Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09102019 - SS Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session and Regular Meeting September 10, 2019 I. . ROLL CALL - 4:00 p.m. Present: Mayor Diane Dixon, Mayor Pro Tem Will O'Neill, Council Member Brad Avery, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Duffy Duffield, Council Member Jeff Herdman (arrived at 4:03 p.m.), Council Member Kevin Muldoon II. CURRENT BUSINESS SS1. Clarification of Items on the Consent Calendar - None In response to Mayor Dixon's question, City Manager Leung explained the purpose of on-call agreements and contracts, reported staff reviewed the process, and believed it has been updated to improve accountability and reduce future amendments. SS2. Proclamation Designating International Literacy Day Mayor Dixon read the proclamation and presented it to Newport/Mesa ProLiteracy Literacy Coordinator Cherall Weiss and Advisory Board Chair Eve Marie Kuntzman, who provided handouts, invited everyone to attend the International Literacy Day Celebration on September 12, 2019, and relayed positive outcomes as a result of the program. SS3. Check Presentation from the Friends of the Library Amy Hunt, President of the Newport Beach Friends of the Library, and Wendy Frankel, Book Store Manager, presented a check for $185,000 to the City, explained how the funds are generated, and indicated the Friends have donated $3.5 million over the past 14 years. SS4. Community Outreach by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Diane Gonzalez, Community Outreach Specialist, explained what the FBI does for the community, provided literature, assured they want to build partnerships and community awareness, and indicated the FBI has an office in Orange County. SS5. Code Amendment Update Related to Residential Design Standards (PA2019-070) Community Development Director Jurjis and Principal Planner Murillo utilized a PowerPoint presentation to discuss the current regulations and suggestions for third floors and attics, issues associated with the regulations, highlight difficulties associated with beach cottages and proposed incentives and changes, review issues and possible options associated with single -unit and two -unit dwellings in Multi -Residential (RM) zones, and review community input on the three issues. In response to Council questions, City Attorney Harp clarified SB 330 and its possible implications to the City as it relates to buildable square footage, and staff reviewed how the current regulation for decks have been altered to become livable space after inspections, instead of remaining outdoor space, provided background to the 2010 Zoning Code changes, confirmed converting RM property to a single-family dwelling has always been in the Zoning Code, explained current issues with the conversion, and discussed how current parking regulations affect beach cottages. Council Member Brenner emphasized the need to be very specific when dealing with decks. Mayor Dixon believed decks should not be permitted to have walls. Volume 64 - Page 178 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting September 10, 2019 Council Member Avery expressed concern about implementing restrictions in RM zones at this point, indicated requiring step backs might assist with the issue, believed massing is happening due to land values, emphasized surrounding neighbors to these properties need to be able to receive air and light, and noted he is in favor of modifications but keeping the height limit. Council Member Brenner discussed the initial intent and style of buildings in RM zones and emphasized the City has changed the regulations in the past and can do it again since it is the City's job to protect the community. Council Member Duffield explained how permanent residency versus summer residency has changed the makeup of homes over the decades. Allan Beek noted a past Council did not adopt Corona del Mar's development standards, stated concerns with mansionization was brought up during the 2006 General Plan meetings and surveys, believed the City needs to review how it deals with non -conforming uses and suggested they only be allowed for a specific amount of time so the City will not have these issues in the future. Charles Klobe expressed support for all three proposed changes, suggested having local architects advise staff on how to tighten loopholes, and agreed with Jim Mosher's written response to the RM component. Ron Yeo suggested going back to the average 24 -foot roof height to solve the third floor massing issue, took issue that the decks are not compatible with the community, and believed decks should be counted toward the square footage and remain open. Tom Houston believed the charm of the older parts of the City is changing due to the abuses within building law, and discussed massing and building height issues on Balboa Island. Lee Pearl noted beach cottages on Balboa Island that have been passed down to family members are being torn down because they had no option to keep them and cannot meet current building standards to improve them; and thanked the City for addressing the massing issue. Denys Oberman believed decks should remain open with no permanent roof or side pieces, offered to provide Council with the background of the 2010 General Plan, and suggested following the American Planning Association's (APA) principles for heights, setbacks and design standards. Jim Mosher believed SB 330 states the City would not be able to impose design standards after January 2020 unless they are objective, but does not completely restrict the City's authority, discussed sheer walls and how step backs are measured, expressed concern with building single- family homes in the RM zone due to the upcoming requirements to increase the housing count, and believed the City might need to provide incentives to create multi -family dwellings, possibly by making standards looser for multi -family units and stricter for single-family units. Ken Rawson believed the ambiance from the 2000 Zoning Code was better, decks should not have roofs, more code enforcement is needed, expressed concerns with beach cottage parking issues, questioned if the City can restrict beach cottages from turning into short-term lodging, and discussed multi -unit height limits versus single-family height limits. Hoiyin Ip asked if the City could implement sustainability features to create more green buildings, discussed Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers, and highlighted San Clemente's letter to the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) and how they handled public outreach. Nancy Skinner believed the solution for decks is to not allow any type of enclosure Volume 64 - Page 179 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting September 10, 2019 Larry Tucker disagreed with counting roofed decks as square footage, requested a better definition of "deck" in the Zoning Code, and emphasized the need for code enforcement. Art Pease took issue with how the City changed the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in Corona del Mar, believed property owners have entitlements under the existing Zoning Code, and requested the RM zoning issue be revisited or removed from consideration. Linda Watkins took issue with over -development and increased traffic, suggested Council conduct several study sessions to determine how the 2006 General Plan turned into the current General Plan and Zoning Code. Michael Mack expressed his opposition to changing anything in the RM zone and believed changes would be a taking of property when property owners have entitlements. Joni Martin indicated she does not have a problem with the changes that are occurring in the RM zone around the 1800 block of Ocean Front, noted there is a financial value that comes with RM development standards, believed changing the RM regulations prohibits property owners from building a property that is consistent with the community, noted the small number of properties in RM zones, and indicated 9 of 15 RM property owners she spoke with expressed opposition to changing the regulations and she will be reaching out to as many of the RM property owners as possible. Catherine Martin Wolcott, representing the Martin Family Trust, expressed opposition to any amendments in the RM zone, as they could significantly affect their property values and property rights, believed amendments would not change massing issues since the problem is with third floor decks, pointed out that it is difficult to pick out a single-family house or a multi- family house in this zone, noted all parcels should be treated equally, expressed support for the beach cottage proposal, and indicated deck shading is helpful for health and safety. Carmen Rawson took issue with Zoning Code definitions associated with decks since they are subject to interpretation, believed livable spaces on decks should be prohibited, expressed concern for parking spaces and square footage associated with beach cottages, and expressed support for amending the RM zone. Mark Teale, architect, believed massing should be mitigated in the City and covered decks should comply with setback regulations. He suggested keeping the area open on 50% of the perimeter of roof decks. Referencing SB 330, Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill believed the City could deal with beach cottage preservation and roof deck issues; however, might be restricted relative to RM zone and buildable square footage issues since SB 330 will look at changes made since January 1, 2018. Following Council discussion and input, Mayor Dixon summarized that all Council members supported cottage preservation, a majority supported the application of third floor step backs for covered decks, and requested staff bring back options to reduce mass and increase articulation of single-family and multi -unit structures in the RM zone. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill indicated he is supportive of third floor step backs for covered decks, but not supportive of the roof deck prohibition. He stated that, if this approach was pursued, he suggested sending postcards about this to Balboa Island and Corona del Mar residents. Council Members Brenner and Herdman agreed that this needs more community input III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Volume 64 - Page 180