Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01_09-30-2021_ZA_Minutes - DRAFT Page 1 of 4 NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH ZOOM THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2021 REGULAR MEETING – 10:00 A.M. I. CALL TO ORDER – The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. Staff Present (Remote): Jaime Murillo, Zoning Administrator Joselyn Perez, Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner Afshin Atapour, Planning Technician II. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES The Zoning Administrator reported that staff requested Item Number 6 be continued to the October 14, 2021, Zoning Administrator meeting. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2021 Action: Approved IV. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 515 Jasmine, LLC Residential Condominiums Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2021-005 (PA2021-131) Site Location: 515 and 515 ½ Jasmine Avenue Council District 6 The Zoning Administrator explained this is a standard request for a tentative parcel map for two-unit condominium purposes. A duplex has been demolished and a new duplex is under construction. No waivers of Title 19 (Subdivisions) are proposed. The Tentative Parcel Map would allow each unit to be sold individually. Applicant Matthew Watson, 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. 3 Brawner Residential Condominium Conversion No. CC2021-001, Tentative Parcel Map No. NP2021-006 and Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-024 (PA2021-129) Site Location: 422 and 422 ½ Acacia Avenue Council District 6 Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that request for a condominium conversion and tentative parcel map for an existing duplex to be converted into a two-unit condominium. The existing duplex was constructed in 1988 per condominium standards; however a parcel map was not recorded, and the building permit was finaled as a duplex. The Tentative Parcel Map will allow each unit to be sold individually. No waivers of Title 19 (Subdivisions) are proposed. A coastal development permit (CDP) is required because this property is in the Coastal Zone. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 09/30/2021 Page 2 of 4 Mrs. Whelan explained that a special inspection was conducted on September 9, 2021. The building inspector found the kitchen and bathrooms have missing ground-fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) outlets, various stair/deck handrails/guardrails do not meet current safety standards of the Building Code, and an unpermitted loft with related stairs in the rear unit at 422 ½ Acacia Avenue. Additionally, only one sewer and piping connection could be identified. The condominium conversion is conditioned to require all GFCI outlets be provided, update the various handrails and guardrails to meet the current Building Code, and to permit or remove the unpermitted loft and related stairs. Additionally, a separate sewer and related piping shall be provided for each unit. A final inspection by the building inspector will be required to verify these conditions are met prior to final of the condominium permit and prior to recordation of the map. Mrs. Whelan made the following corrections to the Resolution: remove Condition No. 2 which was inadvertently included, in Condition No. 6, “ Title 21” was added after “Title 19”, and in Condition No. 19 “should be removed” was added to the end of the sentence to fix a typographical error. The Zoning Administrator asked for clarification regarding a kitchen that was relocated but since has been replaced in its original location, confirmed by the Building Inspector. Applicant Matthew Watson, 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 as Amended ITEM NO. 4 Annual Review of the North Newport Center Development Agreement No. DA2007-002 (PA2009-023) Site Location: Fashion Island; Block 100, Block 400, Block 500, Block 600, and Block 800 of Newport Center Drive; and San Joaquin Plaza Council District 5 Joselyn Perez, Assistant Planner, provided a brief description stating that this is the 2020 annual review of a development agreement (DA) between the City and the Irvine Company for the properties located within the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC). To conduct the annual review, staff evaluated any new discretionary approvals and building permits and analyzed any other relevant information that would affect compliance with the terms of the development agreement. While there were no new discretionary approvals and no new building permits that altered the overall development totals within the NNCPC, a request was received by staff from CAA Planning, on behalf of the Irvine Company, asking to reconcile differences in reported floor area. The request stated that for multiple properties within the NNCPC, the currently reported building area is higher than the actual gross floor area, as defined by the NNCPC text. The request was reviewed by staff and ultimately staff found evidence in support of the reconciliation request for 4 of the 5 properties included in the request. The updated floor areas are reflected in both the staff report and the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) prepared by CAA Planning. Staff concludes that the Irvine Company is complying in good with the DA. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Mr. Jim Mosher, spoke and detailed the difficultly of accessing the text of the DA, expressed concern that this report was inappropriately serving as an increase in the Irvine Company’s development entitlement, and questioned the timing of the annual review and whether it was within the reporting period specified in the Zoning Code. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 09/30/2021 Page 3 of 4 The Zoning Administrator asked Assistant Planner Perez if she knew the effective date of the DA, questioned if the reason the report was being presented late in the year was to allow staff time to research CAA Planning’s request, asked if the reconciliation of the square footages was approved by the Community Development Director, pointed out that the AMR has been used previously to reconcile discrepancies, and asked Ms. Perez to ensure that the DA is easily found online. Miss Perez responded that while she did not know the effective date, the Zoning Administrator is correct in his assessment of the timing of the presentation, that the Community Development Director approved the reconciliation, and that she would look into the DA availability on the City’s website. Ms. Shawna Schaffner of CAA Planning, on behalf of the Irvine Company, thanked staff for their efforts on the reconciliation, clarified that the AMR was submitted in January of 2021 and in compliance with the requirement that the AMR be submitted by January 18th of each year, and then added that square footage discrepancies have been reconciled through the AMR in both 2013 and 2015 and that this is an established procedure. Action: Received and Filed. ITEM NO. 5 Schulman Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-026 (PA2021-140) Site Location: 1615 East Bay Avenue Council District 1 Joselyn Perez, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that the request is for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) to allow the demolition of a single-family residence and the construction of a new, 3-story, single family residence along with typical site improvements. The proposed residence complies with all development standards. The project site is a waterfront lot with an existing bulkhead. The bulkhead will need to be raised and reinforced to protect the new residence from coastal hazards. Because the permitting jurisdiction of the subject property is bisected between the City and the California Coastal Commission (CCC), the applicant will need to submit an Approval in Concept (AIC) to the City and a CDP to the CCC for the proposed bulkhead work. The project Is conditioned to require those approvals. Vertical access to the water is provided at the adjacent street ends and lateral access is provided through public alleyways and East Balboa Boulevard. A public beach is near the project site and provides further access. The project replaces an existing single-family residence with a new single-family residence which does not constitute an increase in density, intensity, or a change in land use which will negatively impact access to the coast nor should the project result in negative impacts to coastal views. Staff recommends approval of the project. The Zoning Administrator asked Assistant Planner Perez to clarify where the Coastal Commission jurisdiction begins, to which Assistant Planner Perez responded 15 feet from the abandoned street right of way, or approximately right beyond where the house ends, and the patio begins. The Zoning Administrator added that the patio should be shown on the AIC and subsequent CDP that is submitted to the CCC. Applicant Ryan McDaniels of Brandon Architects, 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. 6 Wild Strawberry Café Minor Use Permit No. UP2021-026 (PA2021-135) Site Location: 240 Newport Center Drive, Suite 100 Council District 5 Action: Continued to the October 14, 2021, Zoning Administrator Meeting MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 09/30/2021 Page 4 of 4 ITEM NO. 7 Escalette Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2021-027 (PA2021-146) Site Location: 36 Balboa Coves Council District 1 Afshin Atapour, Planning Technician, provided a brief project description stating that this is for a Coastal Development Permit to allow for the remodel and addition of an existing 3,695-square-foot, two-story, single-family residence with an attached 640-square-foot, three-car garage. The proposed addition and remodel would result in a 4,900-square-foot, two-story, single-family residence with an attached 1,260-square-foot, three-car garage. The proposed additions include a 620-square-foot addition to the existing garage and a 1,205-square-foot addition to the existing second floor comprising of a 42 percent addition of the existing structure. The project includes new landscape, hardscape, and drainage facilities within the confines of the private property. No work will be conducted bayward of the existing bulkhead. The project complies with all development standards and no deviations from the Municipal Code are requested. Staff explained that the there was a minor revision to the draft resolution regarding the removal of a repeated condition. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, asked a question regarding the bulkhead location on the project plans. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. Staff explained that the bulkhead was not called out and that the wall with the top of wall call out was in fact the bulkhead. Action: Approved as Amended V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS None. VI. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 10:40 a.m. The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on September 24, 2021, at 10:10 a.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 September 24, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. Jaime Murillo Zoning Administrator October 14, 2021, 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 September 30, 2021 The following corrections are suggested: Page 1, Item 3, first sentence: “Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that this is a request for a condominium conversion and tentative parcel map for an existing duplex to be converted into a two-unit condominium.” Page 2, Item 4, paragraph 1, last sentence: “Staff concludes that the Irvine Company is complying in good faith with the DA.” Page 3, paragraph 1, last sentence: “Miss Perez responded that while she did not know the effective date, the Zoning Administrator is correct in his assessment of the timing of the presentation, that the Community Development Director approved the reconciliation, and that she would look into the DA availability on the City’s website.” [comment: the document linked to as “DA2007-002 North Newport Center” on the Planning Division’s Development Agreements page continues to be only a 25-page amendment (approved in 2012/2013) to the original 2007 Development Agreement. It modifies certain passages in the original 2007 DA but does not replace it. Those who know how to do so can find a copy of the main 2007 DA in the City Clerk’s contracts database, but it continues to be not linked to from the Planning Division page cited above.] Page 3, paragraph 2: “Ms. Shawna Schaffner of CAA Planning, on behalf of the Irvine Company, … added that square footage discrepancies have been reconciled through the AMR in both 2013 and 2015 and that this is an established procedure.” [comment: I may not have made my point clearly enough. As the minutes acknowledge, this item was noticed and listed on the agenda as a “receive and file” item. That does not seem to me to create valid forum for considering and “approving” new development entitlements for the Irvine Company. Moreover, I suspect the “reconciliation” process may be logically invalid, for the 2006 General Plan, on which the PC text protected by the DA was based, was intended to allow certain understood amounts of development to be added to that existing in 2006. To achieve that, new limits were stated equal to the assumed existing amount plus the amount intended to be added. Going back and “discovering” an existing building was smaller than was assumed in 2006 means, to me, that the General Plan/PC text limits were inadvertently misstated and need to be corrected. It does not mean the Council, and the public in approving Measure V in 2006, meant to allow the Irvine Company to expand development by more than the amounts of new development disclosed in the EIR.] Page 4, Item 7, paragraph 1, sentence 3: “The proposed additions include a 620-square-foot addition to the existing garage and a 1,205-square-foot addition to the existing second floor, comprising of a 42 percent addition of to the existing structure.” Page 4, Item 7, paragraph 2: “Staff explained that the there was a minor revision to the draft resolution regarding the removal of a repeated condition.” Zoning Administrator - October 14, 2021 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received After Deadline Draft Minutes of September 30, 2021