Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 - Draft Minutes_04-07-2016 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers - 100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, APRIL 7, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER-The meeting was called to order at 6:32 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Chair Kramer III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Vice Chair Tim Brown, Commissioner Bradley Hillgren, Chair Kory Kramer, Secretary Peter Koetting, Commissioner Peter Zak ABSENT(Excused): Commissioner Ray Lawler, Commissioner Erik Weigand Staff Present: Community Development Director Kim Brandt; Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres; City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine; Senior Planner Gregg Ramirez; Administrative Support Specialist Jennifer Biddle IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Mosher suggested Planning Commission meetings be videotaped rather than just audio recorded. He stated Chair Kramer had requested an item to discuss the possibility of using the City's video equipment but that item had not been placed on the agenda. He discussed the protocol of the hearing and study session items and stated the rules of procedure did not include information regarding the time allocated to applicants. He questioned whether the overall development potential for Newport Center would be discussed in addition to the Museum House item. V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES Community Development Director Brandt reported that the applicant was requesting Item No. 2 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2016, in order to provide adequate time to consider various site designs. Motion made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Secretary Koetting to continue Item No. 2 to the Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2016. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Koetting, Zak ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Lawler, Weigand VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF MARCH 17, 2016 Recommended Action: Approve and file It was noted that written corrections to the minutes were submitted by Jim Mosher. Motion made by Secretary Koetting and seconded by Vice Chair Brown to approve and file the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 2016, as amended. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Koetting, Zak ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Lawler, Weigand VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 D'ELISCU RESIDENCE VARIANCE (PA2015-205) Site Location: 1011 Kings Road 1 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4/7116 The item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2016, under Request for Continuances. VIII. NEW BUSINESS ITEM NO. 3 MUSEUM HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT(PA2015-152) Site Location: 850 San Clemente Drive Community Development Director Brandt explained that the matter was on the agenda to allow the applicant to present their project to the Commission and community. She stated Senior Planner Ramirez would provide an update on the environmental impact report and public hearing schedule. She reminded the community that the matter was not a public hearing and that the environmental analysis had not been completed nor the staff analysis prepared. She stated it was not the time to discuss the merits of the proposal or form definitive conclusions. She stated staff may collect comments but will not make formal responses. She stated, due to significant interest, staff intended to present the tentative processing schedules for the Museum House project and Newport Villas and overview of Charter Section 423, Greenlight vote, to the City Council on April 26, 2016. She stated the time for review of the project's merits would occur at a future public hearing of the Planning Commission. She noted the community would be able to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) once completed and circulated for public review. Senior Planner Ramirez presented the vicinity map for the proposed Museum House. He explained the proposed project for the condominium tower. He provided the site plan depicting the entrance drive and parking. He stated the project would require a General Plan Amendment, amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan, approval of a tentative tract map, site development review, traffic study, development agreement, and CECA review. He presented the tentative timeline for release of the draft EIR in June and public hearings for the project which included Planning Commission tentatively in August and City Council dates in September or October. In response to Secretary Koetting, Senior Planner Ramirez confirmed that the applicant would explain the site plan, dimensions,and open space. Commissioner Zak asked why the matter would be presented to the Planning Commissioner before the Airport Land Use Commission. Senior Planner Ramirez explained that the Airport Commission preferred the Planning Commission make its recommendation to the City Council prior to it making a decision. Commissioner Hillgren requested an explanation of why a General Plan Amendment was required. Senior Planner Ramirez explained that the current land use designation was private institutional with a 45,000 square-foot cap. He stated the current designation did not allow residential development, therefore the request would remove 24,000 square feet of the 45,000 square-foot cap of nonresidential use allowed on this particular property,for the purpose of adding 100 dwelling units. Chair Kramer explained the process for discussion of the matter. He reminded the public that it was a study session and it was important to listen. Bill Witte, CEO of Related California, provided an overview of the company's and individual's involvement in the community. He explained their efforts to be deliberate in approach. He stated they were at a preliminary stage in design and the goal was to inform the Commission and community about the design philosophy. He displayed photographs of other successful projects. Suzanne Hori, land use counsel for Related California from Manatt, Phelps & Philips, provided background on land use and the Greenlight initiative and application to the Museum House project. She discussed the General Plan and concentration of development in Newport Center. She discussed Land Use Policy 6.14.4 related to development in the Newport Center. She discussed the original vision for development in Newport Center and indicated Museum House would be a continuation of that that vision. She summarized City Charter Section 423, Greenlight Initiative, and explained the thresholds for Page 2 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4/7116 a major General Plan Amendment. She explained the proposed location of Museum House in Statistical Area L1. She discussed the City's July 1, 2015 statistical tracking table indicating availability under the Greenlight capacity before a vote is needed. She stated the Museum House was not a major General Plan Amendment and would not require a vote under the Greenlight Initiative. Mr. Witte discussed the selection of the design architect and importance to the OC Museum of Art that the project would be of the highest quality. He discussed the qualifications and qualities of architect Robert Stern. He provided a description of the best in class design of the Museum House and other residential development in Fashion Island. He explained that a luxury condominium development created the least traffic impacts of any potential use. He stated the project would not obstruct views and is located near existing residential uses. He discussed other Related California sustainable developments and the type of residents they expect to have. He presented renderings of the preliminary building design. Gino Canori, Executive Vice President of Related California, addressed the Commission regarding the height of the project. He discussed sensitivity towards preserving the views and provided a comparison to the height of other buildings in Newport Center. He stated the Museum House would not be the tallest building in Newport Beach nor in Fashion Island. He displayed drone photography and views from various locations depicting no visible impact. He discussed the shadow studies and analysis. Mr. Witte concluded that the discussions of community benefits through a development agreement would ensue. He discussed efforts to design a positive addition to Fashion Island with minimal impact. Commissioner Zak requested staff comment on Ms. Hod's interpretation of the Greenlight Initiative as it related to the proposed project. Community Development Director Brandt stated staff was not prepared to make any conclusions regarding Greenlight. Commissioner Zak asked if there was criteria for the 300-foot height limit. Community Development Director Brandt stated the analysis would be included as the project progressed. She stated there were provisions in the Zoning Code for high rise zones. Commissioner Zak asked the height limit for residential. Community Development Director Brandt stated the property was currently designated for public or private institutional. Senior Planner Ramirez stated the San Joaquin Apartments would be approximately 60 feet tall from grade. Ms. Hori discussed the height limits for each development and stated the existing height limit was 65 feet. Commissioner Hillgren requested information on why the two Irvine Company buildings were not included and what other development entitlements existed in Fashion Island. Assistant City Attorney Torres encouraged the Commission to refrain from questions until staff analysis and the environmental impact was completed. He stated the intention was to listen. He stated Community Development Director Brandt would be making a presentation to the City Council at its second meeting in April. In response to Secretary Koetting, Community Development Director Brandt stated the traffic analysis would be included in the environmental impact report. City Traffic Engineer Brine stated the study had been initiated and should be available when the matter goes before the City Council. Mr. Witte discussed meetings with interested community members, including SPON and the Irvine Company. Chair Kramer opened the meeting up for public comment and reminded the public that it was a study session and the Commission would not be taking action. He explained the comment process and asked for speakers to limit comments to new points and to subject matter discussed this evening. Dennis Baker expressed concern about the loss of a cultural institutional piece of property. He questioned the ownership of the property. Anita Mishook expressed excitement about the Museum House project due to increased property values and opportunities for high end residential. She commended Mr. Stern on his architecture. She stated Page 3 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4!7116 she was aware of the concerns of environmental impacts but the building would be state of the art. She encouraged the Planning Commission to approve the project. Barry Allen encouraged the Traffic Engineer to pay close attention to the description of the project as a luxury high rise. He also mentioned water usage problems. Sherry Bower discussed her experience in commercial real estate. She stated the project was too big and too tall. She stated the residents wanted to review any large scale projects and should have a voice in the proposed project. She stated the future look of Newport Beach needed to be considered and its brand needed to be preserved. She encouraged the leadership of the City to give the people a voice on the project. Susan Skinner discussed the Greenlight Initiative and stated the Museum House project required a vote of the people. She discussed Mr. Ellis' participation in Councilmembers' campaigns and possible involvement in lobbying the Museum House project. Sherry Pollack suggested the 1961 plan be revised. She expressed concern about traffic congestion. Tom Fredericks expressed surprise that the Commission allowed the developer's attorney to explain why the Greenlight Initiative did not apply. Luisa Gulley asked if traffic studies were preparedfollowing project completion and suggested the current developments be completed such as the apartments to include those traffic impacts. Kurt English discussed relocation of the museum and the purchase and sale agreement with Related California. He urged the Commission to reject the anti-property rights arguments. He encouraged the Commission to support the project. Therese Loutherback questioned the view from Spy Glass. She expressed concern about the City changing the zoning. Nancy Skinner stated the Greenlight Initiative did not take away property rights. She discussed the General Plan and stated amendments should provide a major non-monetary benefit to the residents. Chip Long expressed concern with the traffic generated from the new apartments and the traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. Jennifer Van Bergh discussed the existing Museum and that people don't know that it's there. She states the new museum would be world class. She indicated support for the project due to the creation of a community within a community. Jim Warren discussed Measure Y and the desires of the community. He stated there should be a special election paid for by the developer. Darrel Anderson discussed Newport Center and stated the Museum House completed the center. He stated the museum was not compatible in the current location and would be better suited on the donated land in Costa Mesa. He indicated support for the Museum House project. John Fornes questioned why the traffic impact of the San Joaquin Apartments project was not combined with the proposed Museum House project. Dr. Stephanie Moore discussed potential power restrictions and blackouts and indicated opposition to the project. Bob Currie stated Newport Beach was a wonderful place to live and the proposed project was consistent with Newport Beach. Page 4 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4/7/16 Jim Mosher expressed surprise that the applicant had the opportunity to discuss the results of the EIR and opine on the Greenlight Initiative. He questioned why the museum wanted to relocate. He commented on Ms. Hori's statements regarding the site location and building height policy. He stated a world class museum could be developed on the existing site. Mary Saucedo questioned the statement that the residents would be elderly and use it as a second home. She expressed concern about traffic. Mr.Witte reiterated that they would continue to have meetings to discuss the project. He stated the draft EIR would address the public's questions. In response to Secretary Koetting, Community Development Director Brandt stated the units in the San Joaquin Apartments were approved under the 2006 General Plan and also through a transfer of development rights from the Marriott where 79 hotel rooms were converted to 79 dwelling units and transferred, as allowed by the General Plan, and that is how 524 apartments were allowed to be developed. Commissioner Hillgren thanked the community for participating in the Planning Commission meeting. Chair Kramer thanked the applicant and public for its input. Community Development Director Brandt stated staff would continue with the environmental analysis which would be available for public review. She stated staff will respond to all comments on the Draft EIR and responses would be incorporated into the final EIR. Chair Kramer asked when the Commission would hear the matter again. Senior Planner Ramirez stated an additional study session would occur during the 45-day EIR review period. IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION— None. ITEM NO. 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1. Update on the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee Community Development Director Brandt stated the City's eleven coastal boundary adjustments would be considered by the Coastal Commission on April 14, 2016. 2. Update on City Council Items Community Development Director Brandt stated the Back Bay Landing Project would be presented to the City Council on April 12, 2016. ITEM NO.6 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT-None ITEM NO. 7 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Hillgren requested an excused absence for the Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2016. Secretary Koetting requested an excused absence for the Planning Commission meeting of May 5, 2016. X. ADJOURNMENT Page 5 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4/7/16 There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:16 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of April 21, 2016. The agenda for the Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, April 1, 2016, at 3:13 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on Friday, April 1, 2016, at 3:20 p.m. Kory Kramer, Chair Peter Koetting, Secretary Page 6 of 6 Planning Commission - June 9, 2016 Item No. la Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of April 7, 2016 June 9, 2016, Planning Commission Agenda Item Comments Comments on Newport Beach Planning Commission regular meeting agenda item submitted by: Jim Mosher( iimmosher(o),vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229). Item No. 1. MINUTES OF APRIL 7, 2016 The following very minor changes to the draft minutes passages shown in italics are suggested in strikeeut underline format. Page 2, last paragraph: "Suzanne Hod, land use counsel for Related California from Manatt, Phelps & Philip Phillips, provided background on land use and the Greenlight initiative and application to the Museum House project. ... She discussed the original vision for development in Newport Center and indicated Museum House would be a continuation of that that vision." Page 4, paragraph 9: "Therese Loutherback questioned the view from s SpVglass."