented two (2)
years ago in terms of a negative declaration and a designation of a commercial use. She noted that a hotel was the
desired use of this property by residents and requested that the Commission provide clarification supporting the
public policy position already established. She noted that design guidelines are not regulatory and asked for
clarification accordingly. She stated she cannot understand why there needs to be a discussion on alternative uses
and suggested having a discussion as to why the alternatives may be beneficial or not. She added that this project
should be described as the superior use and listed some of the reasons for same.
Vice Chair Tucker closed public comments.
Commissioner Kramer commented positively on the project. He addressed the possibility of using the roof deck of
the conference room as useable space and how that relates to the parking issue and asked that staff explore the
possibility. Additionally, he asked that staff address the issue with the adjacent property and that of the supposed
easement and how that relates to the City's jurisdictional authority to approve the plan.
Commissioner Myers commented on the public space accessible by the sidewalk and felt that is something that
needs to be clarified in terms of allowed uses and how it will be policed.
Commissioner Ameri stated he would like to see no special designation for the open space area and how the
developer plans to use that area in terms of public use. Additionally, he commented on the possibility of increasing
parking if staff feels additional parking is warranted and asked the applicant to take that into consideration.
Vice Chair Tucker commented on the development limit square footage in terms of "either /or" and noted that every
environmental document must consider alternatives. Additionally, he noted the importance of the operator
maintaining control of public spaces.
Staff will schedule a Public Hearing for this matter on July 17
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT is
There being r
6:03 p.m.
2014.
to come before the Planning Commission, the Study Session was adjourned at
Page 3 of 3
Correspondence
Item No. 1.OAa
Draft Minutes 06/05/14
June 19, 2014, Planning Commission Agenda comments
Comments on Newport Beach Planning Commission regular meeting agenda item by:
Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(o).vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 - 6229).
Item No. 1A: STUDY SESSION MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 2014
Changes to the draft minutes passages shown in italics are suggested in strikeeut underline format.
1. Page 1, Item A: "PRESENT: Ameri, Brewn, Kramer, LawleF Myers, and Tucker" [since
Brown and Lawler are listed as having excused absences, they should not also be listed as present]
2. Page 2, paragraph 6: "Ms. Mulvihill reported that it is the City Attorney's position that there is
no easement in relationship with the property to the north as to access from 32"" Street....
The adjacent neighbors have responded se provided comments in response to the Notice
of Preparation and staff will respond to same." [Without the suggested qualification, the
statement as written is contradicted by the following sentence which says the City believes there is a
valid easement affecting Finley. See also the last paragraph on the page which describes the dispute
as being over "the alley that provides access from 32nd Street for Via Lido Plaza. "]
3. Page 2, paragraph 9: "...loss of parking should be the easement Fesul� It in biro be valid,
4. Page 2, paragraph 10: "... the Coastal Lane) -r+se Land Use Plan amendment relative to
impacts on public views, ..."
5. Page 2, paragraph 14: "Hugh Helm, liaison between the Lido Home Owners Association
Board and City Council, spoke in support of the project adding that the hotel will be an
anchor to the entire Lido Revitalization project."