Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0_Draft Minutes_08-08-2019V VI. VII. NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, AUGUST 8, 2019 REGULAR MEETING - 6:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Klaustermeier ROLL CALL PRESENT: Vice Chair Erik Weigand, Commissioner Curtis Ellmore, Commissioner Sarah Klaustermeier, Commissioner Peter Koetting, and Commissioner Mark Rosene ABSENT: Secretary Lee Lowrey, and Commissioner Lauren Kleiman Staff Present: Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine, Associate Planner Chelsea Crager, Planning Technician Patrick Achis, and Administrative Support Technician Amanda Lee ELECTION OF OFFICERS ITEM NO. 1 Election of Officers Summary: The Planning Commission's adopted rules require the election of officers at its annual meeting, which occurs at the first meeting of July each year. Officers include the Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary and they would serve fora one-year term. Recommended Action: 1. Find this action not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378), of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; 2. Nominate Planning Commission officers consisting of Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary; and 3. Appoint the officers by majority approval of a motion. In response to Commissioner Koetting's inquiry, Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell advised that Commissioners Kleiman and Lowrey anticipate being present for future Planning Commission meetings. PUBLIC COMMENTS None REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO.2 Minutes of July 18, 2019 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Ellmore to approve the minutes of the July 18, 2019, meeting with Mr. Mosher's written revisions. AYES: Weigand, Ellmore, Klaustermeier, and Rosene NOES: ABSTAIN: Koetting ABSENT: Lowrey, Kleiman 1 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 Vlll. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 3 THE DOCK CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA2109-075) Site Location: 2816 Lafayette Avenue Summary: A conditional use permit to allow a Type 47 (On -Sale General — Eating Place) alcoholic beverage control license at an existing food service establishment. The Dock currently operates with a Type 41 (On -Sale Beer and Wine) alcoholic beverage control license with hours of operation from 6:00 a.m. through 11:00 p.m., daily. The existing establishment consists of 1,060 square feet of net public area, including a 597- square-foot covered outdoor patio fronting the Rhine Channel. No change to hours of operation and no physical interior or exterior alterations are proposed. The Applicant also requests a continuation of historical parking reductions. If approved, this use permit would supersede Use Permit No. UP3578. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-022 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP 2019-023. Associate Planner Chelsea Crager reported the applicant proposes to upgrade its ABC license from a Type 41 license to a Type 47 license in order to serve distilled spirits in conjunction with the restaurant use. The applicant also requests a continuance of the existing parking reductions. The Dock is located in Cannery Village, a mixed -use area, and some on -street parking is available in front of the restaurant. In 1971, a take- out restaurant was located on the subject site, and an apartment was located above the restaurant. In 1996, the restaurant expanded and added the sale of beer and wine. In 2005, the restaurant expanded a second time and received a parking waiver. When the original restaurant was established in the 1970s, the Zoning Code did not require parking for the use. The Dock contains 1,060 square feet of net public area, including the 597-square-foot dining area with 47 seats. The restaurant's current entitlement allows operations between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. daily. The restaurant does not provide live entertainment, dancing, or on -site parking. The applicant does not propose any physical changes to the restaurant. A municipal parking facility with 44 parking spaces is located approximately 360 feet from the restaurant. Staff recommends approval of the application. Commissioner Koetting expressed concern about the applicant's ability to sell alcohol at 6:00 a.m. when residences are located nearby. He asked about the status of the public parking lot near the project site. In response to his question, Associate Planner Crager advised that she did not observe the public parking facility in Cannery Village filled to capacity during site visits. Commissioner Rosene disclosed he has driven past the site. Commissioner Klaustermeier disclosed she has driven by the site and had some email correspondence with the applicant's consultant. Commissioner Koetting disclosed he has spoken with the applicant's consultant and visited the site. Commissioner Ellmore disclosed he has received no correspondence. Vice Chair Weigand disclosed a discussion with the applicant's consultant regarding the restaurant's operation and the new license. Vice Chair Weigand opened the public hearing. Cora Newman, applicant's consultant, indicated the applicant has reviewed the staff report and the police report and agrees with the conditions of approval. The police report indicates there have been no alcohol incidents at the restaurant. The dock at the rear of the restaurant has space for two duffies. The Dock has had to deny its customers' requests for cocktails because of the lack of a Type 47 license. The applicant is not proposing an intensification of use, entertainment, or a bar. 2 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 Christine Overstreet, applicant/owner, shared the history of her ownership of the property. Many customers walk, ride bikes, and take tenders and duffies to the restaurant. Area businesses, dignitaries, and celebrities patronize the restaurant. In reply to Commissioner Koetting's inquiries, Ms. Overstreet explained that she uses the upstairs residence as an office. The Dock's Sunday brunch is offered from 10:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. The Dock does not serve lunch during the week but occasionally serves breakfast for private events only. If the Planning Commission wishes to change the hours for alcohol service, she requested a start time of 8:00 a.m. so that alcohol may be served for private events. With recent residential development in the area, The Dock may begin serving lunch Wednesday through Friday if it made sense to do so. She and her husband dock their boat at the restaurant dock. The dock can accommodate three duffies, and reservations are taken for the dock spaces. Vice Chair Weigand closed the public hearing. In answer to Commissioner Koetting's query, Associate Planner Crager reported Condition of Approval No. 12 requires the applicant to comply with the Building Code if the applicant makes any interior improvements. In response to Commissioner Ellmore's inquiry, Associate Planner Crager clarified that the conditions of approval associated with the existing conditional use permit are incorporated into the proposed use permit so that the proposed permit, if approved, will be the only use permit applicable to the restaurant. Therefore, the proposed use permit contains the standard conditions of approval for a restaurant. Vice Chair Weigand remarked that Conditions of Approval Nos. 15 and 19 limit the future use of the site should the existing operator cease to exist. Therefore, he was comfortable allowing the applicant to serve alcohol beginning at 6:00 a.m. consistent with the current hours of operation. Motion made by Commissioner Koetting and seconded by Commissioner Elmore to approve staff's recommendation. AYES: Weigand, Ellmore, Klaustermeier, Koetting, and Rosene NOES: RECUSED: ABSENT: Lowrey, Kleiman ITEM NO. 4 SAGEMODERN LIVE -WORK DEVELOPMENT (PA2018-232) Site Location: 502 and 504 West Balboa Boulevard Summary: The applicant requests a coastal development permit and a minor site development review to demolish an existing two-story, mixed -use building and surface parking lot and construct two new live -work units. As part of the project, the applicant also requests approval of a variance to waive or modify Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.48.130 to allow reduction of the required 25-foot depth of nonresidential uses on the ground floor to a depth of 18 feet 4 inches. The project includes hardscape, landscape, and subsurface drainage facilities and the design complies with other applicable development standards. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-023 approving Coastal Development Permit No. CD2018-105, Minor Site Development Review No. SD2018-006, and Variance No. VA2018-007. Associate Planner Crager reported the project is two individual live/work units, which means the first floor is a non- commercial use, the upper floors are a residence, and one tenant occupies all floors. The applicant requests a variance for the nonresidential depth on the first floor. The project site is located on Balboa Peninsula. Across the 3 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 alley from the project site is the Bay Island parking structure. A small restaurant and a small market are located adjacent to the project site. Residential uses are located in the area. The project site is composed of two parcels, one of which has a mixed -use building and the other has a surface parking lot. Associate Planner Crager went on to report that each proposed building will provide four parking spaces, two spaces in the garage and two open spaces. One parking space for each unit is ADA accessible. Each building measures 31 feet to the peak of the sloped roof, which complies with the maximum allowed height in the mixed - use vertical zoning district. Each unit contains slightly less than 2,100 square feet of residential floor area, which is the maximum permitted, and 735 gross square feet of nonresidential floor area, which is the minimum required for live/work units in the zoning district. The Zoning Code requires the commercial space have a minimum depth of 25 feet and the applicant requests a depth of 18 feet 4 inches with the subject variance application. The open parking spaces are located at the rear of the properties and accessed via the alley. Possible uses for the commercial spaces include office and retail. The applicant has not proposed uses for the commercial spaces. The second floors of the units are residential and contain two bedrooms and the main living space. The third floors contain master bedrooms and outdoor living spaces. The first floors also provide spaces for indoor gardens and bike storage. Associate Planner Crager also reported that the alley at the rear of the property is only 10 feet wide. As a result, a drive aisle is required and must measure 24 feet wide and therefore, the open parking spaces are set back 14 feet from the rear property line. The open parking spaces are required to have a length of 18 feet, and the garage parking spaces are required to have a length of 19 feet 8 inches. These requirements leave a depth of 18 feet 4 inches for the nonresidential space given the relatively shallow depth of the lot. If the applicant were to comply with the 25-foot requirement for depth of the nonresidential space, the length of the parking spaces would have to be reduced and would not comply with requirements. Staff recommends approval of the variance application. In reply to Commissioner Rosene's inquiry, Associate Planner Crager indicated the existing surface parking lot provides parking for the adjacent mixed use building but it is not a dedicated to that use officially. Commissioners Rosene and Koetting disclosed that they have visited the site. Commissioners Klaustermeier and Ellmore and Vice Chair Weigand disclosed no ex parte communications. Vice Chair Weigand opened the public hearing. Gina Siciliano, project architect, advised that removal of the curb cut into the surface parking lot (from Balboa Boulevard) will create one on -street parking space. The Public Works Department required a 14-foot setback from the rear property line for the open parking spaces to improve vehicle maneuvering and access. If the usual 5-foot setback applied to the properties, the two units could comply with the 25-foot requirement for depth of nonresidential space. The variance request applies to a Zoning Code requirement only because the requirement is not contained in the Local Coastal Program (LCP). In answer to Commissioner Koetting's queries, Ms. Siciliano explained that the height limit prevents enclosing the third -floor outdoor area. The minimum required width for two garage parking spaces is 17 feet. The wall for the trash enclosure will be concrete block. Construction staging can occur in the rear setback and parking areas. The rear of the adjacent restaurant is parking for the restaurant, contrary to the seating shown in the photos. The owner of the nonresidential use is required to occupy the residence. The two units are for sale, but they are not condominium units, as each unit is on a separate parcel. Signage could be placed on the front door or the wall adjacent to the door or could be hung from the cover above the door. In response to Commissioner Klaustermeier's inquiry, Ms. Siciliano commented that cedar wood requires maintenance, but the quality of real wood is nice. In reply to Commissioner Ellmore's questions, Ms. Siciliano described the building design as coastal modern. The area is mostly residential with some commercial uses on the block of the project site. The residences across the street have mostly wood or stucco siding. The units' two-story volumes and storefronts are meant to convey the commercial business while the wood and stucco components are meant to reflect the residential area. The Cannery live/work lofts and buildings on Balboa depict a coastal modern design. Newer developments in the area appear to be more modern. The project is not meant to look like a traditional older home. 4 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 Commissioner Koetting remarked that signage would be needed for the businesses but could detract from the appearance of the buildings. In answer to Vice Chair Weigand's queries, Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell advised that staff has not proposed conditions of approval for signage because the Zoning Code prescribes those standards. The architect could develop a sign location package for review during plan check. The Zoning Code would not allow a sign to be hung from the balcony. Associate Planner Crager indicated the bike storage area counts toward the required nonresidential square footage and is included in the proposed 735 square feet of nonresidential area. Ms. Siciliano added that the area is depicted as bike storage, but it could be storage for the business. The trash enclosure is large enough to accommodate bike storage. The applicant accepts the proposed conditions of approval. Chuck Remley suggested the applicant investigate soil contamination due to the previous uses of a gas station and automotive repair shop adjacent to and on the project site. The units will be expensive for the average business owner. In response to Vice Chair Weigand's and Commissioner Klaustermeier's inquiries, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell reported the record contains no evidence to suggest there are any environmental concerns, but staff can explore the issue with the County of Orange Health Care Agency. With that information, the applicant is required to ensure the site is free of volatile organic compounds (if present). Storage tanks for the gas station were likely removed many years ago, and environmental cleanup would have been required at that time. Staff will ensure environmental concerns are addressed before building permits are issued. The Planning Commission may proceed with the item. The applicant has to submit soils reports for plan check but not an environmental report. Staff did not find the properties on any lists of sites containing contaminated materials when reviewing the project. Jim Mosher commented that the Planning Commission should continue the item because of the environmental concern, because granting a variance is not appropriate, and because the findings for a coastal development permit cannot be made. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell advised that the project is fully consistent with the Implementation Plan, which the Coastal Commission certified. The block has a mixed -use zoning designation because the Coastal Commission rejected a residential designation. The project's interior spaces provide commercial opportunities. In replyto Vice Chair Weigand's question, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell indicated Condition of Approval No. 4 could be revised to state the commercial space shall be used for commercial purposes consistent with the Zoning Code and the Local Coastal Program. Nancy Remley inquired whether the 20-minute parking zone in front of the subject site will remain and requested the applicant not obstruct traffic during construction. The plans show a lovely building. City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine explained that the 20-minute parking zone may be reviewed when the project is complete. Staff reviews requests to change curb markings and determines whether changes are warranted. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell reiterated that removing the curb cut will add one on -street parking space that would improve public access to the area. There are no known plans or requests to change the 20-minute parking zone. In answer to Commissioner Koetting's queries, Associate Planner Crager stated the City has coastal development permit jurisdiction for this property. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell explained that staff will initiate code enforcement action if commercial activity is not observed and will check that a business license is obtained. Blair Porteous, property owner, advised that the preliminary title report does not reflect a prior use of a gas station. The geotechnical analysis found no indication of environmental concerns. 5 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 Vice Chair Weigand closed the public hearing Commissioner Ellmore commented that the applicant is forcing the project to comply with the zoning designation. He did not find any buildings with a modern design on Balboa Boulevard. The project does not conform with the aesthetics and intent of the area. The Cannery covers a larger area, and its modern design is not as obvious because of its size. Vice Chair Weigand did not completely disagree with Commissioner Ellmore's comments, but the project is fine and responsible and conforms with parking requirements. The aesthetics of the area may be changing. Commissioner Rosene noted the project site is currently an underperforming property. The applicant's proposal is a much better use. He could envision small sole -proprietor businesses in the units. He did not have any reason not to support the development. Commissioner Klaustermeier remarked that the project is an improvement to the community. Conditions of Approval Nos. 4 and 5 address her concerns regarding the commercial components of the units. Construction traffic is addressed in Condition of Approval No. 24. Commissioner Koetting advised that the project meets or exceeds most of the development standards. He had no issue with granting the requested variance. The design is different and will stand out nicely. Motion made by Commissioner Koetting and seconded by Commissioner Rosene to approve staffs recommendation with the revised language for Condition of Approval No. 4. AYES: Weigand, Klaustermeier, Koetting, and Rosene NOES: Ellmore RECUSED: ABSENT: Lowrey, Kleiman IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 5 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION i,G7T ITEM NO. 6 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell reported on August 151' staff will meet with Peninsula Point residents regarding the oceanfront encroachment issue. The Coastal Commission denied the Citys application to allow retention of some of the encroachments. On August 19'1, staff will hold a community meeting regarding potential changes to residential design standards. The encroachment item scheduled for the August 22th Planning Commission meeting has been postponed. In reply to Commissioner Rosene's inquiry, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell advised that continuing the boardwalk to Peninsula Point has been discussed, but the City has no plans to extend the boardwalk at the current time. In response to Commissioner Koetting's questions regarding the tentative schedule, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell explained that the Zoning Administrator will hear an item regarding sidewalk sales at Jack's Surfboards. All of the projects listed for consideration by the Zoning Administrator fall within the Zoning Administrator's review authority established by the Zoning Code. The Planning Commission has the authority to call any of the projects for review after they are acted upon. The Planning Commission would review any proposed revisions to the residential design standards at a future public hearing. 6 of 7 Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2019 ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES None X. ADJOURNMENT — 7:46 p.m. Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Ellmore to adjourn the election of officers to the August 22, 2019, Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Weigand, Ellmore, Klaustermeier, Koetting, and Rosene NOES: RECUSED: ABSENT: Lowrey, Kleiman The agenda for the August 8, 2019, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, August 2, 2019, at 12:45 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, August 2, 2019, at 1:00 p.m. Chairman Secretary 7 of 7 Planning Commission - August 22, 2019 Item No. 2a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of August 8, 2019 August 22, 2019, Planning Commission Item 2 Comments These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by: Jim Mosher (iimmosherCa)yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229). Item No. 2. MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2019 Suggested changes to draft minutes passages are shown in strikesut underline format. Page 1, Item 1: It is unclear from the draft minutes how this item (Election of Officers) was disposed of. It would be helpful to add that "Assistant City Attorney Summerhill advised the item could be adjourned to the following meeting." Page 2, line 3 from end: "The dock at the rear of the restaurant has space for two du#ies Duffvs.11 [alternatives: Duffies or, perhaps better, Duffy boats. Note: it is unclear what the plural of Duffy (boat) is, but since it is a brand name, it seems like it should be capitalized. The only use of the plural I could find on the internet was at one place on the manufacturer's website: they use "Duffys".] Page 3, sentence 2: "Many customers walk, ride bikes, and take tenders and du#ies Duffys to the restaurant." Page 3, paragraph 2, last sentence: "The dock can accommodate three duffies Duffys, and reservations are taken for the dock spaces." Page 3, last paragraph, sentence 1: "Associate Planner Crager reported the project is two individual live/work units, which means the first floor is a non-commercial use, the upper floors are a residence, and one tenant occupies all floors." [this is indeed what was said at 30:30 in the video, but the "non-commercial' description seems strange since the remainder of the minutes emphasize the need for a commercial component on the ground floor. The word intended was probably "non-residential."] Page 3, last paragraph, sentence 3: "The project site is located on the Balboa Peninsula." Page 4, paragraph 3 from end, sentence 4: "The rear of the adjacent restaurant is parking for the restaurant, contrary to the seating shown in the photos rendering." [There is a glitch in the video at 43:08, so it is impossible to tell from it what was said, but the statement appears to be to a rendering (rather than a photo) that showed chairs in the restaurant's rear parking area. I do not know which rendering that was.]