Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/21/2016 - Planning Commission CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers - 100 Civic Center Drive Monday, July 21, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER-The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Chair Kramer III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Kory Kramer, Vice Chair Peter Koetting, Commissioner Bill Dunlap, Commissioner Bradley Hillgren, Commissioner Ray Lawler, Commissioner Erik Weigand ABSENT: Secretary Peter Zak Staff Present: Community Development Director Kim Brandt; Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres; City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine; Associate Planner Makana Nova; Senior Planner Gregg Ramirez, Associate Planner Benjamin Zdeba; Senior Planner Jaime Murillo;Administrative Support Specialist Jennifer Biddle IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS-None. V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES Community Development Director Brandt stated a request for continuance was received from the applicant on the Troesh Residence Appeal. Commissioner Lawler indicated he would recuse himself due to a business relationship with one of the individuals opposed to the application. In response to Vice Chair Koetting, Community Development Director Brandt stated the request for continuance was received earlier in the day. Vice Chair Koetting expressed concern regarding last minute delays. Community Development Director Brandt explained that the applicant had the opportunity to request a continuance and it was up to the Planning Commission whether or not to grant a continuance. Chair Kramer opened up public comments. Gavin Sacks, 332 Catalina Drive, indicated opposition to continuing the matter. Shawna Schaffner, CAA Planning, representing the applicant, requested a continuance to August 18, 2016. Chair Kramer closed public comments. Motion made by Chair Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to approve the continuance to August 18, 2016. AYES: Dunlap, Kramer, Koetting, Weigand NOES: Hillgren RECUSED: Lawler ABSENT: Zak VI. CONSENT ITEMS 1. MINUTES OF JULY 11, 2016 Recommended Action: Approve and file It was noted that written corrections to the minutes were submitted by Jim Mosher. 1 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 Motion made by Commissioner Dunlap and seconded by Vice Chair Koetting to approve and file the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 11, 2016, as amended. AYES: Dunlap, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Koetting, Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Zak VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2. TROESH RESIDENCE APPEAL(PA2015-122) Site Location: 336 Catalina Drive and 333 La Jolla Drive Continued to August 18, 2016 under Request for Continuances. 3. 150 NEWPORT CENTER(PA2014-213) Site Location: 150 Newport Center Drive Summary: Community Development Director Brandt introduced the item. Associate Planner Nova presented a PowerPoint presentation outlining the legislative applications, changes since the June 23, 2016 study session, vicinity map of the project site, existing residential development in Statistical Area L-1, Zoning Code Amendment and requested Planned Community Development Plan with 10-acre minimum waiver, proposed project height, existing building heights in the south end of the Newport Center area, building setbacks, view impacts, and public comments. She noted the applicant has decreased the number of units to 45 and reduced the height of the proposed project to 6 stories (65 feet 6 inches to top of roof) from 7 stories (75 feet 6 inches to top of roof). Additionally, staff is recommending a further reduction in height to 5 stories (55 feet to the top of roof). Community Development Director Brandt presented a PowerPoint presentation explaining Charter Section 423, (Greenlight and/or Measure S analysis) with regard to a major General Plan amendment. She discussed the threshold calculation and trigger for voter approval. She stated the primary question before the Planning Commission was whether a General Plan Amendment (GPA) is appropriate for the property. Chair Kramer stated the Commission would be reviewing the legislative issues including, GPA, code amendment and planned community development plan. He explained that the site development review, tentative tract map, Development Agreement (DA) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be considered at the next hearing. In response to Vice Chair Koetting, Associate Planner Nova described the extent of the North Newport Center Planned Community. She explained the application requested by the Irvine Company in 2009 to incorporate the central portion of Block 100 into the North Newport Center Planned Community. Vice Chair Koetting questioned why all of Block 100 was not included. He asked about the vision for Fashion Island. Community Development Director Brandt stated Fashion Island was a regional shopping destination. She explained the concentration and intensity of development in the upper half of Newport Center. Vice Chair Koetting questioned why the City previously approved the height increase for Block 100. Associate Planner Nova explained that this was an individual application request made by the property owner of the middle of Block 100 whereas the other parcels are under a different property ownership. For this application, she explained staff's consideration of height limits and existing building heights in the area as a range of heights in Newport Center when preparing a recommendation as to whether a height increase is appropriate for the area. Chair Kramer stated it was necessary to determine what was best for this Applicant's parcel, Block 100 and Newport Center. He discussed inconsistencies and anomalies in the surrounding blocks. He indicated support for mixed use including residential and suggested the possibility of a Mixed Use (MU) Page 2 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 designation. Associate Planner Nova stated the applicant requested RM and MU which could be denser. Chair Kramer expressed concern with the waiver of 10-acre minimum for a planned community district and suggested 150 Newport Center be incorporated into an existing planned community. Associate Planner Nova stated the project could be incorporated as a subarea of North Newport Center. Community Development Director Brandt recommended incorporating it into North Newport Center because it is contiguous. Chair Kramer discussed existing grade and proposed height. Associate Planner Nova stated staff had suggested a 50-foot height limit to the applicant. She explained that by removing one additional floor, the project height would be 55 feet and the overall height would be 61 feet with appurtenances. Chair Kramer expressed concern with the setbacks and driveway issues. He stated it was necessary to determine the appropriate number of units and height. Commissioner Weigand discussed responses to the EIR and read a portion of the Irvine Company letter. He requested copies of the responses. Associate Planner Nova explained that responses were being prepared for CEQA related comment letters and would be available for the August 4, 2016 meeting. In response to Commissioner Dunlap, Associate Planner Nova stated the project was 1.3 acres. She stated the EIR considered 49 units and 7 stories. In response to Commissioner Lawler, Associate Planner Nova explained that the existing 12 planned community waivers in the City ranged from 0.76 acres to 9.63 acres, with half of those under 2 acres in area. She explained the benefits of a planned community which provides more flexible development standards. Community Development Director Brandt clarified the 20 percent reduction in units for prior General Plan Amendments that applies under Section 423. In response to Commissioner Hillgren, Community Development Director Brandt stated staff would bring back options for combining 150 Newport Center in other planned communities within Newport Center and a breakdown and background of existing planned communities with a waiver of the 10-acre minimum. Chair Kramer requested historical background on the 32-foot height limit for properties In Newport Center particularly Block 100. Commissioner Hillgren discussed height restrictions in relation to the cascading master plan and view protection. He suggested a taller and thinner rather than a short and wide project. In response to Vice Chair Koetting about the 100 dwelling unit threshold, Community Development Director Brandt clarified that there are only 5 unbuilt/entitled dwelling units remaining in Newport Center and the proposed application requires an increase in units currently allowed under the General Plan. She explained that the 100 unit threshold is tied to Charter Section 423 and the trigger for voter approval. She stated the threshold applies over a rolling 10-year period. Vice Chair Koetting asked if there were any potential residential sites. Associate Planner Nova stated there is a current application at the Orange County Museum House site,which consists of 100 proposed dwelling units. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Mike Lutton, representing the applicant, stated the initial project was for a seven-story building with no environmental impacts. He explained the reduction to six stories. Elaine Linhoff stated the opponents had to prove why changing the law was bad. She expressed doubt about the applicant's statement that traffic would be reduced. She stated the only benefit of the project was increased revenue. She suggested the amendment be denied. Enrique Gonzalez suggested implementation of the Specific Plan. He suggested recycled water be required for car washes. Page 3 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 Tom Fredericks asked if displacement of car wash customers were included in the car trip calculations. He stated the residents would drive to and from the project. He questioned the less than minimal footprint increase. Jeffery Stephan stated he was the former carwash owner. He stated the carwash recycled water and it was a good business. Dennis Baker, representing SPON, read comments from their letter sent to the Planning Commission regarding the DEIR, highlighting the inappropriateness of a Planned Community Development(PCD) as an egregious example of spot zoning and precedent for relaxing height limitations and use of PCD for small parcels. Beth Kiley expressed concern about setting a bad precedent. She stated the project was a 34-unit per acre development, which would change the lifestyle in Newport Beach. She urged the Commission to retain the General Plan vision. Debbie Stevens expressed appreciation for staff and Planning Commission review of the project. She stated she did not support the waiver for a Planned Community nor the height. She requested the opportunity to review the response to comments on the EIR. Lorian Petry discussed the City Hall location which was initially intended to be a freeway exit. She described the City's General Plan as a desired end through 2025 and urged the Commission to implement the vision. Allan Beek discussed development measures and stated the people did not want the development. He stated that staff had thoroughly analyzed whether the project could be approved but urged the Planning Commission to carefully consider whether the project should be approved. Jean Watt expressed disagreement with the application of prior land use changes toward the current Section 423 thresholds and concern about the "domino effect" of increased project heights. She stated the precedent setting resulted in a different landscape in Newport Center. Sind! Schwartz, owner of Muldoon's, discussed the 200 block of Newport Center. She questioned why the applicant was not sensitive to blocking the views from Muldoon's. She stated the scale, height and width of the development must be considered. She urged the Commission to implement the General Plan and retain the commercial zoning. She suggested two or three stories should be adequate. Jim Warren suggested that the parameters for the property have been set and that the applicant should make the project fit within the rules. Susan Skinner suggested that the project should consider increases due to traffic diverted to other car washes. She expressed concern about the project acting as a tipping point for more intense development characteristic of Los Angeles and requested the Commission deny the proposed development. She stated the project required a Greenlight vote as a result of the 79 dwelling units associated with the San Joaquin Plaza project and emphasized that the ballot box provides residents with a powerful voice and recourse for the bad choices of City leaders. Nancy Skinner commended the Commission for its thoughtful consideration of the project. She expressed concern with development exceeding the 2006 General Plan and impacting the charm and character of the community. She stated the project was too tall and massive. She urged the Commission to deny the exceptions and enforce the General Plan. Carl Cassidy urged the Commission to take a holistic approach with fiscal responsibility. He discussed potential litigation when going against the public. Jim Mosher stated the planning staff did not realize the City's rigid limitations on structure height. He discussed the 50-foot height limits for Block 100. He discussed conversion of units and the Greenlight policy. Page 4 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Mr. Lutton discussed outreach and efforts to benefit the community. He stated they owned and operated the car wash and new carwashes were opening at nearby gas stations. Community Development Director Brandt corrected the typographical error on page 4 stating it should read 69.2% rather than 60.2%. She acknowledged the time needed to review the response to comments on the EIR and recommended continuing the matter to August 18, 2016. Chair Kramer stated the proposed continuance seemed reasonable. Mr. Lutton concurred. Commissioner Weigand stated the Museum House study session was tentatively scheduled for August 18, 2016 as well. Commissioner Lawler discussed existing planned community development waivers of the 10-acre minimum and requested further analysis of these waivers. In response to Commissioner Hillgren, Associate Planner Nova discussed the possibility of incorporating the project into the North Newport Center Planned Community. Chair Kramer stated the issues were height, number of units, and intensity. Vice Chair Koetting thanked the Commission, staff, and public for its input. He stated there was work to be done on the project. Commissioner Dunlap stated he was also impressed with the public comment. He stated he heard the community did not want residential on the site. He discussed alternatives which could be worse. He agreed with looking into the possibility of tying the project into another planned community. Chair Kramer stated he did not see a problem with changing the zoning to residential. He stated the issue was the zoning code amendment and opportunity for a planned community. Motion made by Chair Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to continue the hearing to August 18, 2016. AYES: Dunlap, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Koetting, Weigand NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Zak RECESS Chair Kramer called a recess at 9:03 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:09 p.m.with all Commissioners present except Commissioner Zak. VIII. CURRENT BUSINESS ITEM NO. 4 WEST NEWPROT MESA STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN (PA2015-138) Site Location: West Newport Mesa Associate Planner Ben Zdeba gave a brief introduction of the project and introduced the consultant for the Master Plan, Brian Hannegan of RRM Design Group. Mr. Hannegan explained the goals of the Master Plan, outreach efforts, and existing and proposed improvements. Page 5 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 In response to Vice Chair Koetting's comment about undergrounding utilities in the area, Mr. Hannegan noted that would not be part of the proposed improvements; however, should undergrounding be completed, the Master Plan would still be applicable to the increased parkway area. Mr. Hannegan discussed proposed trees and shrubs and the near-term phase. In response to Chair Kramer, Mr. Hannegan explained the boundaries of the streetscape master plan. Community Development Director Brandt stated the residential areas were incorporated in the study, but it could be expanded further to the west. Chair Kramer suggested including all areas to the boundaries. Associate Planner Zdeba presented a map of the City boundaries. Chair Kramer suggested adding the northwest section near the City Utilities Yard and the northeast section including the City Corporation Yard to the plan. Commissioner Hillgren encouraged water-saving landscaping but suggested a similar selection to the improvements on Dover Drive. Chair Kramer suggested utilizing the plant palette used on Dover Drive. Mr. Hannegan explained the mid-term and long-term phases. In response to Vice Chair Koetting, Mr. Hannegan stated the project estimate was $6.8 million. Community Development Director Brandt explained right-of-way improvements could be required in conjunction with a subdivision map. She stated there had to be a nexus between the development and public right-of-way improvement. Commissioner Dunlap asked if there was a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget for the project. Community Development Director Brandt explained the plan preparation and budgeting process. Vice Chair Koetting stated he liked some of the revised concepts in the updated plan. He stated it would be difficult on some of the narrow frontage properties to complete the project. Mr. Hannegan discussed phasing and ways to complete the project. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question about funding, Community Development Director Brandt stated an assessment district was not currently in the plan but could be a funding mechanism. Commissioner Weigand suggested studying the plan to ensure businesses were not impacted by the proposed medians and provided an example of what to avoid. City Traffic Engineer Brine discussed the speed limit. Mr. Hannegan noted the proposed median would only eliminate the ability to make one of the two left turns into the liquor store. The left turn into the larger driveway approach would be maintained. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Ed Davis, representing the Ebb Tide project, 1560 Placentia Avenue, indicated support for the plan. Jim Mosher stated he had not read the entire plan because it was not attached to the agenda report. He stated West Newport Mesa was the only area where multifamily residential was allowed to go to 40 feet. He discussed the left turn near King Liquor and questioned the status of its General Plan amendment. Page 6 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 Community Development Director Brandt explained that King Liquor was a legal non- conforming development in a residential general plan designation. She stated it was currently under a multi-year abatement condition. Sheila Koff expressed concern about development in general and suggested Banning Ranch remains open space. Jean Longless, 877 Production Place, asked if provisions had been made for seating on the streets. Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Mr. Hannegan stated the plan included budget for several benches on each block. Commissioner Dunlap suggested the Council procure the work in a design/build manner. Motion made by Chair Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Hillgren to recommend adoption of the West Newport Streetscape Master Plan to the City Council, expanding the boundaries and editing the conceptual photographs to use Dover Drive as an example. AYES: Dunlap, Hillgren, Kramer, Koetting, Lawler,Weigand NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Zak IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 5 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION—None. ITEM NO. 6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1. Update on the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee Community Development Director Brandt announced the Mariners' Mile workshop on Monday, July 25, 2016, at 7 p.m., at Newport Sea Base. She stated the California Coastal Commission would be holding its meeting in the Council Chambers on September 7, 8 and 9 requiring the Planning Commission's meeting of September 8 to be rescheduled. She proposed September 1 as an alternative date. She stated there was not a need to have a meeting on August 4. She stated staff would review the August 18, 2016 tentative agenda. 2. Update on City Council Items Community Development Director Brandt provided an overview of the Residences at Newport Place appeal and stated that staff is recommending that the modifications to the site plan be brought back to the Commission. City Attorney Torres explained that the City Council would consider referring the matter back to the Planning Commission. ITEM NO. 7 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT—None. ITEM NO. 9 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Hillgren indicated he would be absent on August 18, 2016. X. ADJOURNMENT Page 7 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/21/16 There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of August 18, 2016. The agenda for the Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, July 15, 2016, at 3:30 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located outside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on Friday,July 15, 2016, at 3:35 p.m. *Kra .��/Iv" Page 8 of 8