Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2027 - Autonation- 320-600 W Coast Hwy RESOLUTION NO. 2027 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFIORNIA, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2016-001, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO, SD2015-002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP2015-025, AND NEWPORT PARCEL MAP NO. NP2015-010 FOR THE AUTONATION PORSCHE PROJECT LOCATED AT 320-600 WEST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2015-095) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by AutoNation, Inc., with respect to property located at 320-600 West Coast Highway and legally described as Lots 7 to 17 inclusive, of Tract No. 1210 requesting approval for the development of an automobile sales and service facility (Project). The following approvals are requested or required to implement the project as proposed: a. A Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3. b. A Traffic Study pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance). c. A Site Development Review to fulfill the requirements of NBMC Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) because the Project would consist of a nonresidential construction of greater than twenty-thousand (20,000) square feet of gross floor area. The Site Development Review also includes a request to allow an increase in the height limit pursuant NBMC Section 20.30.060.C. d. A Conditional Use Permit to fulfill the requirements of NBMC Section 20.20.020 for the operation of a vehicle sales and service facility within the CG (General Commercial) zoning district. e. A Tentative Parcel Map to merge eleven (11) contiguous lots into one (1) lot to avoid the development of a building over intervening lot lines in violation of the Building, Zoning and Subdivision Codes. 2. The subject property is designated CG (Commercial General) by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Commercial General land use category is implemented by the CG (Commercial General) zoning district. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone. 3. On August 18, 2016, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing for the Project in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2027 Page 2 of 4 CEQA and the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing. 4. On August 18, 2016, at the request of the applicant, this item was continued because the applicant failed to conduct outreach to residents of the adjacent residential community and the applicant failed to incorporated enough marine elements into the Project's design. 5. On October 6, 2016, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing for the Project in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with CEQA and the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. A. The Planning Commission was unable to approve the Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit for the following reasons: 1. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the use are not compatible and would prove detrimental to existing uses in the vicinity. Additionally, the site is not physically suitable in terms of its location and size to support an automobile dealership of the intensity sought by the applicant as it would not comply with all applicable Municipal Code requirements and standards. The efficient arrangement of structures on the site and the harmonious relationship of the structures to one another and to other adjacent developments are not provided. The proposed design is based upon maximizing development consistent with the marketing image of Porsche without regard to standards of good design as provided by the Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework guidelines. 2. The site is located between two residential areas and nuisances from increased traffic, noise from test drives, and lighting are not conducive to the peaceful enjoyment of nearby residential properties. 3. The adequacy and efficiency of vehicular access, including drive aisles, driveways, and parking and loading spaces is not evident. The site is not large enough to accommodate a floor area ratio of close to 0.5 without seeking increased height of buildings and deviating from other development standards related to parking. Specifically, the intensity of use and the size of the lot contribute to a request to reduce the width of a publically accessible drive aisle from 26 feet to 24 feet. Additionally, the site and development rely upon a parking management strategy where employee parking is not designed as a self-parking facility. This inconvenience could lead to AutoNation(PA2015-095)October 6,2016 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2027 Page 3 of 4 employees to park off-site or on nearby streets potentially diminishing parking availability to nearby uses and the public. 4. The compatibility in terms of bulk, scale, and aesthetic treatment of structures on the site and adjacent developments and public areas is not evident. The Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework seeks to guide development to "fit in" with its surroundings. It identifies a color and materials palette is to be applied considering the context of a site within the Mariners' Mile area. The modern building design that is promoted by Porsche does not have any context or relationship to the Mariners' Mile corridor and its nautical heritage and aspirations despite past allowance of modern building designs in the vicinity. The proposed color pallet for the Porsche dealership uses neutral colors; however, the contrasting trim exceeds ten percent, which is the target amount. The proposed exterior of the project does not use any nautical building elements or accents. The failure of the proposed design to fit in to the desired vision as expressed in the Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework will make it more challenging to achieve the larger district-wide goals diminishing the City's ability to achieve the desired vision. This finding is heightened by the large size of the project. 5. The increased height up to thirty-five (35) feet as measured to the established grade plane pursuant to NBMC Section 20.30.050 (Grade Establishment) decreases the distance between the proposed project that includes rooftop parking and residences along Kings Road. This relationship is undesirable as it will subject residents to increased noise nuisance attributable to cars on the roof or other commercial activities. The project does not provide any meaningful additional amenities such as increased open space or maintenance of views to the bluff as suggested by the General Plan Policy LU 6.19.13 to offset the request for increased height. 6. The applicant indicated that some service activities will be conducted at their current dealership and this fact also shows the site and at the intensity proposed is insufficient to accommodate the level of planned use. A reduced intensity project might possibly be more suitable for the constrained site. B. The Planning Commission was unable to approve the requested traffic study for the following reasons: 1. The proposed traffic study directly relates to and is necessary for the approval of the requested Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit. The findings for approval of these applications have not been met. Specifically, the project is not consistent Mariners' Mile Design Framework and the proposed automobile dealership would be detrimental to the peaceful enjoyment of property in the area. 2. Approval of the traffic study without approval of the Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit under these circumstances would be detrimental to the peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the project site proposed use and the general welfare of the City AutoNation(PA2015-095)October 6,2016 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2027 Page 4 of 4 C. The Planning Commission was unable to approve the requested application for a Tentative Parcel Map for the following reasons: 1. The proposed parcel map for the lot merger directly relates to and is necessary for the requested Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit and the findings for approval of these applications have not been met. Specifically, the project is not consistent Mariners' Mile Design Framework and the proposed automobile dealership would be detrimental to the peaceful enjoyment of property in the area. 2. Approval of the parcel map without approval of the Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit under these circumstances would be detrimental to the peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the project site proposed use and the general welfare of the City SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, California, does hereby deny without prejudice Traffic Study No. TS2016-001, Site Development Review No. SD2015- 002, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2015-025, and Newport Parcel Map No. NP2015-010 for the AutoNation Porsche project located at 320-600 West Coast Highway (PA2015-095). 2. The action to deny Newport Parcel Map No. NP2015-010 shall become final and effective ten (10) days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of NBMC Title 19 Subdivision. 3. The action to deny Traffic Study No. TS2016-001, Site Development Review No. SD2015- 002, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2015-025 shall become final and effective fourteen (14) days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of NBMC Title 20 Planning and Zoning. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016. AYES: Dunlap, Hillgren, Koetting, Weigand, Zak NOES: Kramer ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Lawler BY:To - ae , Chairm n BY Peter Zak, Se re ry AutoNation(PA2015-095)October 6,2016