Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01_02-13-2020_ZA_Minutes - DRAFT Page 1 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH CORONA DEL MAR CONFERENCE ROOM (BAY E-1ST FLOOR) THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2020 REGULAR MEETING – 3:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER – The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. Staff Present: Jaime Murillo, Zoning Administrator David Lee, Associate Planner Liz Westmoreland, Associate Planner Patrick Achis, Planning Technician Liane Schuller, Planning Consultant II. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES Patrick Achis, Planning Technician, requested that Item No. 2 be removed from the calendar for the Applicant to conduct in-depth alternative site analysis. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JANUARY 30, 2020 Action: Approved IV. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 AT&T Small Cell SLC2389 Minor Use Permit No. UP2019-007 (PA2019-042) Site Location: Public Right-of-Way, City streetlight number SLC2389, near the northeast corner of Bixia Street and Eastbluff Drive Council District 4 Action: Removed from calendar. ITEM NO. 3 South Bayfront Waterpointe, LLC. Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019- 075 (PA2019-265) Site Location: 400 South Bay Front Council District 5 Liane Schuller, Planning Consultant, provided a brief project description stating that the project site is a vacant bay front property on the corner of Pearl Street and the Balboa Island promenade, and the applicant is requesting approval of a coastal development permit to construct a new single-family residence and attached garage. The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning and General Plan designations on the property. The proposed design complies with all applicable development standards, including the standards and approval requirements of the City’s Local Coastal Program. Ms. Schuller stated that staff received a letter of comment this afternoon from a member of the public, Jim Mosher, regarding the proposed density and suggesting that window glass facing the bay be treated to minimize bird strikes. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/13/2020 Page 2 of 5 One member of the public, Rick Barrett asked for clarification on the overall square-footage of the residence and garage. Mr. Murillo clarified that the maximum allowed square footage is 6,544 square feet and the combined size of the residence and garage is less than that at 6,404 square feet. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 4 BR Trust Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2020-001 (PA2020-001) Site Location: 4700 Surrey Drive Council District 6 Liane Schuller, Planning Consultant, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is requesting approval of a lot line adjustment to facilitate construction of a driveway, which will provide access to a new, subterranean three-car garage at the northwesterly end of the property. The property is located in a Categorical Exclusion Area; therefore a coastal development permit is not required for the development. The land area proposed to be added to the residential property is a 5-foot by 67-foot strip of land that separates the property from the Surrey Drive right-of-way. A portion of the added land area will be improved with a standard residential driveway; no other development is proposed within the 5-foot strip of land. The driveway apron itself will be located within the existing Surrey Drive right-of-way. Ms. Schuller stated that staff received a letter of comment this afternoon from a member of the public, Jim Mosher, regarding density. In response, Ms. Schuller stated the property currently allows one single-family dwelling and approval of the lot line adjustment will not increase or decrease the allowed density on the site. Applicant Craig Schultz, of Laidlaw Schultz Architects, on behalf of the property owner, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 5 Fox Residential Duplex Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019-061 (PA2019-243) Site Location: 494, 496, and 498 Seaward Road Council District 6 David Lee, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is proposing to demolish an existing triplex and construct a new duplex. Mr. Lee provided zoning information and stated that the project meets all development standards. Mr. Lee stated that the project results in the reduction of one housing unit. However, since the project was deemed complete by the Planning Division on December 9, 2019, it is not subject to Senate Bill 330. Mr. Lee proposed a revision to the resolution in order to fix a typographical error. Applicant Robert Coffee, on behalf of the owner, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, an unnamed gentleman, spoke and stated concerns that the project would not be completed. The gentleman inquired how the City would enforce a dilapidated property. The Zoning Administrator discussed the conditions of approval that addressed permit expirations and also directed the gentleman to Code Enforcement for any future issues. Greg Fox, representing the owner, responded and assured the gentleman that the owner has intentions of completing the project in a timely manner. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/13/2020 Page 3 of 5 Action: Approved ITEM NO. 6 Richard Barrett Trust Seawall Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019-071 (PA2019- 251) Site Location: 930 Via Lido Nord Council District1 David Lee, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant is proposing to raise an existing concrete seawall and construct an elevated deck in the front setback abutting the Newport Bay. Mr. Lee stated that a previous grade determination was approved, allowing the height of accessory structures to be measured from 9.5 feet (North American Vertical Datum of 1988). Mr. Lee stated that the project does not affect any public views of the bay, nor will it affect any public access. Mr. Lee requested multiple revisions to the draft resolution to clarify that the proposed lower seawall complies with the City Standard for height, and that the combination of seawalls are adequate to protect the existing residence from sea level rise using the low-risk aversion scenario. Finally, Mr. Lee requested to revise the resolution to clarify that the existing structure will remain above high-tide sea level until approximately 2085 and that the seawall can be raised to a higher elevation if needed. Applicant Richard Barrett stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 7 Hwang Residence Modification Permit No. MD2019-006 (PA2019-175) Site Location: 107 32nd Street Council District 1 Liz Westmoreland, Associate Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the applicant proposed to construct a new single-family residence that complied with all development standards except the required garage depth. The applicant is proposing an 18-foot garage depth instead of the Zoning Code required depth of 19 feet. Staff stated that the orientation and narrow width of the lot made a 19-foot garage depth infeasible, since alley access was located along the side yard. Staff recommended approval of the project. Applicant Phil Nielsen, on behalf of the owner, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. The Zoning Administrator confirmed with staff that the third open parking space was not required, but would help offset the smaller garage size proposed by the applicant. He asked staff as to why it was not included as a condition of approval to maintain this parking space free and clear of any obstructions for the purpose of parking a vehicle. Ms. Westmoreland responded that there was not a particular reason why it was not included as a condition, but that it was shown on the site plan. She stated that it could be added as a condition if appropriate. The Applicant, Mr. Nielsen accepted the additional condition of approval to maintain the third car parking space in the rear of the lot, free and clear of any encroachments for the purpose of parking a vehicle. Action: Approved MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/13/2020 Page 4 of 5 ITEM NO. 8 Wells Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019-047 (PA2019-174) Site Location: 1140 West Bay Avenue Council District 1 Patrick Achis, Planning Technician, provided a brief project description stating that the project site is a bay front property at the northeast corner of West Bay Avenue and 12th Street on the Balboa Peninsula. The Applicant requests approval of a coastal development permit to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new single-family residence and attached garage. The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning and General Plan designations on the property. The proposed design complies with all applicable development standards, including the standards and approval requirements of the City’s Local Coastal Program. Mr. Achis stated a public comment letter was received from Jim Mosher about treating the tempered glass railing on the third floor to minimize bird strikes. Staff explained that this could be a consideration for the Applicant; however, it is not required by the City’s adopted Implementation Plan. The Zoning Administrator asked staff to clarify agency permit jurisdiction for the bulkhead proposal. Staff replied the requested bulkhead modifications require a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission due to permit jurisdiction. Applicant Brad Smith, Architect, on behalf of the Owner, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, the public hearing was closed. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 9 SoCal Cycleboats Boat Rental Limited Term Permit No. XP2019-010 and Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019-059 (PA2019-236) Site Location: 2406 Newport Boulevard and 2000 West Balboa Boulevard Council District 1 Patrick Achis, Planning Technician, provided a brief project description stating that the request is for a limited term permit and associated coastal development permit to allow the temporary operation of a cycleboat business to utilize off-site parking for one year. The proposal complies with all Mixed-Use Water (MU-W2) related designations. No construction or physical alterations to the site are proposed. The off-site parking location at 2000 West Balboa Boulevard will maintain a surplus of five parking spaces designated for the cycleboat operation for the entirety of the limited duration. Public parking availability for coastal access will not be affected by project implementation. Included conditions of approval ensure the proposal and the existing restaurant at 2406 Newport Boulevard will be compatible with the proposed and remain separate operations. Applicant Michael Kapusta, of SoCal Cycleboats, stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, representing a boat storage business directly across the Harbor, stated concerns regarding the maneuverability of the boat in this narrower channel area. Mr. Kapusta replied that an experienced captain would drive the Cycleboat at all times and as such, traffic conflict is not anticipated. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 02/13/2020 Page 5 of 5 Action: Approved V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS None. VI. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 3:49 p.m. The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on February 7, 2020, at 4:30 p.m. 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 February 7, 2020, at 4:20 p.m. Jaime Murillo Zoning Administrator February 27, 2020, Zoning Administrator Agenda Comments Comments submitted by: Jim Mosher ( jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item 1. Draft Minutes of February 13, 2020 The following corrections to the draft minutes are suggested: Page 2, Item 4: Something is wrong with the description of how this item was handled. The notation at the end (“Action: Approved”) suggests the item was approved as presented, but it was not. The staff report posted prior to the meeting said nothing about the properties being in the Coastal Zone. Indeed, Section 1.4 of the draft resolution stated unequivocally as a “fact” (see page 5) that: “The subject properties are not located in the coastal zone.” However, sentence 2 of the opening paragraph of the draft minutes says to the contrary: “The property is located in a Categorical Exclusion Area; therefore a coastal development permit is not required for the development.” And Section 1.4 of the Resolution No. ZA2020-012 signed by the Zoning Administrator and posted with the Planning Division’s administrative approvals for 2/14/2020 (see page 12) has been changed to read: “The subject properties are located in the coastal zone; however, approval of the Lot Line Adjustment will not result in an increase in density or intensity of use and therefore a coastal development permit is not required.” Nothing I can see in the draft minutes indicates that there was a material misstatement in the staff report or that changes were made to the posted resolution prior to its approval. The correction, in this case, is quite significant since applications for properties in the Coastal Zone are processed differently, and receive different scrutiny, from those outside the zone. Moreover, the City’s reasons for not requiring a Coastal Development Permit are stated quite differently in the minutes compared to in the approved resolution. And both reasons are highly debatable. The City’s Categorical Exclusion Order (CE-5-NPB-16-1-A1), by its terms, “is limited to the demolition and/or construction of single-unit and two-unit dwelling units and their appurtenant facilities in the R-1, R-BI, and R-2 Zoning Districts.” A lot line adjustment would not seem to be “demolition and/or construction” nor is it an “appurtenant facility.” Similarly, the question of whether a lot line adjustment results in an increase [and that should be “change” – not “increase”] in density or intensity is irrelevant given the California Supreme Court’s finding in Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of Los Angeles, 55 Cal.4th 783 (2012) that any act of subdivision is development under the Coastal Act by definition (irrespective of its effect on density or intensity). In addition, for this and other items, the correspondence referred to in the draft minutes does not appear to have been made part of the administrative record by archiving it with meeting materials. Page 4, Item 9, paragraph 1, last sentence: “Included conditions of approval ensure the proposal proposed use and the existing restaurant at 2406 Newport Boulevard will be compatible with the proposed and remain separate operations.” Zoning Administrator - February 27, 2020 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received after Deadline Draft Minutes of February 13, 2020